Associated Press
June 28, 2015
LOS ANGELES — It all happened in seconds. But those brief moments would forever change life for David Klinger, a self-described “beach kid” who’d dreamt of being a police officer since he was a kid. He’d entered the Los Angeles Police Academy in 1981 with a clear motive. He wanted to try to help make life better for the people of violence-ridden south-central Los Angeles.
Now he was standing with his gun pointed at Edward Randolph, who at 26 was just three years older than himself. Randolph had a butcher knife aimed at the throat of Klinger’s police partner, Dennis Azevedo, who was on the ground trying with all his might to hold back Randolph’s attack.
“Shoot him,” Azevedo cried out to his rookie partner.
Deadly force by police has made headlines from Ferguson, Missouri, to Baltimore. Just this month, a Los Angeles police officer was found “unjustified” in shooting and killing a 25-year-old mentally ill man. Across the country, most officers are exonerated. But more and more people are calling for strategies to make such incidents less common, notably through improved police training.
For Klinger, it has long been a very personal issue — one that led a young cop who entered the “kill zone,” as officers call it, to become a researcher seeking to understand the dynamics of confrontation. In doing so, he hopes to be a voice of reason in an emotional national debate, and an advocate for change.
When Klinger showed up in his ranks on the night shift, Tim Anderson, then an LAPD sergeant, wasn’t sure he was the kind of recruit who’d make it in neighborhoods plagued with gang warfare.
Klinger, a quiet, devout Christian, whose dad was a classical clarinet player, had moved to California from Miami, at age 13, with his mom and two sisters after his parents split up. “Here’s a kid from a very mild-mannered side of life who ends up here,” Anderson says.
But Klinger was determined. “I actually asked for this to be my assignment out of the academy,” he says, sitting in a restaurant north of Los Angeles after revisiting the scene of Randolph’s shooting.
That night in 1981, he was teamed with Azevedo when they were called to a home where an armed burglar had been reported. As a police helicopter circled overhead, a large crowd gathered to watch across busy Vernon Avenue.
“Get out of here!” the officers yelled. Most spectators ran, except Randolph.
Azevedo says he didn’t think Randolph could hear him, or maybe didn’t speak English. So he ran across the street to try to get him to move.
“In the blink of an eye,” Azevedo recalls how Randolph lunged forward and stabbed him in the lower chest with a blow stopped — just barely — by his protective vest. Stunned, Azevedo tried to draw his gun, but he tripped on uneven pavement, he says — and Randolph jumped on him with the knife raised.
Rushing over, Klinger grabbed Randolph’s left wrist, but Randolph broke free. Klinger pulled his own gun and fired at close range.
“I blamed myself for 20 years for not being able to wrest the knife from him,” he says.
Investigators ultimately determined the fatal shooting was justified and that the rookie officer had saved Azevedo’s life. But Klinger still found it difficult to rest easy.
In the year that followed, there were nine more times he says he could have shot a civilian — and believes he would have been justified in doing so. But he but didn’t shoot because the suspects dropped guns, or other officers intervened.
Feeling like a “magnet” for trouble, he moved to a smaller department in Redmond, Washington. But he found no better fit there. It was time for something new.
Today, the 57-year-old Klinger is a professor in the department of criminology and criminal justice at the University of Missouri-St. Louis. He earned a doctorate and has written a book, “Into the Kill Zone,” telling the stories of officers who’ve shot and killed people.
He also has done research on methods officers can use to avoid deadly force. This spring, testifying at a U.S. Civil Rights Commission hearing on deadly force, one topic he discussed was “tactical positioning,” a strategy in which officers keep a safe distance, unless there is imminent danger.
“Often times, officers find themselves in too close, too quickly, and they don’t have any option other than to shoot their way out of it,” Klinger says. “That’s where I really think we fall down in American law enforcement.”
He uses last year’s police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, as an example. Though he agrees that Officer Darren Wilson was justified in shooting Brown, he also says that shooting might have been avoided if Wilson had waited and called for backup.
Such assessments anger some. But Klinger says police agencies must ask, “What can we learn from this?'”
Even now, there is disagreement among Klinger’s own former colleagues about whether the 1981 killing of Edward Randolph could have been avoided. They agree that Klinger was justified in the shooting.
But Anderson, their sergeant, says Azevedo should have ignored Randolph and let him take his chances as they pursued the burglar, who ultimately got away. “He should’ve never engaged this suspect by himself,” says Anderson, a former SWAT team supervisor, who’s retired and now advises police departments on tactical operations.
Azevedo, also retired after a long law enforcement career, stands by his decision. He says it was his duty to try to protect a person he thought was an innocent bystander.
Either way, Klinger has let go of his guilt with the help of a counselor who, as he puts it, helped his heart accept that he “did what he had to do.”
Speaking of Randolph, he says, “He’s 26 years old. His whole life was driven by other people besides me. So why should I blame myself for my inability to control him for that one second that I was in physical contact with him?”
It has been, perhaps, the most difficult lesson the professor has learned.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Edward Randolph most definitely deserved to be killed!
Klinger chose the wrong profession. He should not have hesitated when his partner called out for him to shoot Randolph.
A cop must be prepared to shoot to kill at any moment. Klinger’s advice to keep a distance between a cop and an armed suspect is good advice, but not always possible. And his advice on calling for backup is also good, but backup may not be available in time.
Tuesday, June 30, 2015
MURPHY’S LAW WORKED OVERTIME
About to give birth, a woman takes a back road, gets lost, runs out of gas, gives birth, is attacked by bees and after being stranded for three days, is rescued when she set mountain on fire
By Gamaliel Ortiz
KCRA.com
June 29, 2015
OROVILLE, Calif. —An Oroville woman going into labor decided to take the back roads to her parents' home for help, but soon found herself in more trouble than expected.
It began with her gas and cell service running out in the Plumas County National Forest.
"I was told about this back road and people had showed it to me a few times, but I had never driven it by myself," Amber Pangborn told an NBC affiliate in Oroville.
As she traveled down French Creek Road -- not long before running out of gas and cell service -- Pangborn gave birth to her daughter, Marissa. She did it alone on Thursday.
