This El Monte Police Officer Was Justified in Kicking This Suspect in Head as He Surrendered

Read the following article and watch the embedded video to understand a reasonable explanation from the police union about why this head-kick was justified. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/05/the-kick-deliver-by-an-el-monte-police-officer-to-the-head-of-a-car-chase-suspect-laying-on-the-ground-at-the-ending-of-a-tel.html

The reason that the Police union gave to justify kicking this suspect was that it was a distraction technique that police officers are taught in police training classes. Often a violent and unpredictable suspect will feign surrender, while planning a surprise attack on the arresting officer. Police are taught that a swift jolt to the head will disorient a suspect, so that they can handcuff the suspect without putting themselves at risk.

However, I believe that the kick delivered to this suspects head was justified for an entirely different reason. The cop was completely justified for kicking the suspect in the head because the suspect was obviously a "WASTE OF HUMAN FLESH".

Click on the above link to view the suspect's photo. Obviously this "waste of human flesh" has tattooed himself in such a way as to make himself look like a violent, psychotic felon who is prone to act, unpredictably and irrationally, especially when cornered like a rat.

The suspect's "markings" warned the officer that this suspect was potentially dangerous. The officer was justified by nullifying this potential threat with a kick to the head.

The only reason for a gangster in today's America to tattoo himself in such a manner, is to warn people that he is capable of psychotic, unpredictable,violent and irrational behavior. In other words, he is advertising that he is dangerous.

Similarly, poisonous snakes advertise the danger they pose with bight distinctive markings and sounds. These prominent markings on venomous snakes warns predators that these snakes are potentially dangerous. As a result they are usually left alone.

Just like the poisonous snakes, Extreme markings on gangsters are usually not idle bluffs. In most cases these anti-social sociopaths will be dead or in prison before their 21st birthday as a result of their psychotic behavior. However, their warnings are real, if you mess with them, you are likely to suffer a fatal blow, just like with venomous snakes..

However, even in nature there are posers. There are "look-alike" snakes that are harmless. However, the casual observer can easily confuse them with their deadly their deadly counterparts. In most cases, harmless snakes are protected by their markings that imitate those of their venomous counterparts. However, there are times when their bluff could lead to their death.

I understand why the psychotic, criminal gang member would use extreme tattoos to warn his enemies that he is capable of unpredictable, deadly behavior. However, I do not understand why otherwise normal youngsters in today's popular culture would imitate these violent, psychopathic, gangsters with tattoos, mannerisms, dress, gestures language, music and attitude.

The popularity of "gangster look-a-likes" in today's popular culture is more proof of the statement: .

"When you celebrate and embrace something that is abnormal and unhealthy, reason and common sense are turned on their head. Our children lose the ability to distinguish between, good and bad, right and wrong, normal and abnormal, healthy and unhealthy, constructive and destructive, considerate and rude, brave and cowardly, modest and lewd, vulgar and polite, acceptable and unacceptable, respectful and contemptuous, virtuous and shameful, tolerant and intolerant, etc."

Rather than finding myself in the position of being a victim of police brutality, I personally avoid this scenario by taking the following precautions:

1) I don't run from the police unless I am certain that I will escape. If I am caught, I understand that I am at risk of being beaten.

2) I do not purposely alter my appearance to look like an unpredictable psychotic. This strategy may backfire on me.

3) I speak respectfully to the police. I call them "officer" and I say "yes sir" and "no sir". I keep my hands in full view of the police and make no sudden moves. I strictly follow police instructions whenever I have contact with them.

4) I do my best to keep my criminal record free of felony convictions.

This has been a winning formula for me in avoiding police brutality. I think that these ideas should be taught in schools, universities, the media and the "arts". Instead, they are teaching today's youths that police are brutal, racist and unfair. They are teaching our youth that police are their enemies rather than their strongest defense against psychotic criminals and the like.

Today's police are the most pacified police that this nation has ever seen. They are afraid to perform their job effectively, lest they get criminally charged, sued or fired for doing their job too well. There has undoubtedly been an increase in cases of police brutality brought against cops. It is ironic that this is happening in a time when America's police have become sissified and pacified and less actual brutality is actually being committed.

In many cases, today's police have lost the ability to protect themselves in the sissified environment that now defines most police forces. It stands to reason, that if the criminals fear the cops, rather than the other way around, there will be less crime and less people behind bars.

