No products in the cart.


Ohio Cop: You Stood Up There And Took An Oath

Ohio Cop’s Outrage Goes Viral: ‘You Stood Up There and Took an Oath’

An emotional video posted to Facebook on Wednesday by an Ohio police officer has gone viral after she vented her outrage about a recent police shooting, demanding that police officers with racist sentiments stop patrolling in neighborhoods that contain people of color.



nakia-jones-coeddotcomElias Alias Note: This article was published on July 08, 2016, and updated on July 09 2016 at this link —

I am proud of this woman officer, and I am proud to recommend her to Oath Keepers national leadership for consideration as a candidate for a national award as Police Officer of the Year for 2016.  Below is a brief excerpt from the article which features her video presentation.

Nakia Jones, Thank you sincerely for moral and spiritual uprightness and for setting an example for all police officers across this vast land. Your personal courage and dignity is a credit to all police, and a reminder to all to honor their Oaths.


Elias Alias, editor


Note on Sunday July 17 2016 by editor:  The above praise represents my personal take on Nakia’s emotional reaction to seeing the video of the shooting in Louisiana and is not to be seen as an official Oath Keepers statement.  Some among us can appreciate her reaction, but others in our organization have a different opinion. I am editing in a response sent to me by one of our leadership gentlemen who has a more level-headed take on Nakia’s outburst. (The video will be placed below Greg’s op-ed.) The following is from Greg McWhirter, Montana Peace Officer liaison. Thank you, Greg, for sending this in.

Well, you guys know me, and you [know] my opinion about all the division in the country. This is the first time I’ve seen this video.

I can completely relate to this lady’s background. I grew up in the bad part of Indianapolis, east 10th st. I lost friends to the “street life”, whether it was prison or the grave. I’ve had to arrest some of those people I grew up with. So I can understand the context of how personal this is to her. Also, referencing herself and family as “African-American” is not really self segregation. A lot of us black kids grew up where being referred to as black was kind of like being referred to as an object, and it dehumanized us. So I don’t think she uses that phrase to self segregate, or reverse racism. I think she may have grew up in a household where you are more than your skin color, so I understand the idea that she would say it like that and I would say don’t read too much into it.

With all of that said I can say this, there are 5  things this lady said that I don’t agree with at all. There are MANY things she said that I do agree with. If you are an officer who;

Is afraid to go into these communities and do your job,
Has a god complex,
Has a chip on his shoulder,
Has something to prove,
Is actually racist,

We don’t need you, your community doesn’t need you, turn your shit in. I think we all agree on that.

I agree with her on those points and more. We can do without the emotional response, we can also do without her assumption that those Baton Rouge officers did wrong. She should know better than anyone to let the investigation complete, and let the facts come out before she assumes they murdered (acted unlawfully ) that man. So I rebuke her emotionally charged rhetoric on that point. She said a lot of good stuff, she said some bad stuff. It was directed to our fellow officers, as Stewart has said, let the cops admonish the cops. If she has 20 years of service, she’s earned a seat at the table to say her part.

I say leave it up, and tone down the “she deserves an award” spin.

Greg McWhirter


[ot-video type=”youtube” url=””]


A seven-minute video posted by Warrensville Heights officer Nakia Jones, regarding the police shooting of Alton Sterling in Louisiana, had been viewed over six million times by Friday afternoon, when rumors began swirling that she had been fired.

Mayor Brad Sellers quickly confirmed that she is not suspended, and that she did not violate the department’s social media policy. However, during an interview with local station WKYC, Jones tearfully explained that she has been placed on leave by her supervisor and does not know when she will be able to return to work.


[ot-video type=”youtube” url=””]


Please read whole story at Original article found here  —


Elias Alias

Editor in Chief for Oath Keepers; Unemployed poet; Lover of Nature and Nature's beauty. Slave to all cats. Reading interests include study of hidden history, classical literature. Concerned Constitutional American. Honorably discharged USMC Viet Nam Veteran. Founder, TheMentalMilitia.Net



    1. Respectfully Elias, did I miss something here? Where you see virtue I see confusion. The lady does not know, or at least, did not communicate the content of her oath. Replace the words she used with “white” and I am sure most on Fbook would cry racism. This type of emotional response is a poor substitute for thinking and analyzing the problem.

      She did recommend that educated black men mentor the young lads in their communities. That is laughable! In my experience they would hear themselves derided as oreos and treated with the same scorn as a ‘cracker’.

      In my opinion this tirade dovetails with Frau Clintons speech, which appears elsewhere in these pages, and was probably orchestrated by the same interests. The filters that Fbook and other social media apply to posts are carefully crafted algorithms designed to blend speech into the message desired by the powers that be. I resent having such garbage appear on a website that includes the words of real thinkers and yes, patriots.

    2. Another key phrase is, “Thou shalt not bear false witness.” Until all the fact are known, then they are not known. A rush to judgment breaks the code of honor.