Pangborn, 35, was stranded for the next three days. In that time, she encountered a swarm of bees and mosquitoes.
"I was trying to get them not to sting her, but I got stung," Pangborn said.
She survived only off a few apples and modest amounts of water.
On Saturday, three days into her ordeal, she decided to start a signal fire, hoping to attract some attention -- but that didn't go as planned.
"I think mommy just started a forest fire," Pangborn recalled telling her daughter shortly after starting the fire.
Within hours, the fire was tracked by a U.S. Forest Service worker, and Pangborn and her daughter were found safe.
"I was just crying, and I was just so happy," Pangborn, said. "I thought we were going to die."
They were admitted to Oroville Hospital, and the baby was taken to UC Davis Medical Center in Sacramento on Sunday for further evaluation.
The two are expected to be reunited soon.
By Gamaliel Ortiz
KCRA.com
June 29, 2015
OROVILLE, Calif. —An Oroville woman going into labor decided to take the back roads to her parents' home for help, but soon found herself in more trouble than expected.
It began with her gas and cell service running out in the Plumas County National Forest.
"I was told about this back road and people had showed it to me a few times, but I had never driven it by myself," Amber Pangborn told an NBC affiliate in Oroville.
As she traveled down French Creek Road -- not long before running out of gas and cell service -- Pangborn gave birth to her daughter, Marissa. She did it alone on Thursday.
Pangborn, 35, was stranded for the next three days. In that time, she encountered a swarm of bees and mosquitoes.
"I was trying to get them not to sting her, but I got stung," Pangborn said.
She survived only off a few apples and modest amounts of water.
On Saturday, three days into her ordeal, she decided to start a signal fire, hoping to attract some attention -- but that didn't go as planned.
"I think mommy just started a forest fire," Pangborn recalled telling her daughter shortly after starting the fire.
Within hours, the fire was tracked by a U.S. Forest Service worker, and Pangborn and her daughter were found safe.
"I was just crying, and I was just so happy," Pangborn, said. "I thought we were going to die."
They were admitted to Oroville Hospital, and the baby was taken to UC Davis Medical Center in Sacramento on Sunday for further evaluation.
The two are expected to be reunited soon.
Monday, June 29, 2015
SCOTUS OKAYS MIDAZOLAM FOR EXECUTIONS
In a 5-4 ruling, the Supreme Court held that the use of midazolam in executions did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment
The use of midazolam in executions was challenged after the botched Oklahoma execution of Clayton Lockett on April 29, 2014. Here is how Yahoo News described the execution:
First, a sedative was administered to render him unconscious (which, in this case, was midazolam). Next, a paralytic was added to prevent Lockett from moving or thrashing as he died, while also stopping his breathing. Finally, he received a drug to cause cardiac arrest. In Lockett’s case, the procedure went poorly: He awoke after the administration of the midazolam, which was supposed to render him unconscious, all the while kicking his legs, panting, clenching his teeth, and flailing against the restraints. Lockett continued to struggle, eventually raising his head off the gurney completely and managing to articulate the word “Man” before eventually dying 40 minutes later.
(Please excuse me while I collect myself. The description of poor old Clayton’s agonizing demise was more than I could take. I'm OK now, I've managed to stop laughing.)
In a 5-4 ruling Monday, the Supreme Court turned back challenges to the use of midazolam in executions, holding that its use does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment. Naturally, the four liberal justices dissented.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion, saying that “petitioners failed to establish that any risk of harm was substantial when compared to a known and available alternative method of execution.”
In their dissent, liberal justices Stephen G. Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg went so far as to note their belief that the death penalty itself was unconstitutional.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a scathing dissent, saying that it “would not matter whether the state intended to use midazolam, or instead to have petitioners drawn and quartered, slowly tortured to death, or actually burned at the stake.”
Sotomayor’s dissent seems akin to the ridiculous rant of a deranged person. She must have been smoking some funny tobacco just before she wrote it. Or there is always the possibility that her uber-liberal mindset has addled her brains.
While this ruling is a victory for the death penalty, we’d better enjoy it while we can. When Hillary Clinton becomes President, she will get to appoint several Supreme Court justices and you can bet they will all have the same mindset as Sonia Sotomayor. Then you can kiss the death penalty goodbye.
The use of midazolam in executions was challenged after the botched Oklahoma execution of Clayton Lockett on April 29, 2014. Here is how Yahoo News described the execution:
First, a sedative was administered to render him unconscious (which, in this case, was midazolam). Next, a paralytic was added to prevent Lockett from moving or thrashing as he died, while also stopping his breathing. Finally, he received a drug to cause cardiac arrest. In Lockett’s case, the procedure went poorly: He awoke after the administration of the midazolam, which was supposed to render him unconscious, all the while kicking his legs, panting, clenching his teeth, and flailing against the restraints. Lockett continued to struggle, eventually raising his head off the gurney completely and managing to articulate the word “Man” before eventually dying 40 minutes later.
(Please excuse me while I collect myself. The description of poor old Clayton’s agonizing demise was more than I could take. I'm OK now, I've managed to stop laughing.)
In a 5-4 ruling Monday, the Supreme Court turned back challenges to the use of midazolam in executions, holding that its use does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment. Naturally, the four liberal justices dissented.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote the majority opinion, saying that “petitioners failed to establish that any risk of harm was substantial when compared to a known and available alternative method of execution.”
In their dissent, liberal justices Stephen G. Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg went so far as to note their belief that the death penalty itself was unconstitutional.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a scathing dissent, saying that it “would not matter whether the state intended to use midazolam, or instead to have petitioners drawn and quartered, slowly tortured to death, or actually burned at the stake.”
Sotomayor’s dissent seems akin to the ridiculous rant of a deranged person. She must have been smoking some funny tobacco just before she wrote it. Or there is always the possibility that her uber-liberal mindset has addled her brains.
While this ruling is a victory for the death penalty, we’d better enjoy it while we can. When Hillary Clinton becomes President, she will get to appoint several Supreme Court justices and you can bet they will all have the same mindset as Sonia Sotomayor. Then you can kiss the death penalty goodbye.
