Pentagon to release about 200 photos of tortured Afghan, Iraqi prisoners

Link

Pentagon to release about 200 photos of tortured Afghan, Iraqi prisoners

Pentagon will publish 198 photos of tortured detainees in the US prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan on Friday, a top American civil rights group said. The release comes after a decade-long lawsuit ended in the group’s favor in March.

Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU’s Center for Democracy, announced on Wednesday that the US Department of Defense (DoD) would provide public access to previously disclosed images of prisoners being tortured in US detention centers after more than 10 years of staunch resistance to do so.

The ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request demanding the government to reveal records, including photos of the alleged abuse of prisoners by US officers in the American detention facilities overseas back in 2004.

Despite President Obama’s initial promise to release the requested materials back in 2009, he then urged Congress to pass a special exemption clause to block the release of photos citing security reasons, adding that the publication of the photos “would not add any additional benefit to our understanding of what was carried out in the past by small number of individuals” and would “further inflame anti-American opinion and put our troops in great danger.”

After a long-running court battle, the US District Court Judge Alvin Hellerstein ruled that the government should “disclose each and all the photographs” referring to the ACLU’s lawsuit in last March.

However, only about 200 images out of some 2,100 pictures will be released on Friday. The major part of the evidence comprising approximately 1,900 photos will remain concealed after US Defense Secretary Ash Carter had invoked his authority under 2009 exemption provision last November.

“I have determined that public disclosure of any of the photographs would endanger citizens of the United States, members of the United States Armed Forces, or employees of the United States Government deployed outside the United States,” he wrote in the certification renewal in support of his decision to appeal the ruling on November 7.

Yet the Pentagon has made some minor concessions in the case with Carter refusing to extend his certification to 198 photographs which are now being processed for release. However, Carter didn’t explain the difference between this series of photos and those remain withheld from the public domain, according to Politico.

The still-classified images consist of collection of photographs taken by the DoD in the period from September 11, 2001 to January 22, 2009 and relate to the treatment of “engaged, captured or detained individuals”, according to the court documents.

The ACLU said it would insist on releasing the whole package of documents. The last major scandal in connection with the release of photos and footages depicting scenes of prisoners’ abuse and humiliation by the American soldiers in the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq broke out in 2004. The exposure of horrendous human right violations in the detention center prompted authorities to launch an investigation into the matter as a result of which 11 soldiers accused of sexual abuse in martial trials were incarcerated.


The notorious prison was used for detention purposes by US-led coalition in Iraq until 2006 when the US government handed control over prison to the local authorities. The prison ceased functioning in 2014.

Zionism and the Third Reich – Was Hitler a Zionist Agent? Did Hitler Create Israel??

Link

Zionism and the Third Reich – Was Hitler a Zionist Agent? Did Hitler Create Israel??

This is part 3 in series dealing with the issues concerning Hitler, National Socialist Germany and the Jews. In the first part, I demonstrated that powerful and influential self-described “Jews” in New York and London declared war on Germany in 1933, and launched a world wide economic warfare against her, based upon bogus atrocity stories. In part 2, I showed that the largest and most influential Jewish organization in Germany at the time, publicly stated that these stories were untrue and that they themselves attempted to defend National Socialist Germany against the vile, slanderous atrocity propaganda, and how of their own accord, they took measures to re-assure the world that the atrocity stories were untrue, and moreover, that these stories were doing more harm than good, by fanning anti-Jewish sentiments within Germany. Now let’s turn to the issue of Zionism.

Many in the so-called “truth movement” today claim that Hitler was a Jew and / or a Rothschild, or a Zionist agent, and hence; that was “founder of Israel”. I have already dealt with this in a variety of previous posts and refuted those lies, but let’s look more closely now at the “Zionist agent” allegations. The so-called “Jewish Question” was not something that Hitler invented nor a problem that Hitler alone had perceived of. It was well discussed by Churchill and Roosevelt, and many others in Europe too. Hitler openly acknowledged the problem, which was also acknowledged by the Zionist Jews themselves!