    3. I’m sorry, Did I miss something?? Did the investigation in LA get completed and they found that a white officer did actually kill this man, because he was black?? I mean that is what they found right?? Cause Why would a Officer of so many years get on a rant, about how racist white cops need to stay out of those communities?? And How dare they stand next to her…. And she would be SO RIGHT!, if in fact those were the FACTS!!!! She might be wearing a Badge….and she might Serve and Protect….. She jumped to a conclusion. And pretty much labeled the officers before the investigation was complete. Not to mention pretty much Showing that she actually believes that White officers are hunting Black people down. If you guys want to give her a award? Make it Asshat of the Year.

  1. Excuse me, but by what evidence has this officer condemn another officer of racial motives or not honoring their oath of office? There may be a need for a narrative, perhaps a debate, but loud mouth summary justice is not the answer. These emotional outbursts are getting out of hand and are causing real harm to people’s lives, ie Darin Wilson. The media has manipulated their viewers into pre-judging an incident for the sake of ratings. We have system in place, and while not perfect, it is the best system ever created. Our constitution provides for a system of justice by due process. In this case, as in all cases, the arresting officer is presumed innocent until proven guilty. I can tell you after after 16 years in the bag (uniform patrol) and 9 years as a detective there are always two or more sides to any given story and if I sound upset that’s because I am. I’m really getting tired of people trying usurp our justice system with visceral P.C. nonesense. If you want to judge somebody do your civic duty and sit as jurist. Examine the FACTS, weigh the arguments and it might suprise you which side you find yourself on.

    1. I respect your service to your community just as you respect our veteran service.

      My question is: Are there any perks, commissions, pay incentives, promotional incentives for felony arrests? If so, the problem is the so called “due process” at initial contact is geared to escalate, and escalation can result in arrests and that equate to promotions and increases in wages. We witness a system that is geared to invite corruption. There is no denying examples of police corruption are many. It’s the initial point of contact where a LEO makes a decision to escalate or deescalate. The wandering eye of surveying with a flashlight of what’s in my back seat is a function of escalation under the pretense of personal safety. Pulling over a vehicle for a broken tail light is a function of training that creates an opportunity to escalate. The public sees a tyranny emanating from LEO’s rather than being peace officers.

      I see her message as just that and 99% of LEO’s are on the right side of our oath, but the bad one’s need to be vetted out because they are the ones who are in the news.

      Furthermore, there is a difference in how police serve and how we vets serve. We vets did not and do not get financial perks for meeting a ticket “quota” as a result of a probability norm from past ticket data. We are recognized for simply doing what is expected. There is no contract or guarantee that says we get anything beyond our duty. And by the way, ALL my friends are vets and LEO’s and I would venture to say they would 100% agree with my comments and perspective. Some of you will disagree, that is fine. but the militarization of our policing is a bad blend of increasing killing power and an incentive program built around arrests.