CONVIICT LIVES MATTER
Prison inmates start protest movement in wake of David Sweat shooting with white, black and Hispanic inmates united
By Ima Schmuck
The Unconventional Gazette
June 29, 2015
The shooting of unarmed New York prison escapee David Sweat by a state trooper has riled up prison inmates across the U.S. White, black and Hispanic prison inmates have set aside their fierce rivalry to unite and form a ‘Convict Lives Matter’ protest movement.
Terry “Big Terry” Blake, a general in the Aryan Brotherhood of Texas (ABT) prison gang, was incensed over the Sweat shooting. Big Terry, who is in custody on federal racketeering charges, told reporters that correctional officers and cops are always shooting unarmed prison inmates who are only trying to get out of the “hell holes” they’ve been confined in.
“If them niggers can protest and riot when cops shoot one of them spooks,” Big Terry said, “then us convicts ought to be able to protest and riot too when one of our unarmed brothers gets shot by the bulls or the cops. I hate to join up with them niggers and wetbacks, but when it comes to us cons getting shot, we all gotta stick together.”
Donna Lieberman , executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, said the ACLU is supporting the rights of convicts to demonstrate, but she stopped short of supporting their right to riot. “We always support the right of any group to demonstrate peacefully,” she said, emphasizing the word ‘peacefully.’
Lieberman is also concerned that an unarmed Sweat was shot in the back by a New York state trooper while running away. She compared the Sweat shooting to that of 50-year-old Walter Scott, an unarmed black man who was shot in the back last April by Michael Slager, a North Charleston, South Carolina cop. As a result, Slager has been indicted for murder.
Prison officials are bracing for the possibility of rioting and are considering lockdowns in those prisons where the “Convict Lives Matter’ movement appears to gaining some traction.
Marshall L. Fisher, Commissioner of the Mississippi Department of Corrections, said “We ain’t about to let a bunch of criminals demonstrate for any reason or cause, Our correctional officers have been instructed to deal harshly with the leaders of the ‘Convict Lives Matter’ movement in our state prison system.”
Burl Cain, warden of Louisiana’s Angola state penitentiary, said he was not worried about any demonstrations at his prison. “Here at Angola,” he said, “our inmates are well behaved because they know how we deal with troublemakers. I ain’t worried about no ‘Convict Lives Matter’ demonstrations. They ain’t about to happen here at Angola.”
As for the Sweat shooting, Amnesty International general secretary Salil Shetty summed it up in his London office by saying, “The shooting of Mr. Sweat is just one more example of cowboy cops in America.”
By Ima Schmuck
The Unconventional Gazette
June 29, 2015
The shooting of unarmed New York prison escapee David Sweat by a state trooper has riled up prison inmates across the U.S. White, black and Hispanic prison inmates have set aside their fierce rivalry to unite and form a ‘Convict Lives Matter’ protest movement.
Terry “Big Terry” Blake, a general in the Aryan Brotherhood of Texas (ABT) prison gang, was incensed over the Sweat shooting. Big Terry, who is in custody on federal racketeering charges, told reporters that correctional officers and cops are always shooting unarmed prison inmates who are only trying to get out of the “hell holes” they’ve been confined in.
“If them niggers can protest and riot when cops shoot one of them spooks,” Big Terry said, “then us convicts ought to be able to protest and riot too when one of our unarmed brothers gets shot by the bulls or the cops. I hate to join up with them niggers and wetbacks, but when it comes to us cons getting shot, we all gotta stick together.”
Donna Lieberman , executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, said the ACLU is supporting the rights of convicts to demonstrate, but she stopped short of supporting their right to riot. “We always support the right of any group to demonstrate peacefully,” she said, emphasizing the word ‘peacefully.’
Lieberman is also concerned that an unarmed Sweat was shot in the back by a New York state trooper while running away. She compared the Sweat shooting to that of 50-year-old Walter Scott, an unarmed black man who was shot in the back last April by Michael Slager, a North Charleston, South Carolina cop. As a result, Slager has been indicted for murder.
Prison officials are bracing for the possibility of rioting and are considering lockdowns in those prisons where the “Convict Lives Matter’ movement appears to gaining some traction.
Marshall L. Fisher, Commissioner of the Mississippi Department of Corrections, said “We ain’t about to let a bunch of criminals demonstrate for any reason or cause, Our correctional officers have been instructed to deal harshly with the leaders of the ‘Convict Lives Matter’ movement in our state prison system.”
Burl Cain, warden of Louisiana’s Angola state penitentiary, said he was not worried about any demonstrations at his prison. “Here at Angola,” he said, “our inmates are well behaved because they know how we deal with troublemakers. I ain’t worried about no ‘Convict Lives Matter’ demonstrations. They ain’t about to happen here at Angola.”
As for the Sweat shooting, Amnesty International general secretary Salil Shetty summed it up in his London office by saying, “The shooting of Mr. Sweat is just one more example of cowboy cops in America.”
Sunday, June 28, 2015
WHO SERVED IN VIETNAM?
Opponents of the Vietnam War alleged that African-Americans saw the brunt of combat in the jungles of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia
We are now approaching the 51st anniversary of the Vietnam War. All through the Vietnam War, I heard the shrill voices of the war’s opponents alleging that it was mostly poor blacks who were seeing combat in the jungles of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. Here are some interesting statistics forwarded to me by a retired public relations professional:
88.4 percent of the men who actually served in Vietnam were Caucasian (includes Hispanics); 10.6 percent were black; 1 percent belonged to other races.
86.3 percent of the men who died in Vietnam were Caucasian; 12.5 percent were black; 1.2 percent belonged to other races.
86.8 percent of the men who were killed as a result of hostile action were Caucasian; 12.1 percent were black; 1.1% belonged to other races.
Overall, blacks suffered 12.5 percent of the deaths in Vietnam at a time when the percentage of blacks of military age was 13.5 percent of the total population.
We can see from these stats that the opponents of the Vietnam War lied when they alleged that blacks saw the brunt of combat during that war. The truth is that blacks served and died in numbers approximating their percentage of the total population.