Hitler sought to work with them to bring about a mutually beneficial solution. He did not, however, “ally” himself with the Zionists, as many today claim, but rather acknowledged them as a distinct race and culture, and he negotiated with them honourably, right in the midst of a wave of global Anti-Germanism, created and fanned by self-described “International Jewry”, which I believe was really a just front organization for the International Bankster Gangsters, the very same interests which Hitler decried and attempted to free his people from.

This group were attempting to strangle Germany economically, in the hope that the Hitler’s government would then collapse, return to the status quo: the Weimar “free for all” Republic, and the dictates of the Versailles Treaty,  under which the International Bankster Gangsters could then go back to “business as usual” in bleeding Germany to a slow and painful death. And, thereby removing a real competitor from the world market.  Not to mention leaving her and Europe wide open to the Soviet Bolshevik menace. Thus, the “status quo” was NOT acceptable to the Germans, which is precisely why Hitler and the NSDAP were elected to government and was NOT an option!


No other countries wished to take large numbers of Jews, and no other organization was in place with whom they could negotiate. Hitler’s support for them, however, was limited!

Excerpt from Zionism and The Third Reich, by Mark Weber (IHR)

Official Reservations

German support for Zionism was not unlimited. Government and Party officials were very mindful of the continuing campaign by powerful Jewish communities in the United States, Britain and other countries to mobilize “their” governments and fellow citizens against Germany. As long as world Jewry remained implacably hostile toward National Socialist Germany, and as long as the great majority of Jews around the world showed little eagerness to resettle in the Zionist “promised land,” a sovereign Jewish state in Palestine would not really “solve” the international Jewish question. Instead, German officials reasoned, it would immeasurably strengthen this dangerous anti-German campaign. German backing for Zionism was therefore limited to support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine under British control, not a sovereign Jewish state… /23″

FULL ARTICLE: http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v13/v13n4p29_Weber.html

The above article by historian Mark Weber is also available as a free podcast here

To further understand the “Transfer Agreement” between NS Germany and the Zionists, I recommend you listen to the following. or download the free booklet and read it for yourself.:

VIDEO: Deanna Spingola – The Transfer Agreement Boycott Fever of 1933


Deanna Spingola reads from the book: The Transfer Agreement Boycott Fever of 1933 by by Professor Udo Walendy. This 40 page booklet goes into all of the pertinent background information regarding the declaration of war against Germany by self-described “World Jewry” or “Judea” , and their global boycott of German goods and services, based upon anti-German propaganda. Their objective was to bring Germany to her knees and to destroy her. They began to implement this plan, under false pretences (pretexts) , as soon as the National Socialists came to power, in order to undermine Hitler and the NS economic rescue plan, and thereby, subvert the democratically expressed will of the German people who had elected his party. It was a “False Flag Operation” of global proportions.

Hitler’s party platform did indeed include an appeal for racial purity in Germany, and the removal of Jews from positions of power and influence, and a return of power to the people.  Even after the Nuremberg Laws were decreed, Jews however, could still make appeals to Hitler directly from exemptions, and he was dealing with these daily until at least late 1942 or early 1943 (well into the war).   It must be noted too that, it was the British who put an end to emigration to Palestine when the war started, leaving any who wished to emigrate to Palestine stranded in Germany and later in transit camps. The western powers also refused to cooperate with Germany  on alternative plans to have the Jews emigrate to locations such as Madagascar.  But not all Jews wanted to leave Germany. Most rather enjoyed living there and wanted to stay.  Approximately 150,000 loyal Jews served in the military and defended National Socialist Germany.  Proven loyalty and devotion to Germany was always the key!  I will cover this in more detail with expert sources at a later date.

It must also be underscored again, however, that Hitler’s support of Jewish immigration to Palestine was NEVER intended to be at the expense of the Palestinians, for whom he had great empathy, and he also worked closely with the Grand Mufti to support their cause, and vice versa.

VIDEO: Hitler speaks on the plight of the Palestinians and of USA and British hypocrisy 1939

In the picture below, the Grand Mufti Husseini meets with Adolf Hitler in Berlin

The picture below is of National Socialist supporters in Palestine.