      1. WGP, I thank you for your service as well. I’m always willing to engage in a civil discourse as long as it is productive. I often think that people are ill informed, i.e.: ignorant of the facts and base their opinions on false premises or no real life experience. As your tone truly appears to be inquisitive and your questions are fair I will do my best to answer them.
        Question : Are there any perks, commissions, pay incentives, promotional incentives for felony arrests?
        Answer: Yes and no, let me explain and keep in mind I can only speak for the state I was employed in. Other states may differ. Yes, promotion comes with higher pay for the added responsibility of supervising every larger groups of officers. Promotions are made from a list of candidates who took and passed a written civil service promotional exam. Excluding tie scores, but including time in service points and veterans points only the top 3 candidates can be considered for an open position. Those 3 candidates are then interviewed by their superiors and elected public officials such as the mayor, city council and police commission. Their direct supervisors’ recommendations will be reviewed, as will their educational background, and work history before a decision is rendered. That being said, work history, in part, includes proactive productivity, ie: amount and types of arrests made outside of dispatched calls. Now in truth every type of Police agency tailors their business model differently and gives different weight to proactive productivity. The State Police goes about policing very differently from a city police department. The sheriff may have a road patrol but their mainly responsible for the county jail. Towns, villages, hamlets and resort communities focus on community service. Ideally every police department should be a reflection of the community it serves but sadly this is not always the case.
        Within every police department there is a bifurcation out of patrol, at the same rate of pay, for choice assignments. Not subject to a written test or review by elected officials these assignments are usually temporary and given out by the administrator, chief or sheriff at his or her desecration, ie: narcotics, K9, marine, bicycle patrol, etc. Now I’m not inferring that this is corrupt, incorrect, or even bad, because no one wants to see a 62 year old street cop get hurt in a bar fight and somebody has to be the evidence officer, but these assignments are a powerful inducement for officers to “ make the boss’ happy.
        Question: If so, the problem is the so called “due process” at initial contact is geared to escalate, and escalation can result in arrests and that equate to promotions and increases in wages.
        Answer: I think your confusing due process with reasonable suspicion which then may escalate to probable cause.
        Due process is the legal requirement that the state (prosecutor) must respect all legal rights that are owed to a person. (Including police officers) Due process is a theory of law known as jurisprudence which encompasses the entire legal process from arrest to post conviction appeals and is recognized and enforced by every criminal court in the country. It includes, but is not limited to: a presumption of innocents (by the court), Miranda warnings (prior to incrementing statements) , grand jury proceedings, hearings on evidence, testimony, admissions, indictments, rules of evidence, jury of your peers, right to face your accuser, right to a lawyer, right not to incriminate oneself, etc.
        Reasonable suspicion is a legal standard of proof that is less than probable cause, the legal standard for arrests and warrants, but more than an “inchoate and unparticularized suspicion or ‘hunch'”;[1] it must be based on “specific and articulable facts”, “taken together with rational inferences from those facts”,[2] and the suspicion must be associated with the specific individual.[3] If police additionally have reasonable suspicion that a person so detained is armed and dangerous, they may “frisk” the person for weapons, but not for contraband like drugs. Reasonable suspicion is evaluated using the “reasonable person” or “reasonable officer” standard,[4] in which said person in the same circumstances could reasonably suspect a person has been, is, or is about to be engaged in criminal activity; it depends upon the totality of circumstances, and can result from a combination of particular facts, even if each is individually innocuous. (ie: stop, question and frisk)
        Probable cause is the standard by which police authorities have reason to obtain a warrant for the arrest of a suspected criminal. The standard also applies to personal or property searches. An officer may arrest on Probable cause if the crime occurred in his presence, and / or if physical evidence leads to the suspect or upon a sworn affidavit of a witness.
        Question: The wandering eye of surveying with a flashlight of what’s in my back seat is a function of escalation under the pretense of personal safety.
        Answer: This not really a question but I understand what you’re getting at. The Supreme Court of the United States has determined that your car is not your home, neither is your boat, or camper. It is not your legal residence so you have no protection under the IV Amendment of the Constitution therefore you have no right of privacy from open field searches, ie: the wondering eye, but to be fair this is not a pretense. Every officer wants to go home to his or her family after work just as you do and I can tell as a matter of fact most police officers are killed while in the process of a vehicle stop. As a side note, the courts have also determined that driving is a privilege given to you by your state and you have no legal right to drive. If you do not produce a driver’s license, registration and insurance you may just get a ticket but you may also be arrested, depending on state law and local police policy
        Question: Pulling over a vehicle for a broken tail light is a function of training that creates an opportunity to escalate.
        Answer: Again this not really a question but I get the gist. This goes back to proactive policing. Yes, there is a safety concern here for you and other motorists. Imagine running into the rear of an unlit car or truck in a heavy rain or fog bank. I think if you survived the accident unharmed you’d be pretty pissed at the cop who didn’t write that arse a ticket. That said let me restate what I said earlier. Every police agency type has a business model, for the lack of a better term; Highway cops primarily enforce vehicle and traffic laws. That IS what the state pays them to do. If they didn’t enforce vehicle and traffic laws they would have no purpose.

        Question: The public sees a tyranny emanating from LEO’s rather than being peace officers.
        Answer: Again this not a question but a statement. It’s sad that you have bad experiences with the police but I think you should not presume to speak for others. For every person who has bad experiences with the police there is another who has a good experience. I wish I could show you my personal file because have many commendations from my department and city but more importantly thank you cards and letters from stranded motorist who’s tires I have changed, or cars I’ve unlocked with the keys inside, or playing football in the streets with the local kids, getting people into their apartments when they got lock out, shoveling the steps of the elderly, recovering stolen property, putting out a car fire, catching a local burglar, arresting a rapist not to mention a serial killer.

        Your statement: 99% of LEO’s are on the right side of our oath, but the bad one’s need to be vetted out because they are the ones who are in the news.
        Answer: Yes I agree, ALL people at ALL levels should be held accountable. In police parlance we call it cleaning house. Good cops are never sad to see corrupt cops go down. The fact is most cops are tired of being dragged through the mud but let me ask you a question. Think about the last time a cop was fired and charged with a crime maybe even went to prison. Happens almost weekly now right? Now think about the last time a corrupt politician or bureaucrat was fired or God forbid was put in prison! Never happens at the federal level. So who’s really the bad guy here?

        By way of disclosure I am not a veteran, never been in the military and would never presume to tell a retired or active duty soldier how to take a fortified hilltop. (So please don’t tell me how to do police work) but I’d be willing to bet that when veterans get together and talk ‘shop’ a hot topic is rules of engagement and, how, when, where those rules effect an operation and safety and I bet training evaluation is a close second. Understand that the rules of engagement are no different from police policy and boot camp is no different than the police academy. In my opinion the root of the problem is at the academy level. Now I can tell you in a police academy you will have classes on every type of law, including statue law, case law, vehicle and traffic law, environmental law, etc. but I’ve never have heard of a class given in ‘Constitutional Law’ and what your oath to the constitution means and I bet they don’t offer that class in boot camp either. In my opinion was done intentionally. Those in power want to educate us just enough to do our jobs but not enough to question their authority.

      2. @Axiom, “Our constitution provides for a system of justice by due process.”