The blacks who served, died and were wounded in the Vietnam War were true American heroes. And, of course, so were all the others who saw combat in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.
We are now approaching the 51st anniversary of the Vietnam War. All through the Vietnam War, I heard the shrill voices of the war’s opponents alleging that it was mostly poor blacks who were seeing combat in the jungles of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. Here are some interesting statistics forwarded to me by a retired public relations professional:
88.4 percent of the men who actually served in Vietnam were Caucasian (includes Hispanics); 10.6 percent were black; 1 percent belonged to other races.
86.3 percent of the men who died in Vietnam were Caucasian; 12.5 percent were black; 1.2 percent belonged to other races.
86.8 percent of the men who were killed as a result of hostile action were Caucasian; 12.1 percent were black; 1.1% belonged to other races.
Overall, blacks suffered 12.5 percent of the deaths in Vietnam at a time when the percentage of blacks of military age was 13.5 percent of the total population.
We can see from these stats that the opponents of the Vietnam War lied when they alleged that blacks saw the brunt of combat during that war. The truth is that blacks served and died in numbers approximating their percentage of the total population.
The blacks who served, died and were wounded in the Vietnam War were true American heroes. And, of course, so were all the others who saw combat in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.
DIVORCE LAWYERS LEAPING UP AND DOWN WITH JOY
Supreme Court ruling has lawyers salivating over an expected divorce bonanza
So you think that homosexuals were overjoyed at the Supreme Court’s ruling on Gay marriage. Of course they were overjoyed, but divorce lawyers were even more ecstatic.
Divorce lawyer are leaping – rather than jumping – up and down with joy over the ruling by the Supreme Court that made Gay marriages legal across the land.
Nationwide the divorce rate among heterosexual couples still hovers around 50 percent. There is no reason to think that the divorce rate among Gays will be any less.
Lawyers are salivating over an expected divorce bonanza. Since many homosexuals are successful professionals and business owners, their divorce proceedings are likely to be protracted and thus very costly. Their lawyers will be laughing all the way to the bank.
So you think that homosexuals were overjoyed at the Supreme Court’s ruling on Gay marriage. Of course they were overjoyed, but divorce lawyers were even more ecstatic.
Divorce lawyer are leaping – rather than jumping – up and down with joy over the ruling by the Supreme Court that made Gay marriages legal across the land.
Nationwide the divorce rate among heterosexual couples still hovers around 50 percent. There is no reason to think that the divorce rate among Gays will be any less.
Lawyers are salivating over an expected divorce bonanza. Since many homosexuals are successful professionals and business owners, their divorce proceedings are likely to be protracted and thus very costly. Their lawyers will be laughing all the way to the bank.
Saturday, June 27, 2015
STOP CUTTING DOWN TREES!
*Look what happens when we cut down too many trees.*
*Global warming is one thing, but see below and look at what is happening if we continue to clear our wooded lands!*
*We have to stop cutting down trees!*
*This is getting really serious!*
*Global warming is one thing, but see below and look at what is happening if we continue to clear our wooded lands!*
*We have to stop cutting down trees!*
*This is getting really serious!*
SUPREME COURT RULES IN FAVOR OF MOST BUCK-WILD PRIDE PARADE NATION’S EVER SEEN
5-4 ruling upholds raunchy gay pride parades
The Onion
June 26, 2015
WASHINGTON—Following decades of debate over the constitutional right to same-sex marriage, the U.S. Supreme Court today handed down a 5-4 ruling in favor of the most buck-wild, balls-to-the-wall gay pride parade this country has ever seen.
“After reviewing the constitutional underpinnings of this case, the court finds that it is discriminatory for states to deny the right to the most out-of-control, bonkers gay pride parade that anyone could possibly imagine,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion, which outlined at length the elaborate floats, billowing rainbow flags, and phalanxes of outlandishly dressed participants, barely scratching the surface of how completely bananas things are about to get. “This decision confirms what should be obvious: The government cannot prevent a nonstop bacchanal surging through the streets of every American city. We’re talking half-naked lesbians covered in body paint, rollerblading homosexuals in brightly colored Native American headdresses and sparkling gold briefs, as well as hundreds of thousands of supporters losing their fucking minds while ‘I Will Survive’ blares at 150 decibels. This is going to be an absolute shit show.”
The Supreme Court’s landmark decision was reportedly appended by a concurring opinion authored by Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor in which she agreed that the right to “an uninterrupted three-day batshit insane rager” was mandated by the U.S. Constitution.
The Onion
June 26, 2015
WASHINGTON—Following decades of debate over the constitutional right to same-sex marriage, the U.S. Supreme Court today handed down a 5-4 ruling in favor of the most buck-wild, balls-to-the-wall gay pride parade this country has ever seen.
“After reviewing the constitutional underpinnings of this case, the court finds that it is discriminatory for states to deny the right to the most out-of-control, bonkers gay pride parade that anyone could possibly imagine,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion, which outlined at length the elaborate floats, billowing rainbow flags, and phalanxes of outlandishly dressed participants, barely scratching the surface of how completely bananas things are about to get. “This decision confirms what should be obvious: The government cannot prevent a nonstop bacchanal surging through the streets of every American city. We’re talking half-naked lesbians covered in body paint, rollerblading homosexuals in brightly colored Native American headdresses and sparkling gold briefs, as well as hundreds of thousands of supporters losing their fucking minds while ‘I Will Survive’ blares at 150 decibels. This is going to be an absolute shit show.”
The Supreme Court’s landmark decision was reportedly appended by a concurring opinion authored by Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor in which she agreed that the right to “an uninterrupted three-day batshit insane rager” was mandated by the U.S. Constitution.
ON LOWERING THE FLAG
By Charles Krauthammer
The Washington Post
June 25, 2015
After a massacre like the one at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, our immediate reaction is to do something. Something, for politicians, means legislation. And for Democratic politicians, this means gun control.