Would this be possible if Hitler was a “Zionist Agent”? Do you think these people considered Hitler as the man responsible for the creation of modern day Israel? Or rather, as their ally?

Before wrapping this up, I will leave you with the following for your further consideration which demonstrates (again) the utter hypocrisy of the “ALL LIES”.  Moreover, I believe it is further evidence of a criminal conspiracy to demonize Hitler and NS Germany for the sake of a profitable war, and for the protection of the interests of the self-described “Jewish” Bankster Gangsters, even at the expense of Jews in Germany and Europe. It is high-time for people to re-examine everything they thought they knew regarding Hitler, National Socialist Germany and World War II.

Allied Hypocrisy and Collusion:

What FDR said about Jews in private

By Rafael Medoff, Los Angeles times, April 7, 2013

In May 1943, President Franklin Roosevelt met with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill at the White House. It was 17 months after Pearl Harbor and a little more than a year before D-Day. The two Allied leaders reviewed the war effort to date and exchanged thoughts on their plans for the postwar era. At one point in the discussion, FDR offered what he called “the best way to settle the Jewish question.”

In 1923, as a member of the Harvard board of directors, Roosevelt decided there were too many Jewish students at the college and helped institute a quota to limit the number admitted. In 1938, he privately suggested that Jews in Poland were dominating the economy and were therefore to blame for provoking anti-Semitism there. In 1941, he remarked at a Cabinet meeting that there were too many Jews among federal employees in Oregon. In 1943, he told government officials in Allied-liberated North Africa that the number of local Jews in various professions “should be definitely limited” so as to “eliminate the specific and understandable complaints which the Germans bore towards the Jews in Germany.” [FDR also]… dismissed pleas for Jewish refugees as “Jewish wailing” and “sob stuff”; expressing (to a senator ) his pride that “there is no Jewish blood in our veins”; and characterizing a tax maneuver by a Jewish newspaper publisher as “a dirty Jewish trick.” But the most common theme in Roosevelt’s private statements about Jews has to do with his perception that they were “overcrowding” many professions and exercising undue influence. ”
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-medoff-roosevelt-holocaust-20130407,0,581781.story

Sir Winston Churchill: Zionist Hero

http://www.independent.co.uk

“Jewish supporters of Winston Churchill are to unveil a bust of the British wartime leader in Jerusalem this weekend in what they say is a long-overdue recognition of his staunch and unwavering support of the Jewish cause and their desire for a homeland.

“As a passionate Zionist all his life and a philo-semite, Churchill has been under-recognised,” says Anthony Rosenfelder, a trustee of the Jerusalem Foundation, which is behind the project to commemorate the British leader. He “combined a historical understanding of the Jewish people and what the promised land meant for Jews … with realpolitik”.

It is perhaps ironic that a statue of Churchill should stand just yards away from the King David Hotel, scene of a deadly Jewish terror attack on British military headquarters in 1946 that was to hasten the demise of mandate rule in Palestine.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/sir-winston-churchill-zionist-hero-8277918.html

RELATED INFO:

• Behind the Balfour Declaration: Britain’s Great War Pledge To Lord Rothschild by Robert John
• Straight Talk About Zionism: What Jewish Nationalism Means by Mark Weber
• Zionism vs Bolshevism by Winston Churchill, Illustrated Sunday Herald February 8, 1920, page 5 (David Irving)

House Adopts Anti-Palestinian Resolution, Sustains “Israel’s Right to commit the Highest Crimes”

Link

House Adopts Anti-Palestinian Resolution, Sustains “Israel’s Right to commit the Highest Crimes”

On Tuesday, a one-sided bipartisan non-binding House resolution with 71 co-sponsors was adopted by voice vote, no opposition registered.

The entire process on an issue this sensitive took 30 minutes, no debate needed. Rubber-stamp approval sufficed, more proof showing Palestinians are on their own, sustained resistance their only recourse. Changing the deplorable status quo is impossible any other way.

Neocon Republican House Foreign Affairs chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen introduced the measure.

AIPAC applauded the resolution, (e)xpressing concern over anti-Israel and anti-Semitic incitement within the Palestinian Authority.” Its statement “condemning the recent wave of Palestinian terrorism in Israel.”