        Yes, and you, as are all who serve within government – state of federal, at all levels – are required to take and keep an Oath to support the US Constitution and all that is in Pursuance thereof if, then your state Constitution (if state officer), THEN the contract that you direct department/position is under. In that order of importance.

        Notice that you brought out the US Constitution as an example to make a point, but totally ignore it in its requirements of YOUR actions within the position where you decided to serve within our governments. Do not take this as an attack, learn from what I am saying, and please verify it for yourself. You must be aware that the US Constitution is the supreme LAW of this land as you pointed directly to it making a point as the ultimate source of law.

        What does your most important Oath required of all who serve within our governments in order for them/you to lawfully remain in the position currently being occupy within government and to be true to your legitimate government/nation? It requires you to follow the US Constitution above and before orders of superiors and above and before the duties of the position you occupy.

        But, if you go against your superiors, even if they are corrupt and by not following and keeping their Oath working against our legitimate government, sooner or later they will dump you. It is a difficult choice. Most officers today do not remember when a warrant was/actually still is always required. Even then, a lot welcomed corrupt judges who gave them a signed blank warrant. Not one of those corrupt judges were charged with the crimes they were committing against their nation that i know of. Why the term “against their nation”? Because without the US Constitution there is no USA.

        So the choice then becomes, do you “just follow orders”, “just do your job” or do you stand up for your legitimate government? In my family we divided, one quit pursuing law enforcement because that one stands for the US Constitution first; while the other wholeheartedly enjoyed and embraced the reduction of requirements and standards to less then constitutional. Even though not taking or breaking the required Oath was/is at least on felony and the crime of Perjury in most states.

        You must understand that Hitler, Stalin, etc all created laws that were enforced against the people. Germany even had a Constitution, though not like ours. They had rights granted to the people by their constitution, but our US Constitution PROTECTS rights. Red the preamble to the Bill of Rights which makes clear that the Bill of Rights are restrictions and “forbiddens” placed upon all those that serve within our governments.

        Preamble to the Bill of Rights: Congress OF THE United States begun and held at the City of New York, on Wednesday the Fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.
        THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution.”

        But legal is not lawful. Most of the time legal is “Color of Law”. Legal is not lawful, and here in the USA we are a nation that is lawful with the highest document in our land also being the highest law in our land that ALL laws/codes/regulations/etc are required to follow in order to be lawful and “legal”. Statutes to NOT trump the US Constitution, they are required to be in Pursuance thereof it or in this nation they are not lawful and are not binding on the American people..

        Color of law: The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal right. Misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because wrongdoer is clothed with authority of state, is action taken under “color of law.” Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, page 241.

        “A constitution is designated as a supreme enactment, a fundamental act of legislation by the people of the state. A constitution is legislation direct from the people acting in their sovereign capacity, while a statute is legislation from their representatives, subject to limitations prescribed by the superior authority.” Ellingham v. Dye, 231 U. S. 250.

        “The basic purpose of a written constitution has a two-fold aspect, first securing [not granting] to the people of certain unchangeable rights and remedies, and second, the curtailment of unrestricted governmental activity within certain defined spheres.” Du Pont v. Du Pont, 85 A 724.

        Cooley, The General Principles of Constitutional Law, 3rd. ed. (1898), pp. 386-387. (Little & Brown Co.).: “In the construction of these instruments the following rules are actually observed:
        1. The practical construction must be uniform. A constitution does not mean one thing at one time and another at some subsequent time.
        2. The object of construction is to give effect to the intent of the people in establishing the Constitution; it is the intent of the law giver that is to be enforced. But the intent is to be found in the instrument itself. . .”

        If one studies history, police, or military – many times acting as law enforcement are always needed to start the destruction of the nation. They are called, as is America today being called, a “police state” for a reason. The police and/or military are used to enforce laws that are created against the supreme law that all are required to follow. Here in America it was the critical tip of the spear that nicked an artery. America is bleeding out because your/all LE’s and Military are not keeping your Oath to the US Constitution.

        Because this always happens and is always the “tip of the spear”, is why the framers REQUIRED within the US Constitution that those who serve within our governments may only use the Militia made up of the people to;

        — Enforce the US Constitution and each state’s Constitution,
        — Enforce and keep the “Laws of the Union” (which are constitutional laws ONLY),
        — Protect the country against all enemies both domestic and foreign, and
        — “to suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”.

        That requirement means that for as long as you are serving within law enforcement the only lawfulness your actions have are when you keep the Oath.

        Some things to consider.

        The courts of our land, including the US Supreme court is bound by the US Constitution, judges are bound by their Oaths to support and defend it. They are NOT given the authority to “interpret” it. Judges are held to the standard of “Good Behaviour” (constitutional spelling). When they no longer do their duties as constitutionally delegated to them, when they no longer keep their Oath they can, and are required to be, charged with the crimes of not using good behavior while serving, breaking their Oaths – felony and Perjury, given their day in court while the burden of guilt is proven against them by facts; if so proven they are removed.