The commonsense way to reduce crime in America is to have tougher cops, stronger families, and independent citizens.

Another Example of Deranged Public Behavior by Liberal Activists

This is the latest, in a long line of examples of bad public behavior by liberal activists. I have posted about 8 examples of liberal activists who attempt to discredit, ridicule, insult, bully, intimidate and demonize their opposition publicly in an effort to discredit, silence and marginalize them.

I challenge anyone to provide equally bad behavior on the part of conservatives in recent history. So far, you have a lot of catching up to do.

This bad behavior is straight out of Saul Alinsky's book: "Rules for Radicals". The following article illustrates how Barack Obama also follows the 5 basic rules outlined in Alinsky's book: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTY5ZTA5NmEwMGY4MTFhNDg2ZDg4NjU2MDkxOGYyYTE=&w=MA==

Freedom Prospers When Religion Is Vibrant

There are many reasons why thriving civilizations fail, however, three examples of the failure of societies at the height of their wealth and power are: the Roman Empire, the Greek Empire and the biblical cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Although I am not a historical or biblical scholar, I believe that these prosperous civilizations were at the height of their immorality, debauchery and open homosexuality at the time of their demise.

A democracy can not sustain itself upon the view of the majority alone. It is quite obvious that views held by the majority are not necessarily proved as correct. There are countless examples, including that at one time, the vast majority of people believed that the Earth was flat. A democracy can only sustain itself if it is built upon a moral base which is founded upon universal spiritual principles, otherwise it will devolve into "mob-rule". An example would be the Palestinian democracy in the Gaza Strip. The Palestinians democratically elected the terrorist group "Hamas" to lead their country. Once in power, they began to fire rockets into Israel, while ignoring their peoples needs for food, infrastructure (sewers, electricity, etc.), and productive work. This would not occur, in a democracy restrained by spiritual principles. Democracy without moral restraint, will not bring about freedom, peace and prosperity.

I often hear liberals claim that you can not legislate morality. This is preposterous. Most of our laws that our country was founded on were based on principles that are spelled out in the "Ten Commandments". We still honor most laws against lying, cheating , stealing and murdering which are moral principles that are laid out in the Ten Commandments. Up until recently we had laws against adultery, sodomy and doing business on the Sabbath. In my opinion, the decay we are seeing in morality is attributable to our society becoming more secular and less religious. Although I am not religious in the traditional sense, I do have a strong belief in God, the eternal soul and divine judgment. If these principles are removed or diminished from the American culture, I can see no other outcome than the demise of our unique American culture and the fall of our great nation.

I often hear liberals say that this country was founded in sin, due to slavery. To the contrary, the "Declaration if Independence", our Constitution and our "Bill of Rights" were based on spiritual principles and written in such a way that would eventually lead to the end of slavery. 750,000 men gave their lives in our most bloody war which resulted in the end of slavery. Please read the lyrics to all five verses of the "Battle Hymn of the Republic", which was a famous marching song of the Civil War. This hymn brings tears to my eyes because it puts morality and God above life itself. Years later, it was Christian leaders who started the civil rights movement which successfully removed discrimination, based on race, from our laws and our culture.

Click here for the lyrics: "Battle Hymn of the Republic"

Click here for a short article about the hymn's history.

For a real tear-jerking experience, click on the video below and listen to the the US Army Chorus perform three verses of the "Battle Hymn of the Republic". This rendition was performed on the White house lawn during a ceremony welcoming Pope Benedict XVI to Washington DC on April 16, 2008.



One of the many verses that always brings tears to my eyes is:
"As he [Christ] died to make men holy, let us die to make them free"

Ronald Reagan said: "Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged".

John Adams said: "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

Left to our own devices, we will eventually devolve to our base instincts, which will lead to anarchy (total freedom without restraints) or a totalitarian government (no freedom) will rise to power, in order to restore order. Only a secular democratic government, restrained and balanced by religious morality, can yield both maximum freedom and order. This is the unique American culture that made our nation free, prosperous and powerful. Belief in a power greater than ourselves, humbles us and gives us reason to build and maintain a just, free, prosperous and powerful nation. At times we must sacrifice our own, pleasures, wealth and even our very lives, for just and noble causes which bring us closer to God and purchase the freedom and prosperity for future generations. Our nation stands free and strong today because many of our predecessors have chosen to make such sacrifices. The extraordinary motivation for such sacrifice usually comes from desire to serve God, family and country. Today's liberals often seek to diminish the value of Judeo-Christian religions, the traditional family, and our unique American culture. These are required for the continued freedom, prosperity and very survival of America as we know it today.