Ros-Lehtinen’s hate-filled comments were quoted, saying “(t)he House has sent a clear message to Palestinian leadership that its anti-Israel incitement causing so much of the recent tension, violence, and terror will no longer be tolerated.”

There should be no doubt that the Palestinian Authority sets the tone with its incitement, resulting in the recent wave of attacks that we’re seeing against innocent Israeli civilians.

Other House members voiced similar sentiments – ignoring longstanding Israeli state terror, wars at its discretion, brutalizing occupation harshness, persecuting an entire population ruthlessly, holding it hostage, stealing its land, murdering its people.

Congress near unanimously supports Israel’s right to commit the highest of high crimes. When Palestinians defend their rights, they’re called “terrorists.”

According to AIPAC, “a wave of Palestinian incitement and terror (is ongoing) throughout the state of Israel. (A)t least a dozen Israelis have been killed and scores more wounded.”

Eight Jews were killed since October 1 in Occupied Palestine, not Israel, only two by stabbings. AIPAC’s silence was deafening, ignoring 75 Palestinians murdered by Israeli soldiers and police over the same time period, thousands injured, many hundreds arrested and brutalized in confinement.

Things aren’t entirely hopeless. Activist Josh Ruebner points out similar pro-Israeli resolutions usually get 200 – 300 co-sponsors.

This measure was first introduced in June. House members took months bringing it to the floor for a vote. Only two Democrats spoke in support of the measure.

When a voice vote was called, many members weren’t on the floor. Most pro-Israeli resolutions show recorded votes so representatives can show their allegiance on the public record.


Still it goes without saying. Virtually the entire Congress one-sidedly supports Israel. Palestinian rights don’t matter. Not a single profile in courage in Washington speaks out on their behalf. No one condemns decades of Israeli high crimes.

Nearly 40% of African-American children living in poverty – study

Link

Nearly 40% of African-American children living in poverty – study

A new study found the percentage of American children living in poverty has declined slightly since 2010 as the economy has improved, but the rate for African-American children remains extremely high, at nearly 40 percent.

More than 45.3 million people are considered to be living in poverty in the United States, given a poverty line of $24,000 for a family of four. Some 14.7 million of these, or 20 percent, are children.

READ MORE: 20% of US school children living below poverty line, report says

While that figure has declined from 16.3 million in 2010, it still comprises one-fifth of the total number of American children under 18, and one-third of Americans living in poverty, according to Pew Research Center analysis of Census data.

Pew said that for the first time since the US Census starting collecting data in 1974, the number of African-American children living in poverty outnumbers the number of white children. Poverty rates declined for white children from 4.9 million in 2010 to 4.1 million in 2013, but for African-American children it only decreased from 4.4 million in 2010 to 4.2 million in 2013.

While Pew said the difference is not statistically significant, it is still notable since white children outnumber African-American children by three to one, with two out of five African-American children living in families with total income below the poverty line.

There are also stark differences for Latinos. In 2013, one out of three Latino children, or 30.4 percent of the 18 million Hispanic children in the country, was living in poverty, compared to 1 out of 10 white and Asian children, according to Pew.

READ MORE: Over 14 million low-income older Americans are food insecure - gov’t report

The poverty rate for African-American children can be explained, in part, by the employment status and level of income of their parents, according to Mark Hugo Lopez, the director of Hispanic research at the Pew Research Center. Blacks are more likely to be unemployed and earn less than people of other races.

“The labor market has recovered, but the recovery has been uneven,” Lopez told CNN.

Last month, the Department of Labor said the unemployment rate for African-Americans was 9.5 percent, compared to 6.6 percent for Hispanics, 4.6 percent for whites and 3.8 percent for Asians.


“Even though many black parents may be working they may not necessarily be earning as much as their white or Asian counterparts,” Lopez said.

'US beating drums of war against Russia to increase European defense spending'

Link

'US beating drums of war against Russia to increase European defense spending'

Marine Corps General Joseph Dunford testifies during the Senate Armed Services committee nomination hearing to be chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on Capitol Hill in Washington, July 9, 2015.