It’s the all-purpose, go-to, knee-jerk solution. Within hours of the massacre, President Obama was lamenting the absence of progress on gun control. A particular Democratic (and media) lament was Congress’ failure to pass anything after Sandy Hook.
But the unfortunate fact is that the post-Sandy Hook legislation would have had zero effect on the events in Charleston. Its main provisions had to do with assault weapons; the (alleged) shooter Dylann Roof was using a semiautomatic pistol.
You can pass any gun law you want. The 1994 assault weapons ban was allowed to expire after 10 years because, as a Justice Department study showed, it had no effect. There’s only one gun law that would make a difference: confiscation. Everything else is for show.
And in this country, confiscation is impossible. Constitutionally, because of the Second Amendment. Politically, because doing so would cause something of an insurrection. And culturally, because Americans cherish — cling to, as Obama once had it — their guns as a symbol of freedom. You can largely ban guns in Canada where the founding document gives the purpose of confederation as the achievement of “peace, order and good government.” Harder to disarm a nation whose founding purpose is “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
With gun control going nowhere, the psychic national need post-Charleston to nonetheless do something took a remarkable direction: banishment of the Confederate battle flag, starting with the one flying on the grounds of the statehouse in Columbia, then spreading like wildfire to consume Confederate flags, symbols, statues and even memorabilia everywhere — from the Alabama state capitol to Wal-Mart and Amazon.
Logically, the connection is tenuous. Yes, Roof does pose with the Confederate flag, among other symbols of racism, on his Web site . But does anyone imagine that if the South Carolina flag had been relegated to a museum, the massacre would not have occurred?
Politically, the killings created a unique moment. Gov. Nikki Haley (R) was surely sincere in calling for the Confederate flag’s removal. But she also understood that the massacre had created a moment when the usual pro-Confederate flag feeling — and, surely, expressions of it — would be largely suppressed, presenting the opportunity to achieve something otherwise politically unachievable.
But there’s a deeper reason for this rush to banish Confederate symbols, to move them from the public square to the museum. The trigger was not just the massacre itself, but even more tellingly the breathtaking display of nobility and spiritual generosity by the victims’ relatives. Within 48 hours of the murder of their loved ones, they spoke of redemption and reconciliation and even forgiveness of the killer himself. It was an astonishingly moving expression of Christian charity.
Such grace demands a response. In a fascinating dynamic, it created a feeling of moral obligation to reciprocate in some way. The flag was not material to the crime itself, but its connection to the underlying race history behind the crime suggested that its removal from the statehouse grounds — whatever the endlessly debated merits of the case — could serve as a reciprocal gesture of reconciliation.
The result was a microcosm of — and a historical lesson in — the moral force of the original civil rights movement, whose genius was to understand the effect that combating evil with good, violence with grace, would have on a fundamentally decent American nation.
America was indeed moved. The result was the civil rights acts. The issue today is no longer legal equality. It is more a matter of sorting through historical memory.
The Confederate flags would ultimately have come down. That is a good thing. They are now coming down in a rush. The haste may turn out to be problematic.
We will probably overshoot, as we are wont to do, in the stampede to eliminate every relic of the Confederacy. Not every statue has to be smashed, not every memory banished. Perhaps we can learn a lesson from Arlington National Cemetery, founded by the victorious Union to bury its dead. There you will find Section 16. It contains the remains of hundreds of Confederate soldiers grouped around a modest, moving monument to their devotion to “duty as they understood it” — a gesture by the Union of soldierly respect, without any concession regarding the taintedness of their cause.
Or shall we uproot them as well?
EDITOR’S NOTE: To me the Confederate battle flag was never a symbol of racism, nor is it today. It’s part of our history and the banner under which more than 250,000 Confederate soldiers died during the Civil War. Yes, that's more than a quarter of a million soldiers.
Unfortunately, that flag was hijacked by the KKK and other white supremacy hate groups. The media seized upon that to poison the public’s mind, especially that of African-Americans, into believing that the Confederate battle flag represented hatred of non-whites and thus a symbol of racism.
The Washington Post
June 25, 2015
After a massacre like the one at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, our immediate reaction is to do something. Something, for politicians, means legislation. And for Democratic politicians, this means gun control.
It’s the all-purpose, go-to, knee-jerk solution. Within hours of the massacre, President Obama was lamenting the absence of progress on gun control. A particular Democratic (and media) lament was Congress’ failure to pass anything after Sandy Hook.
But the unfortunate fact is that the post-Sandy Hook legislation would have had zero effect on the events in Charleston. Its main provisions had to do with assault weapons; the (alleged) shooter Dylann Roof was using a semiautomatic pistol.
You can pass any gun law you want. The 1994 assault weapons ban was allowed to expire after 10 years because, as a Justice Department study showed, it had no effect. There’s only one gun law that would make a difference: confiscation. Everything else is for show.
And in this country, confiscation is impossible. Constitutionally, because of the Second Amendment. Politically, because doing so would cause something of an insurrection. And culturally, because Americans cherish — cling to, as Obama once had it — their guns as a symbol of freedom. You can largely ban guns in Canada where the founding document gives the purpose of confederation as the achievement of “peace, order and good government.” Harder to disarm a nation whose founding purpose is “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
With gun control going nowhere, the psychic national need post-Charleston to nonetheless do something took a remarkable direction: banishment of the Confederate battle flag, starting with the one flying on the grounds of the statehouse in Columbia, then spreading like wildfire to consume Confederate flags, symbols, statues and even memorabilia everywhere — from the Alabama state capitol to Wal-Mart and Amazon.
Logically, the connection is tenuous. Yes, Roof does pose with the Confederate flag, among other symbols of racism, on his Web site . But does anyone imagine that if the South Carolina flag had been relegated to a museum, the massacre would not have occurred?
Politically, the killings created a unique moment. Gov. Nikki Haley (R) was surely sincere in calling for the Confederate flag’s removal. But she also understood that the massacre had created a moment when the usual pro-Confederate flag feeling — and, surely, expressions of it — would be largely suppressed, presenting the opportunity to achieve something otherwise politically unachievable.