        Read and enforce the US Constitution as it is to which you are bound, or continue to assist in the destruction of our nation. There is a reason the Oath is a requirement of all who serve within our government – it is to defend our nation our US Constitution from harm. That is why that document is supreme law and the requirement is that all laws/regulations, etc that can be enforced against the people themselves are REQUIRED to be “in Pursuance thereof” the US Constitution..

        We have with our government in the position of president a person who has openly given himself First Degree Murder powers using the words “assassination powers”. Are you laughing?

        Your Oath and the training that you and other officers requires of you to support and DEFEND the US Constitution above and before the orders of superiors and before the duties of the position you are occupying. That action is required of all who serve within government. That oath gives jurisdiction because it makes it clear that the most important duty you – and all – ALL LE’s, that WGP as vet/active service has.

        That Oath requires of you that when you have a person serving within government, even as a Governor of the state you may be serving/living in, the nation as a whole commits crimes against the US Constitution that you WILL step in and stop those actions.

        That Oath also requires that you know what the US Constitution says and requires of you above and before anything else. That Oath makes the US Constitution the most important duty you both have. But understand that though I using you for examples, it is all Oathtakers prime duty above and before anything else.

        “Constitution of this state declares, among inalienable rights of each citizen, that of acquiring, possessing and protecting property. This is one of primary objects of government, is guaranteed by constitution, and cannot be impaired by legislation.” Billings v. Hall (1857), 7 C. 1.

        “Right of transit through each state, with every species of property known to constitution of United States, and recognized by that paramount law, is secured by that instrument to each citizen, and does not depend upon uncertain and changeable ground of mere comity.” In Re Archy (1858), 9 C. 47.

        “Traveling is passing from place to place — act of performing journey; and traveler is person who travels.” In Re Archy (1858), 9 C. 47.

        “As general rule men have natural right to do anything which their inclinations may suggest, if it be not evil in itself, and in no way impairs the rights of others.” In Re Newman (1858), 9 C.

        “Ignorance of the law does not excuse misconduct in anyone, least of all in a sworn officer of the law.” In re McCowan (1917), 177 C. 93, 170 P. 1100.

        ORGANIC LAW. The fundamental law, or constitution of a system of laws or principles which defines and establishes the organization of its government. St. Louis v. Dorr, 145 Mo. 466, 46 S. W. 976, 42 L. R. A. 686, 68 Am. St. Rep. 575. Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th edition (1968), West Publishing Co., p. 1251.

        “The authority of the organic law is universally acknowledged; it speaks the sovereign will of the people; its injunction regarding the process of legislation is as authoritative as are those touching the substance of it.” Suth. Stat. Const., p. 44, note 1.

        “The constitution of a state is the fundamental law of the State.” Ware v. Hylton, 3 Dall. 199.

        “What is a constitution? It is the form of government, delineated by the mighty hand of the people, in which certain first principles of fundamental laws are established.” Van Horne v. Dorrance, 2 Dall. 304.

        “Constitutional provisions and amendments to the Constitution relate to the fundamental law and certain fixed principles upon which governments are founded. Constitutions are commonly called the organic law of a State.” State ex rel. Halliburton v. Roach, 230 Mo. 408, 130 S. W. 689.

        God Bless and Stay Safe all

        If there were never intended to be action to defend the Constitution from those who are domestically attempting to destroy its power and authority, why would each Oath require it of those who take the Oaths?

        Chief Tecumseh: “When it comes your time to die, be not like those whose hearts are filled with the fear of death, so that when their time comes they weep and pray for a little more time to live their lives over again in a different way. Sing your death song and die like a hero going home.”

      3. Cal- You are right. The point I am trying to make, and I think Axiom is trying to make, is that LEO’s are not taught the Constitution. They aren’t taught it is the supreme law of the land. They aren’t taught that laws can be ‘held’ to be constitutional, when in fact they are not, if strictly interpreted to the Constitution. In my case I took the oath to become an LEO in 1977. I didn’t think anything about it. It was just something I recited to get the job. It was no different in 1970 when I took the oath to enter military service. It was just something I recited because I was told I had to do to enter military service. I never gave it serious thought at the time, nor did I give it serious thought until well after I retired. I didn’t get it then, now I do. I suspect today’s LEO’s & service members are little different.

      4. Axiom – You are spot on with your comment “In my opinion the root of the problem is at the academy level. Now I can tell you in a police academy you will have classes on every type of law, including statue law, case law, vehicle and traffic law, environmental law, etc. but I’ve never heard of a class given in ‘Constitutional Law’ and what your oath to the constitution means and I bet they don’t offer that class in boot camp either.”

        At no time during any of my LE career [31 yrs] w/ a state police agency did I receive training or guidance with regard to the meaning of the oath I took, nor an understanding of the supreme law of the land.

        Looking back now, I wonder if that was intentional? To keep LEO’s from questioning all the obviously unconstitutional laws that have been enacted.

      5. @ SheepDog And there lies the state of reason, logic, and education in America today. Damn-it, I took an oath, and I was too ignorant to find out on my own what that oath actually meant!