European leaders know that the US wants to get them to spend money on military equipment which will be purchased from the US, says Brian Becker of the anti-war Answer Coalition. But Europe knows the dangers from the experience of two world wars, he added.

Several senior American officials say Russia is the greatest threat to their country's national security. First it was Secretary of the Air Force Deborah James, then General Joseph Dunford at his confirmation hearing for the position of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff called Russian actions “nothing short of alarming.”


RT: Several senior American officials say Russia is the greatest threat to US national security. Why is such rhetoric being employed by senior American officials?

US military leaders call Russia ‘greatest threat’, demand more funding

Brian Becker: We have to understand this rhetoric and these presentations first by the Air Force Secretary Deborah James and Major General Joseph Dunford, soon to be Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, both of whom pose the presentation that Russia is an existential threat and the greatest threat to America.

They also say, and this is very interesting, that it requires the 28 NATO members to step up and do their part to spend at least two per cent of their GDP on military spending in NATO, and only four of the 28 members of NATO are doing it so far. What the US military officials are basically telling NATO is: “Get in line, this is an existential threat, you have to spend more of your money, money that is being drained from other parts of the economies of Europe." A lot of that money will go to US war contractors. So the ABCs of the war propaganda Russia is an existential threat is that it is very good, very necessary in fact for the biggest war contractors, the biggest parts of the military industrial complex in America. That is one part of the story.

RT: What is calling Russia 'the biggest threat'' and lumping it in with Islamic State going to lead to?

BB: It doesn’t just lump Russia in with ISIS, it says “Russia is a greater threat to the US and to the West, and to world peace than ISIS.” Now you see the US’s government right now is at war, endless war with IS because purportedly it poses an existential threat. But if the existential threat posed by Russia is even greater than IS, you can make the case, and I think it’s absolutely true, that the US military is preparing the American public for military confrontation, conflict of some type with Russia, which would seem to all people to be absolute madness.

Nonetheless, they must be doing this to prepare the population to allow greater and greater military threats to go against Russia. Now, once the Pentagon claims the escalation ladder, carries out massive war exercises on Russia’s border, Russia will be compelled to meet that threat. That’s how conflicts go from small conflicts to bigger conflicts, and even possible global conflicts.



RT: European officials have been so far reluctant to boost military spending for NATO. Do they not fear any imminent threats that the US is citing?

BB: The European powers know absolutely that this is hogwash. They know with certainty that the US is beating the drums of war in order to get them to spend more of their money on military equipment, much of which will be purchase from the US. And they also know that it’s easy for American politicians, and the Generals in America are just politicians in uniform before they become big businessman when they circulate back into corporate America, they know that they are playing with fire. It is very easy for American officials to talk tough against Russia. But Europe knows all too well, the dangers of real war, the danger of WWI and WWII which is 70 years over this year. They don’t take lightly to the fact that the Pentagon is playing with fire. And of course it will be the European people who will be on the frontlines, not Americans.

RT: US military officials said that they knew Europe was facing tough economic challenges, but NATO commitments should still be a priority. Is this talk of threats a way to secure NATO funding?

BB: Yes, that was my point. I think a lot of this is to keep the alliance together. They know that Germany and France, and other major European powers could start to have very warm and good relations - economic, political, and even possibly military relations with Russia. They are trying to keep the discipline of the alliance, and they are also trying to make sure that those countries pay their fair share to the war effort, to the NATO war effort, which, as I said, benefits US war corporations.

Units from NATO allied countries take part in the NATO Noble Jump 2015 exercises, part of testing and refinement of the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) in Swietoszow, Poland June 18, 2015.

US Secretary of the Air Force and United States Marine Corps general not diplomats

Paul Heroux, Middle East expert also commented on Deborah James’s and General Joseph Dunford’s statements that Russia is the greatest threat to US national security saying that “Their job is to bring to attention what, in their point of view, is going to be a big threat.”

RT: European officials have been so far reluctant to boost military spending on NATO. Why do you think that is?