But there’s a deeper reason for this rush to banish Confederate symbols, to move them from the public square to the museum. The trigger was not just the massacre itself, but even more tellingly the breathtaking display of nobility and spiritual generosity by the victims’ relatives. Within 48 hours of the murder of their loved ones, they spoke of redemption and reconciliation and even forgiveness of the killer himself. It was an astonishingly moving expression of Christian charity.
Such grace demands a response. In a fascinating dynamic, it created a feeling of moral obligation to reciprocate in some way. The flag was not material to the crime itself, but its connection to the underlying race history behind the crime suggested that its removal from the statehouse grounds — whatever the endlessly debated merits of the case — could serve as a reciprocal gesture of reconciliation.
The result was a microcosm of — and a historical lesson in — the moral force of the original civil rights movement, whose genius was to understand the effect that combating evil with good, violence with grace, would have on a fundamentally decent American nation.
America was indeed moved. The result was the civil rights acts. The issue today is no longer legal equality. It is more a matter of sorting through historical memory.
The Confederate flags would ultimately have come down. That is a good thing. They are now coming down in a rush. The haste may turn out to be problematic.
We will probably overshoot, as we are wont to do, in the stampede to eliminate every relic of the Confederacy. Not every statue has to be smashed, not every memory banished. Perhaps we can learn a lesson from Arlington National Cemetery, founded by the victorious Union to bury its dead. There you will find Section 16. It contains the remains of hundreds of Confederate soldiers grouped around a modest, moving monument to their devotion to “duty as they understood it” — a gesture by the Union of soldierly respect, without any concession regarding the taintedness of their cause.
Or shall we uproot them as well?
EDITOR’S NOTE: To me the Confederate battle flag was never a symbol of racism, nor is it today. It’s part of our history and the banner under which more than 250,000 Confederate soldiers died during the Civil War. Yes, that's more than a quarter of a million soldiers.
Unfortunately, that flag was hijacked by the KKK and other white supremacy hate groups. The media seized upon that to poison the public’s mind, especially that of African-Americans, into believing that the Confederate battle flag represented hatred of non-whites and thus a symbol of racism.
Friday, June 26, 2015
POLICE CARS CAN NOW IDENTIFY CRIMINALS WHILE ON PATROL
By Marc Weber Tobias
Forbes
June 25, 2015
Police departments around the country have been quietly implementing a powerful crime-fighting tool that promises to be the equal of DNA forensics in identifying and finding criminals. Even more importantly, it will provide information that will help prevent criminal activity and deadly traffic accidents.
The technology is called DDACTS, which is an acronym for Data Driven Approach to Crime and Traffic Safety. It involves mounting on the roof of a police car three high-resolution digital cameras positioned to point forward and cover both sides of the vehicle. Each is equipped with infrared lighting which enables them to see in the dark. GPS is integrated into the system, and the digitized pictures of license plates are fed as they are captured to a laptop within the vehicle.
When police officers begin their shift, they download, via a high-speed WiFi hotspot at their station, the latest database of wanted vehicles, fugitive warrants, suspended or revoked drivers licenses, state and federal criminal databases, stolen cars, and other information on bad guys. These files are updated every four hours and allow the integration of OCR (Optical Character Recognition) cameras with criminal indices at the local, state, and national level for instant hits on cars. FBI statistics indicated that a majority of felony stops occur in vehicles, so the system in effect preselects targets of opportunity.
Denver has been a big advocate of the DDACTS system. Since taking office in 2011, Denver Police Chief Robert White has made it a priority to deploy new crime-fighting tech as its population continues to skyrocket. I was in Denver last week and was shown its DDACTS set-up, which costs $11,000 for each vehicle. You can watch my interview with Denver police commander Paul Pazen, who is the most knowledgeable within the department about the program.
Denver has trained more than a hundred officers on how to best use the new tool. It could drastically increase the effectiveness of field officers by not only giving the patrolman three more sets of eyes, but by doing things instantly with those additional eyes that no police officer could hope to accomplish alone. As a cop drives through his or her district, those cameras capture, read, and process hundreds of plates. More than 835,000 license plates have been read into Denver P.D.’s image database in the past two months. That has resulted in moe than 17,000 hits. The information is stored for 364 days before being permanently purged.
The system has proven invaluable as an investigative tool, as well as for analyzing crime and traffic safety patterns. For example, when there is gang activity or a major crime scene, a DDACTS-equipped vehicle will cruise the area, night or day, and record any and every vehicle within proximity. This allows detectives and field officers to identify potential witnesses and suspects for later investigation. Commander Pazen also stressed the importance of predicting high traffic-accident areas for special attention and enforcement.
While some advocates have voiced privacy concerns about the new system, they are unfounded, according to Commander Pazen, because the system does not track individual vehicles. It only logs those cars that it sees, so it is random. However, that may be about to change in an adjacent jurisdiction of Aurora, Colo. That city of about 350,000, which is on the eastern border of Denver, is in the process of installing fixed cameras at key intersections that will do the same thing as DDACTS and feed information into Denver and other jurisdictions to alert them of wanted vehicles that may be entering their cities.
While Denver was the first city in Colorado to implement this new crime-fighting tool, many others will follow. Some cities, such as Los Angeles, have been using license plate readers for several years, but newly enhanced camera technology, coupled with OCR and data base integration have greatly enhanced the ability of law enforcement to increase its effectiveness. So if you are a criminal in Denver or one of the cities that are implementing DDACTS, you should know that not only police officers, but their cars are looking for and can instantly identify you day or night if there is any link between you and your vehicle license plate. The system will store the location of where your vehicle plate is captured and provide an instant notification that you or your car are wanted. If you are driving, then your chances of getting caught are greatly increased.
The next step will be facial recognition, which is already in use in several jurisdictions in the U.S. and in Europe. I am not sure whether Aldous Huxley would be surprised, shocked, or pleased about the use of technology to change the way we catch criminals, but it is clear that law enforcement is being radically changed by technology in terms of its ability to identify and apprehend offenders.
Forbes
June 25, 2015
Police departments around the country have been quietly implementing a powerful crime-fighting tool that promises to be the equal of DNA forensics in identifying and finding criminals. Even more importantly, it will provide information that will help prevent criminal activity and deadly traffic accidents.