        There isn’t one cop that hasn’t at least heard of the constitution, or rights, or about freedom and liberty. They are either to lazy, or just do not care, or just think it will dampen their badassness and responsibilities to non-cops.

        And I am curious, how many cops are in oath keepers since its inception, and, how many have quit, because the “oath” was just to much for them?

    2. Very well put. For several years I was assigned 100% to the Housing Authority in GEORGIA -on the street- and I was a FTO and not a detective as you were, but I found her emotional rant embarrassing and disgusting.

  2. I dunno Elias, I listened and I thought the keyword was “African American”. What’s with all the self segregation? I agree with her sentiments but WE ARE AMERICANS! If a majority of the incarcerated/felons/criminals happen to be a different color American, then let’s talk about the Government plantation that promotes the social ills that plaugue those communities. Tyranny doesn’t care about ethnicity except to exploit those differences for its purpose. Let’s not help them with by using those words which further segregate. My .02$

    1. “Tyranny doesn’t care about ethnicity except to exploit those differences for its purpose.”
      Wise words for these difficult days. Thank you my friend.

  3. Good for her to get her message out there. Before I paged down the article as I was watching her video, I said she would be out the door, and so it is with people who are true patriots and oath keepers. Her suspension is criminal. Hope she sues them royally. I hope other officers take a stand for her, and show support for her passion and words. She spoke her mind not against her employer, not against her country, not against her fellow officers who also serve and protect, she showed no disloyalty, but supported what is right versus wrong. Shame on her superiors for taking action against her. That action they took against her is part of the problem in this country. She should run for president.

    God bless her!

  4. Her argument is absolutely correct however, before I would “…recommend her to Oath Keepers national leadership for consideration as a candidate for a national award as Police Officer of the Year for 2016…” I’d consider a couple of things.
    1. She’s an LEO making a judgement based solely on one item of evidence – a video. I’m not saying that it is not a compelling piece of evidence. It is. But LEO’s need to pursue ALL the facts, and weigh ALL the evidence before reaching a conclusion.
    2. I would be interested to know if her apparent passion for honoring the oath includes an unconditional support of our right to keep and bear arms?

    Elias, I can’t get all tingly for this nomination.

    1. “She’s an LEO making a judgement based solely on one item of evidence – a video. I’m not saying that it is not a compelling piece of evidence. It is. But LEO’s need to pursue ALL the facts, and weigh ALL the evidence before reaching a conclusion.”

      Oh they do. We all know about judgement, and facts, and evidence. And… Blue to Blue partiality. No? Or have I been on another planet until now?

  5. In all my life I have only known one black person who wanted to work strictly with the black community. Generally the pressures within the community to help a brother or sister outside the parameters of the job results in job loss. If this officer is suspended it may well be for her own protection as having a different opinion has painted a target on her.

  6. Ditto to all the well thought out comments of my fellow Oath Keepers. You cannot say you believe in the oath without understanding it refers to the Constitution. That constitution gives the right to all people (citizens) to be judged by the ponderance of the evidence presented. All are entitled to due ;process of the Law.

    If this officer had to shot a white person in the line of duty to protect her life as well as the life of others, would she not want that same process to come into play? Just because someone speaks of the oath does not qualify them for an award. One’s actions speak far more than words.

    My vote is no.

  7. She keeps separating herself from her fellow Americans with the hyphenated term, “African American”. Until she wakes up and realizes that she is, “ONE OF US”, she will never speak, “WITH US” as AN AMERICAN while using that term to describe what kind of American she is. She uses the term, “God complex”, well? Just what kind of complex uses, “African American” as a title?

  8. Really?

    I saw what seemed to be naught but a race-centric rant and a lot of blather about taking an Oath with no mention of protecting and defending the Constitution from all enemies, but, rather, about an oath to protect and serve a community.

    She went on to claim she was the ‘keeper’ of her brothers and sisters…um, yeah… but I for one do not want nor need a ‘keeper’, particularly a proud ‘law enforcer’ employee of government.

    Stay out of my shit and leave me alone.

    I am perplexed because I personally saw little to get lathered up about in her emotive-rant. In fact, I was less than impressed when assessing the message she delivered and the view from which it was delivered.

    This is setting aside the shooting incident she references, since I view it without race-goggles on and, rather, as a potentially/likely predatory enforcer seemingly loosing control and killing someone due to their having a gun which is not a threat in and of itself.

    There is a trend in such ‘enforcer’ excesses and aggressive reactions to any encounter with an armed person and it needs to stop and stop now.

    Where have all the ‘Peace Officers’ gone and who the hell replaced them with these aggressive, predatory, militaristic , order-barking, ‘law enforcers’ with the faux and dangerous ‘warrior mindset’?

  9. Elias Alias proposes Nakia Jones should be given a “Police Officer of the Year” award. I think she deserves “Mother of the Year,” and “Humanitarian of the Year” awards as well.

    One commenter argues Jones’ response was “emotional.” Of course it was! None of us can divide our personalities in the way that observation suggests. We feel as we reason; at all times, in every situation!