Rants, Runts and Ramblings

Recently I have been noticing that many people label any opinion that they disagree with, as a "rant". To my understanding, "rant" is an emotionally charged word. I define a rant as: A wild, incoherent, emotional articulation, where emotionality supersedes rationality. Are there other common definitions that I am not aware of? The term rant implies that opposing opinions are emotional and unreasoned and should be summarily dismissed without debate. I attribute this, and many of our modern day societal problems, to the "feminizing" of our society.

Generally speaking, women rely more heavily on their right brain (emotional and artistic) and men have a stronger left brain which relies more heavily on reason and intellect. Both are needed to complement and contrast each other and form a complete human society. This is why it is so important for children to be brought up in homes that contain a loving compassionate nurturing mother and a strong, reasonable and pragmatic father. This is the way God and nature created the vast majority and this is what I consider to be normal. There is no denying this obvious truth. In today's modern society, I am seeing the feminizing of men, due to the decline of the intact nuclear family. Also emotional, half-truths and propaganda are spread by activists and amplified by the media, universities and the arts.

This feminizing has risen to the level of our political leaders, public schools, universities, media and the arts. Boys are taught to be more sensitive, that crying is natural, normal and nothing for a boy to be ashamed of. Boys are taught to run away from a fight, rather than confront an enemy who threatens them and "theirs". Boys are taught that competition is unfriendly and that good sportsmanship should rise to the level of a world where there are no winners and losers. Many schools have discontinued playground games such as dodge-ball and tag, because they are too aggressive. Some schools have stopped keeping score at sporting events, so that there are no losers. Some school plays alternate the lead part so that everyone gets a chance to play the lead, no matter how inept they are. These are all "feminine" views.

I believe my views to be mainstream, reasonable and obvious to anyone who is able to remain objective. Activists on the left, particularly feminist and homosexual activists, often alter public opinion by bullying their detractors with unfounded charges of prejudice, hatred and homophobia. I believe that these unfounded attacks are just as harmful, if not more harmful, than true prejudices, because their aim is to suppress opposing views with emotion, and manipulate public opinion with half truths and outright lies ".

One example that comes to mind occurred in San Francisco, in the early 80's. Before famous author and conservative radio talk show host Michael Savage achieved fame and notoriety, he volunteered in a San Francisco "free clinic" which was run by two homosexual doctors. Savage has earned a doctorate degree at Berkley and studied epidemiology among many other subjects pertaining to nutrition, botany, and natural healing. Savage was personal friends with these two "gay" doctors, who he often socialized with. During the early 80's, Savage noticed that many young, otherwise healthy gay men, were becoming afflicted with an unknown horrible disease that often lead to death. Savage was aware of the unsanitary conditions of the popular "gay bath houses" in San Francisco and reasoned that the activities going on in them was ripe for spreading an epidemic. Although savage had no proof that these bath houses might be spreading disease among San Francisco homosexuals, he called for closing all San Francisco bath houses in an effort to be prudent and avert a widespread epidemic among homosexuals and save many lives.

When Savage made his views public about shutting down all San Francisco bath houses he was vilified as a homophobe and a "gay basher". The gay doctors fired him from the clinic and disowned him as a friend. Gay activist's condemned Savage's ideas as hateful and anti-gay. He was only trying to avert a deadly epidemic that he reasoned was imminent based on his education, reason and common sense. Savage was dumbfounded because he had friends in the homosexual community who had now turned against him.

As it turned out, several years later it was discovered that a new virus called AIDS was responsible for the numerous illnesses and deaths in San Francisco's gay community. Later it was discovered that this disease was spread by unprotected anonymous gay sex, which was common in the bath-houses. If the gay activists would have used reason and listened to Savage, rather than using emotion to condemn him, many lives could have been saved. Eventually all of San Francisco's bath-houses were shut down because they were considered a breading ground for the deadly virus AIDS. However this truth never stopped the gay activists from labeling Savage as an homophobe and gay basher. To this day, Savage is vilified and demonized in the gay community.

Do you find any truth in my post or am I merely ranting about rants?