Paul Heroux: There could be a number of reasons. The crisis in Greece right now is putting pressure on other European counties because there is maybe a need for a debt bailout. But at the same time we don’t want to go back to the old ways of huge deficit spending on the military. I would like to think we’ve progressed a lot more and we’re going to do more diplomatic solutions.

RT: You talk about diplomatic solutions... Is it diplomatic to call Russia 'the biggest threat' to American security?

PH: No, I don’t think it is. But I also think that was made by somebody whose job is not to be a diplomat, somebody who is either a general or secretary of one of the branches of our [US] armed forces. Their job is to bring to attention what, in their point of view, is going to be a big threat.


We also have other people in the US saying that the biggest threat to US security is cyber terrorism, or cyber security; other people say it might be global warming; other folks might say it’s ISIS or terrorism, and some might even say the nuclear program in Iran.

RT: Does calling Russia "the biggest threat" suggest the deterioration in relations between Moscow and Washington? Is that the sign there is no real hope for dissent dialogue in the next coming weeks and months?

PH: Deterioration has been going on for a number of years, that’s right. From the point of view of the US, Russia is the problem, from the point of view of Russia; it’s probably the US that’s the problem. The important thing is that they keep working together. What we need to do is basically take baby steps, small, realistic goals that can be achieved rather than trying to change the whole landscape of the negotiations and the state of affairs between the two countries. Small realistic baby steps will help develop a sense of trust and a sense of shared interest. And I think that’s the direction we should be going in.

‘Artificially hostile atmosphere’: Moscow blasts US claims of Russian threat

RT: Why has the trust deteriorated so badly, do you think on the both sides since the so-called reset?

PH: I think it could be a number of issues. Just the interest of the US and Russia. Russia, for example, is trying to reclaim its former kind of Eastern superiority, and that may sometimes complete with some US interests or some of NATO’s interests. Other times the US is also trying to keep ourselves from sliding into place where other countries don’t want to work with us, and it’s a difficult balance. Also it largely could be just the personalities of different leaders. We see that with Barack Obama and Benjamin Netanyahu; we saw that starting with Vladimir Putin and George Bush. So personalities do play a large role in these negotiations and discussions.

White Americans bigger terror threat than Islamic extremists – study

Link

White Americans bigger terror threat than Islamic extremists – study

Dylann Storm Roof appears by closed-circuit television at his bond hearing in Charleston, South Carolina June 19, 2015. (Reuters)

White Americans are the biggest terror threat in the United States, having killed more people in attacks than Muslims or any other group in the last 14 years, according to a new study.

The research, conducted by the New America Foundation, examined the 26 attacks on US soil defined as acts of terror since 9/11, and found that 19 of those attacks were committed by non-Muslims.

‘KKK’ guards arrested for plotting black inmate’s murder

Since the September 11 atrocity, 48 people have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, compared to 26 killed by people who claimed to be jihadists. The non-Muslim groups included right-wing, racist, and anti-government organizations.

However, the study found that radical Islamists were indicted more frequently than non-Muslim extremists and served longer sentences.

“From a legal point of view, when people go into court, the Justice Department has certain guidelines about sentencing. So, for instance, if a crime is deemed to have a terrorist underpinning, the sentences that are handed down are longer than it would be just for a conventional crime,” Peter Bergen, vice president and director of studies for the New America Foundation, told NPR.

For the purpose of the research, terrorism was defined as an “act of political violence against a civilian target by someone other than the state,” Bergen said.

Last week's Charleston shooting, which left nine people dead at a historically black church, was included in the study. The shooter, 21-year-old Dylann Roof, supported white supremacist ideology.

Also included in the count was a 2012 Sikh temple shooting in Wisconsin, which left six people dead. The shooting was carried out by Michael Page, who was involved in neo-Nazi and white supremacist circles, and had founded a white supremacist band.

2 Alabama police lieutenants under investigation for ties to hate group

A 2011 multi-state killing spree was also listed, during which David Pedersen and Holly Grigsby killed four people. The indictment alleged the two were members of a criminal enterprise whose purposes included “promoting and advancing a white supremacist movement to 'purify' and 'preserve' the white race...”

