"How we burned in the prison camps later thinking: What would things have been like if every police operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive? If during periods of mass arrests people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers or whatever was at hand? The organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt." ---Alexander Solzhenitsyn - The Gulag Archipelago
Bad Cop, Worse Cop
These days, many news sites have a place after each story where the rabble can throw in their
own comments. And every time there's a story about police abuse, a debate arises about how
many cops are bad apples, and how many are good guys. You'll see everything from "They're
all fascist pigs!" to "The vast majority of cops are honest and do things by the book." Who is
right? What ARE the percentages of good versus bad? Good question. Another good question
is, Does the system even WANT the cops to be honest and by- the-book? Consider the following
story: Fascist pig beats up lady, falsely accuses her of a crime, but eventually is exposed as a
lying, sadistic thug. Here are the details:
Note in the story how this was NOT the first indication that the guy is a power-happy fascist.
So, does the system try to keep such people out, or does it just try to keep them from getting
CAUGHT being fascist pigs? I would suggest the latter.
(Keep in mind, in the settlement for that case, "government" paid NOTHING. "Government"
has nothing to give. It stole money from OTHER people, and gave it to the victim of the fascist
thuggery. I'm not saying she didn't deserve it; I'm saying the ones who PAID it--you and me--
weren't the ones who did her harm. I would have loved to see the fascist himself be forced to
sell everything he has and give her the proceeds--and then get flung in a cage.)
In story after story, cops commit lawless thuggery, LIE about it, and then find out that it was
caught on tape. Then they "cooperate"- - -once they know they're sunk--and get credit for
doing so. The system defends and protects its thugs, until their evil is too obvious for the
public to miss. Then, and only then, will the system hang an individual thug or two out to
dry, as if they are the only problem.
The potential harm that can be caused by "authority" dwarfs what the average crook can do.
Imagine if that lady had been put in a cage for 15 YEARS, based on the fascist's bald-faced lie.
(I only did a year based on fascist lies myself.) And since, as recent stories have shown, cops
seem perfectly willing to lie to protect their fellow gang members, it often makes resisting
police abuse rather hazardous.
So do cops and their bosses actually object to police brutality and abuse? As far as I can tell,
they object to being CAUGHT, and that's about it. They consistently lie, insult, threaten, and
assault, until they're caught on tape. Then, and ONLY then, do they show "remorse," which
shows only that they're sorry they got CAUGHT. While the public gets upset when they see
example of the "bad apples" on
the police force, I see little or no evidence that those who run the system mind it at all... except
when they get caught. Yeah, they publicly act surprised and offended at the "abuse," but only
after all hope of cover-up, excuses and lies is gone.
What would we see if even 50% of cops actually gave a damn about individual liberty,
constitutional rights, truth and justice? We'd see cops getting fired every other day. When
FIVE Tennessee "law enforcers" (power-happy thugs) get caught TORTURING a guy to get
his "consent" to search his home, that means that there are a lot more "bad apples" than
government would have us believe. If there was a "good cop" on the scene, what would he
have done? Well, if he was ACTUALLY good, he would at the very least have exposed the
abuse after the fact, and if he had a spine, he would have done whatever it took to STOP the
other cops from being sadistic thugs.
So how many cops would do that? Why have I NEVER heard of that happening? Like those
in the military, partly because of training and partly because of circumstance, "government"
enforcers always evolve into a gang which cares far more about defending the gang than it
does about doing the right thing. (The mass murder down in Waco is a particularly heinous
example of this.)
Of the recent wave of examples of police abuse that have come out, how many were exposed
by fellow cops? I know of none. Is it because they never NOTICE their fellow officers abusing
people? Of course not. Is there any cop anywhere who has never at least once seen other cops
illegally abusing people? I doubt it. So where are the "good cops" exposing that kind of thing--
I mean BEFORE someone else catches them? Can you think of a single case of that? I can't. Why
not? They've ALL seen the abuse, and NONE of them expose it. Why is that?
It's because if, as a cop, you don't at least look the other way, if not participate yourself in the
thuggery, your chances of remaining a cop are slim to none. No street gang would allow its
members to say bad things about it, and neither would the street gang which calls itself "the
police." The fact that there ARE "Internal Affairs" units at all, which are usually resented by all
the other cops, makes it pretty obvious that most cops are NOT going to "tell" on each other, no
matter what they do. They have sworn to "protect and serve" their gang, and that's exactly what
they do. If there are only a few "bad apples," and if most cops are honest and good--if ANY cops
are honest and good, in fact--why aren't THEY the ones exposing police misconduct? They
have a front row seat to all of it, yet their lips remain sealed.