The technology is called DDACTS, which is an acronym for Data Driven Approach to Crime and Traffic Safety. It involves mounting on the roof of a police car three high-resolution digital cameras positioned to point forward and cover both sides of the vehicle. Each is equipped with infrared lighting which enables them to see in the dark. GPS is integrated into the system, and the digitized pictures of license plates are fed as they are captured to a laptop within the vehicle.
When police officers begin their shift, they download, via a high-speed WiFi hotspot at their station, the latest database of wanted vehicles, fugitive warrants, suspended or revoked drivers licenses, state and federal criminal databases, stolen cars, and other information on bad guys. These files are updated every four hours and allow the integration of OCR (Optical Character Recognition) cameras with criminal indices at the local, state, and national level for instant hits on cars. FBI statistics indicated that a majority of felony stops occur in vehicles, so the system in effect preselects targets of opportunity.
Denver has been a big advocate of the DDACTS system. Since taking office in 2011, Denver Police Chief Robert White has made it a priority to deploy new crime-fighting tech as its population continues to skyrocket. I was in Denver last week and was shown its DDACTS set-up, which costs $11,000 for each vehicle. You can watch my interview with Denver police commander Paul Pazen, who is the most knowledgeable within the department about the program.
Denver has trained more than a hundred officers on how to best use the new tool. It could drastically increase the effectiveness of field officers by not only giving the patrolman three more sets of eyes, but by doing things instantly with those additional eyes that no police officer could hope to accomplish alone. As a cop drives through his or her district, those cameras capture, read, and process hundreds of plates. More than 835,000 license plates have been read into Denver P.D.’s image database in the past two months. That has resulted in moe than 17,000 hits. The information is stored for 364 days before being permanently purged.
The system has proven invaluable as an investigative tool, as well as for analyzing crime and traffic safety patterns. For example, when there is gang activity or a major crime scene, a DDACTS-equipped vehicle will cruise the area, night or day, and record any and every vehicle within proximity. This allows detectives and field officers to identify potential witnesses and suspects for later investigation. Commander Pazen also stressed the importance of predicting high traffic-accident areas for special attention and enforcement.
While some advocates have voiced privacy concerns about the new system, they are unfounded, according to Commander Pazen, because the system does not track individual vehicles. It only logs those cars that it sees, so it is random. However, that may be about to change in an adjacent jurisdiction of Aurora, Colo. That city of about 350,000, which is on the eastern border of Denver, is in the process of installing fixed cameras at key intersections that will do the same thing as DDACTS and feed information into Denver and other jurisdictions to alert them of wanted vehicles that may be entering their cities.
While Denver was the first city in Colorado to implement this new crime-fighting tool, many others will follow. Some cities, such as Los Angeles, have been using license plate readers for several years, but newly enhanced camera technology, coupled with OCR and data base integration have greatly enhanced the ability of law enforcement to increase its effectiveness. So if you are a criminal in Denver or one of the cities that are implementing DDACTS, you should know that not only police officers, but their cars are looking for and can instantly identify you day or night if there is any link between you and your vehicle license plate. The system will store the location of where your vehicle plate is captured and provide an instant notification that you or your car are wanted. If you are driving, then your chances of getting caught are greatly increased.
The next step will be facial recognition, which is already in use in several jurisdictions in the U.S. and in Europe. I am not sure whether Aldous Huxley would be surprised, shocked, or pleased about the use of technology to change the way we catch criminals, but it is clear that law enforcement is being radically changed by technology in terms of its ability to identify and apprehend offenders.
HIGH LEVEL INTERNATIONAL MILITARY GROUP ABSOLVES ISRAEL OF WAR CRIMES IN GAZA
Former chiefs of staff, generals and senior officers from the United States, Germany and the United Kingdom contradict accusations by the Palestinians and their European allies that Israel committed war crimes against the civilian population of Gaza
Finally Israel gets a break.
Ever since the Gaza War, Israel has been pounded by accusations from the Palestinians and their European allies that the Israeli Defense Forces committed war crimes against the civilian population of Gaza. Even the Obama administration condemned Israel for bombing schools, hospitals and mosques which were being used by Hamas to store weapons and munitions.
On the contrary, a group of former chiefs of staff, generals and senior officers from the United States, Germany and the United Kingdom says that Israel went the extra mile to avoid civilian casualties to the detriment of its military operations. Those restraints prevented Israel from defeating Hamas.
Unfortunately, the group’s report will not get the attention it deserves because the world seems determined to demonize and delegitimize the State of Israel.
CAUSE FOR CONCERN: ISRAEL’S RIGOROUS COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL LAW
By Tsvi Sadan
Israel Today
June 23, 2015
“Our overall findings are that during Operation Protective Edge last summer … Israel not only met a reasonable international standard of observance of the laws of armed conflict, but in many cases significantly exceeded that standard.”
That was the conclusion reached by the High Level International Military Group report submitted last week to the UN Human Rights Council. According to the report, this inquiry was unprecedented, and so was the access granted to IDF personal and information.
This group, made up of former chiefs of staff, generals and senior officers from the United States, Germany and the United Kingdom, among others, was intently focused on one of the most pressing issues surrounding modern armed conflict: “How civilian lives can be protected and military forces can fight effectively … in a densely packed civilian area.”
This challenge haunts not only Israel, but all Western democracies. Today, these nations face asymmetric armed conflicts where armies no longer fight armies, but must rather contend with paramilitary organizations that exploit international laws of war for their advantage. This yet unresolved challenge is a cause of severe headache for many statesmen and generals.
Contrary to the anti-Israel rhyme heard all over the world, these 11 experts appeared to be concerned that Israel was in fact going “beyond the required legal principles of proportionality.”
Though not saying so explicitly, they feared that Israel’s extraordinary efforts to avoid civilian casualties represented too high a standard, and would therefore hinder effective military action.
Rather than condemn Israel for alleged war crimes, this group seemed to be saying quite the opposite. Because of its fear of condemnation, Israel becomes an example of ineffective military operations that can have dire consequences not only for Israel, but for any other Western country fighting terror.