    Another accuses Jones of “summary justice,” contending there are always “two or more sides to a story.” Therefore one must “think and analyze” every situation before reacting. Alas, as the perpetual rewriting of history attests, the point at which no additional “sides to a story” remain is never—can never be—attained. Life doesn’t permit us that luxury. it is our fate to judge and react to events as reflexively as we breathe. The officers who shot Alton Sterling and Philando Castile did exactly that. So did Nakia Jones in labelling their behavior implicitly racist—a condemnation with which I—an 85-year-old white man—agree. Moreover, so does every individual who thinks and feels a response to Jones’ conclusion, whether their response is accusatory, admiring or indifferent.

    A final observation: I have a hunch if Oathkeeper readers’ imagine themselves being pulled over by a police officer and are given the option of the officer being Nakia Jones or one chosen at random, the majority, including Jones’ most virulent critics, will unhesitatingly opt for her.
    Ted Keller

  10. IF any person uses a hyphen in the description or background of THEMSELF’S…..their comments and opinions should be ‘taken with a grain of salt’… that they are just mouthing off about what others have said before them….since ALL citizens of this country are Americans….unless they have dual citizenship of another country…if not, then no need for a ‘government propaganda required HYPHEN…….imho

    1. And who do you think brainwashed millions of Americans with this hyphenated crap? Your government and its edumedication schools. And how many times have you filled out a government form asking for your ethnic race/color?

      And speaking of brainwashing… it is amusing to read the comments of the various OK’ers articles, and see brainwashing.

  11. Elias, this is the second time I disagree with you. She was WRONG at JUDGING these LEOs BEFORE all the FACTS were in. PERIOD.

    1. And speaking of brainwashing…

      You are serious, aren’t you? One thing I have seen and learned in my 57 years on this planet, is that the institution of copdom does not give a damn about “FACTS” unless those facts exonerate THEM.

      But then, I am not a RESPECTER of persons, or institutions. In other words, I don’t grab my crotch, and gyrate my loins in adulation, just BECAUSE person/institution. So, I have no girly (oh swoon) EMOTIONAL attachment to BLIND me in the FACT, that yes, the institution of copdom only cares about the “FACTS” if it exonerates them.

      See what happens to cops who refuse to exonerate the “official” facts. They become that purple thumb sticking out in the ranks.

  12. Before some of you professionals that live in glass houses rush to judgement consider educating one’s self before rather than after the fact, of course! If law enforcement would’ve properly trained their cops in policing (Christopher Dorner and Dallas) probably would not have occurred! Also consider the deaths of Tamir Rice, Rekia Boyd, not to mention Philando Castile and Alton Sterling. The way I understand it is there’s 18K police departments in the USA, that are lacking in proper policing and training–according to *Meet The Press* national police department heads! They also think it would do the nation some good to scale back to half 9K police departments! I also came across some interesting documents that cement the fact that our nation is ill-prepared to police the communities in America, because those in the police fraternal order are prideful and arrogant and know what’s best for their officers. So much so that they TURNED-DOWN 10’s of thousands of dollars of free training minus expense, to be trained by certified instructors of The JFK School of Special Warfare… So consider the facts and back-off Nakia Jones, because some you guys probably don’t have-half the heart to express what’s going on internally!

  13. What she said seemed like a hysterical rant. As a leo she made me nervous as to her support of the constitution. Now, if your recommendation is to entice her embrace of OK I get it,, but otherwise I would be cautious even having her as a calm partner on a routine street patrol. Did I miss something here?

  14. Police Murder Because They Are Trained To Murder

    Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

    In response to my request for information on US police training
    (, readers have sent in a variety of information that seems to fit together. I am going to assemble it as best I can as a working hypothesis or provisional account. Perhaps a former or current police officer concerned about the change in the behavior of US police, or an expert on police training and practices, will come forward and verify or correct this provisional account.

    First, we know that the police have been, or are being, militarized. They are armed with weapons of war that hitherto have been used only on battlefields. We don’t know why police are armed in this way, as such weapons are not necessary for policing the American public and are not used in police work anywhere except in Israeli-occupied Palestine.

    There is an undeclared agenda behind these weapons, and neither Congress nor the presstitute media have any apparent interest in discovering the hidden agenda.

    Nevertheless, the militarization of the police fits in with what we know about police training.

    There are sourced reports that US police are receiving training from Israel, both from traveling to Israel and in the US from Israeli training firms or from US firms using Israeli methods. See, for example, and

    The training of American police by Israeli occupation forces is not an Internet rumor or “conspiracy theory.” It is a fact acknowledged by the Israeli press:

    Israeli police practices arose from decades of occupying a hostile Palestinian population while stealing the Palestinians’ land and isolating the population in ghetto enclaves. Essentially, Israeli police practices consist of intimidation and violence.

    We know from innumerable news reports over many years the behavior of the occupying Israeli Army toward the Palestinian population. In four short words: it is extremely brutal.