The findings align with a survey published this week, which asked 382 police and sheriff's departments in the US to rank the three biggest threats from violent extremism in their jurisdiction. About 74 percent listed anti-government violence, while 39 percent listed Al-Qaeda-inspired violence.

The study was conducted by Charles Kurzman of the University of North Carolina and David Schanzer of Duke University, and will be published by the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security and the Police Executive Research Forum, the New York Times reported.

Ohio cops accused of brutality for arresting pregnant woman, 12yo girl at swimming pool

Link

Ohio cops accused of brutality for arresting pregnant woman, 12yo girl at swimming pool

Screenshot from YouTube video recorded by witnesses in Fairfield, Ohio

Police used excessive force and pepper spray on a pregnant woman and several children, who allegedly resisted arrest at a Fairfield, Ohio pool. The woman’s attorney accuses the officers and pool staff of racism.

Krystal Dixon, 33, and her sister Maya, 34, pleaded not guilty to charges of resisting arrest and disorderly conduct in court on Wednesday morning. A police report says Krystal “aggressively confronted pool staff” on June 9, after being asked to leave because of her children’s misbehavior, according to the Dayton Journal-News.

One police officer who intervened says he was physically attacked by the sisters, as well as some of the children. A boy, 15, and a girl, 12, were also charged.

Almost nine minutes of video footage recorded by the Dixons was made public, with the women’s attorney Clyde Bennett saying the evidence clearly shows his clients not breaking the law or acting violently. Bennett asked the city to dismiss the charges “so the community can move on.”

“If a person is behaving in a legal manner, you can’t just grab them. You can’t just say ‘come here’ and snatch them. That’s unconstitutional,” Bennett said. “If you want to go through a trial, that’s fine. I don’t have a problem with a trial, but it shouldn’t go that far,” he told local news station WLWT.

Fairfield is a community about 25 miles north of Cincinnati. The incident took place about a week after police in McKinney, Texas forcefully dispersed a group of African-American teenagers at a pool party. Eyewitness video shows a police officer throwing a girl on the ground and sitting on her back. Officer Eric Casebolt resigned following the public outcry over the incident.

Outrage as Texas cops break up teenage pool partly, violently froced black girl to ground

Bishop Bobby Hilton, head of the Word Deliverance Ministries in Forest Park and member of Reverend Al Sharpton’s National Action Network, held a news conference on Tuesday and showed some of the Dixons’ video footage. Hilton also claimed the 12-year-old girl suffered a jaw and rib fracture from the incident, but later dropped the allegations.

Fairfield Police Chief Michael J. Dickey said the video clips only reinforced his opinion that the officers acted appropriately.

“All they are trying to do is calm everyone down,” Dickey told the Cincinnati Enquirer. “It’s just business.” He rejected all allegations that anyone was injured in the incident, beyond temporary discomfort from the pepper spray used by the officers.

“This is an unfortunate situation and our officers had a tough situation there,” added Fairfield Mayor Steve Miller. “But I think they did a good job in showing restraint.”

According to Dixon, she brought eight children to the aquatics center around 3 pm, and then went to pick up her sister. One of her nephews did not have swimwear and was asked to leave. When Dixon returned, pool staff told her the boy had broken the rules by swimming in his clothes and asked the family to leave because the other children had misbehaved when informed of the violation.

A park ranger who came to ask Dixon to leave asked her to show him her identification. When she did not, he threatened to arrest her and took her by the arm. At that point, several of the children tried to step in, and the staff called 911.

The police released a recording of the 911 call by one of the pool employees, a woman on the verge of tears, who said a group of children was fighting with the officers and asked for backup “immediately.”

“They’re videotaping, trying to make it look like a racist thing, and it’s not at all. They were breaking our policies. We told them they couldn’t be here anymore, and it’s really scary and I don’t feel safe,” the caller says.

Dixon’s attorney, Clyde Bennet, was skeptical of the policy violation explanation. “I’m not convinced that’s why they wanted them out of the pool,” he told the Daily Beast. “There’s a lot of people in Cincinnati who believe they wanted them out … because they were black.”

Krystal and Maya Dixon were allowed to remain free on their own recognizance and are due back in court for a pretrial hearing on July 8.