    For a soldier, especially a female soldier, to execute a child and his mother in the streets of Palestine or in the family’s home requires that soldier to have been desensitized to human life that is not Israeli. This requires Palestinians to have been dehumanized, as the native inhabitants of what is today the United States and Australia were dehumanized by the European immigrants who stole their land.

    On the basis of this information, we can infer that the Israeli training of US police teaches the police to see only police lives as valuable and the lives of the public as potential threats to police lives. This is why American police often murder a wrongly suspected person and almost always an unarmed one. The examples are numerous. You can spend much of your life just watching on youtube the existing videos of wanton murders of US citizens by police.

    The American police are being taught at public expense that only their lives are valuable, not our lives. Therefore, in any encounter with a citizen, the automatic assumption is that the citizen intends harm to the police and must be immediately forcefully subdued and handcuffed or, alternatively, shot dead. The police are trained that the safest thing for the police to do is to terminate the suspect even if it is a soccer mom who forgot to signal a turn while driving her kids to a practice.

    In other words, the American police have no more obligation to respect the lives and rights of US citizens than the Israeli occupying forces have to respect the lives and rights of Palestinians.

    This does appear to be an accurate description of the situation. Even the New York Times has blown the whistle on William J. Lewinski, who trains US police to shoot first and he will answer the questions for them in court, on the rare occasion that the wanton murder they committed lands them there.

    What about racism? Racism is the answer put forward by liberals, progressives, the putative leftwing, and by blacks themselves.

    There are problems with the racist explanation. One obvious problem is that the American police wantonly murder and brutalize white people also. Just the other day the police murdered a 19 year old white American while he lay on the ground. And the TSA abuses far more whites than it does blacks. See my website for recent examples of both.

    A former black police officer provides revealing insight into the real situation. He says that about 15% of a police department consists of people who are there for the right reasons and represent a culture of public service. Another 15% are psychopaths who routinely abuse their power. The remaining 70% of the department goes with whichever of the two cultures prevails. Unfortunately, “the bad officers corrupt the department” and the Chicago police under former Chicago Police Commander Jon Burge proves the case.

    The former black police officer assigns blame to “institutional racism.” However, based on what we have learned about Israeli police training, the police bias against black Americans might not be racist or totally racist. Blacks in America have a history of dehumanization. In the eyes of police trainers, American blacks fit the mold of Palestinians. It is easier to begin the training process by making American police indifferent to the lives of an already dehumanized element of the US population. Once the police are indoctrinated to see themselves not as servants of the people but as “exceptional, indispensable people” whose lives must never be at risk, it is a simple matter to generalize the feeling of police superiority over the white population as well.

    I have always been suspicious of the racist explanation. This is an explanation fed to the public in order to break the public into waring factions that cannot unite against their real oppressors. Indoctrinated as we are to hate and fear one another, those who rule and abuse us can do as they will.

    It is as clear as a clear day that only a tiny percentage of white Americans belong to the One Percent. The rest of us are of no more consequence to those who rule than are blacks. Yet, we are divided, fearful of and opposed to one another. What a success for the One Percent !

    Let me be clear. Just as we oppose the mentality of violence that is being inculcated into the police who live on our earnings, numerous Jews and Israelis themselves oppose the settler mentality that the Israeli government has come to represent. Jews are among the most ardent defenders of human rights of our time. Think of Norman Finkelstein, Noam Chomsky Ilan Pappe, and the American Civil Liberties Union. Think of the brave Israeli organizations that oppose the theft of Palestinian lands and villages. We cannot damn an entire people for the sins of their political masters. If so, then after Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama, all Americans are damned.

    The two greatest threats to the world are American and Israeli exceptionalism. It is the success of the indoctrination of this Nazi doctrine of exceptionalism that is the source of the violence in the world today.

    The problem of American police violence is that the police are now defined as exceptional and unaccountable. They can kill the rest of us without accountability, just as Washington slaughters untold numbers of peoples in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan. Unexceptional peoples are dispensable.

    It is paradoxical that training US police in the violent methods of the Israeli occupying forces is justified with the argument that it is necessary to save American lives from terrorists when the actual result is far more Americans killed by police than by terrorists.

    Clearly the police training is counterproductive.

    It would seem that the families of those murdered and abused by police have good grounds for suing mayors, city councils, county commissioners, governors and state legislators for negligence in police oversight. The evidence is in. The police are taking lives, not saving them. The training is a total failure. Yet it persists. This is a high order of negligence and failure by public authorities.


  15. With all due respect Alias, as real as this officer’s emotional appeal is, we are led into a totally false paradigm. This has nothing to do with race, good cop or bad cops. This is a full-out Alinskified Marxist take-down of the entire system. At some point good will stand against evil, right against wrong to take out the true “enemies, foreign and domestic”. Until then we are ALL nothing more than pawns on their payroll. 🙁

  16. Her suspension was punishment for not bowing down to the blue line of silence. She is punished for not kissing the phallus that issues her paychecks. I do think her rant was for attention. An opportunist of the situation.

Comments are closed.