Though Israelis have long known it to be true, the conclusion that the Gaza campaign “was a legitimate war” carries extra weight coming from an independent international commission of inquiry.
It confirms the fact that “Hamas’s rocket attacks deliberately and indiscriminately targeted Israeli civilian population.”
It reiterates that “Hamas launched attacks against Israel from the heart of its own civilian communities in Gaza and positioned its munitions and military forces there also, including in schools, hospitals and mosques.”
These experts also arrived to the conclusion that “in general Israeli forces acted proportionately as required by the laws of armed conflict and often went beyond the required legal principles of proportionality, necessity and discrimination.”
And finally, just like the Israelis, this fact-finding commission is also concerned that “the measures taken [to avoid civilian casualties] were often far in excess of the requirements of the Geneva Conventions. They sometimes placed Israeli lives at risk. To an extent these steps also undermined the effectiveness of the IDF’s operations by pausing military action and thus allowing Hamas to re-group and replenish.”
This report is a ray of light trying to penetrate the thick prejudice encapsulating the UN. Based on past experience, however, it is unlikely that such reports will make so much as a dent in the world’s blatantly anti-Israel attitude.
Finally Israel gets a break.
Ever since the Gaza War, Israel has been pounded by accusations from the Palestinians and their European allies that the Israeli Defense Forces committed war crimes against the civilian population of Gaza. Even the Obama administration condemned Israel for bombing schools, hospitals and mosques which were being used by Hamas to store weapons and munitions.
On the contrary, a group of former chiefs of staff, generals and senior officers from the United States, Germany and the United Kingdom says that Israel went the extra mile to avoid civilian casualties to the detriment of its military operations. Those restraints prevented Israel from defeating Hamas.
Unfortunately, the group’s report will not get the attention it deserves because the world seems determined to demonize and delegitimize the State of Israel.
CAUSE FOR CONCERN: ISRAEL’S RIGOROUS COMPLIANCE WITH INTERNATIONAL LAW
By Tsvi Sadan
Israel Today
June 23, 2015
“Our overall findings are that during Operation Protective Edge last summer … Israel not only met a reasonable international standard of observance of the laws of armed conflict, but in many cases significantly exceeded that standard.”
That was the conclusion reached by the High Level International Military Group report submitted last week to the UN Human Rights Council. According to the report, this inquiry was unprecedented, and so was the access granted to IDF personal and information.
This group, made up of former chiefs of staff, generals and senior officers from the United States, Germany and the United Kingdom, among others, was intently focused on one of the most pressing issues surrounding modern armed conflict: “How civilian lives can be protected and military forces can fight effectively … in a densely packed civilian area.”
This challenge haunts not only Israel, but all Western democracies. Today, these nations face asymmetric armed conflicts where armies no longer fight armies, but must rather contend with paramilitary organizations that exploit international laws of war for their advantage. This yet unresolved challenge is a cause of severe headache for many statesmen and generals.
Contrary to the anti-Israel rhyme heard all over the world, these 11 experts appeared to be concerned that Israel was in fact going “beyond the required legal principles of proportionality.”
Though not saying so explicitly, they feared that Israel’s extraordinary efforts to avoid civilian casualties represented too high a standard, and would therefore hinder effective military action.
Rather than condemn Israel for alleged war crimes, this group seemed to be saying quite the opposite. Because of its fear of condemnation, Israel becomes an example of ineffective military operations that can have dire consequences not only for Israel, but for any other Western country fighting terror.
Though Israelis have long known it to be true, the conclusion that the Gaza campaign “was a legitimate war” carries extra weight coming from an independent international commission of inquiry.
It confirms the fact that “Hamas’s rocket attacks deliberately and indiscriminately targeted Israeli civilian population.”
It reiterates that “Hamas launched attacks against Israel from the heart of its own civilian communities in Gaza and positioned its munitions and military forces there also, including in schools, hospitals and mosques.”
These experts also arrived to the conclusion that “in general Israeli forces acted proportionately as required by the laws of armed conflict and often went beyond the required legal principles of proportionality, necessity and discrimination.”
And finally, just like the Israelis, this fact-finding commission is also concerned that “the measures taken [to avoid civilian casualties] were often far in excess of the requirements of the Geneva Conventions. They sometimes placed Israeli lives at risk. To an extent these steps also undermined the effectiveness of the IDF’s operations by pausing military action and thus allowing Hamas to re-group and replenish.”
This report is a ray of light trying to penetrate the thick prejudice encapsulating the UN. Based on past experience, however, it is unlikely that such reports will make so much as a dent in the world’s blatantly anti-Israel attitude.
Thursday, June 25, 2015
FREDDIE GRAY AUTOPSY LEAK INFURIATES PROSECUTOR
By Bob Walsh
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
June 24, 2015
If you follow any amount of broadcast news you are aware that the autopsy of Freddie Gray was leaked to the press yesterday. You might remember that Gray was an all-around humanitarian and small businessman engaged in unlicensed independent pharmaceutical sales when he died in custody, leading to an orgy of rioting.
An article on this from the Boston Sun says that Gray was ripped out of his gord on weed and opiates when he died. Funny but most of the articles on the late lamented Mr. Gray seem to ignore that detail.
It is also noteworthy in that the conclusion states that the alleged fact that the officers failed to follow safety procedures made his death a homicide rather than an accidental death.
The prosecutor, Marilyn Mosby (who was recently featured in Vogue magazine and stated firmly that she had no regrets for anything she said at any time about this case) is seemingly livid about the release of the autopsy results. She is trying hard to muzzle any release of information favorable to the defense while she continues to pollute the jury pool with inflammatory statements from her office.
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
June 24, 2015
If you follow any amount of broadcast news you are aware that the autopsy of Freddie Gray was leaked to the press yesterday. You might remember that Gray was an all-around humanitarian and small businessman engaged in unlicensed independent pharmaceutical sales when he died in custody, leading to an orgy of rioting.
An article on this from the Boston Sun says that Gray was ripped out of his gord on weed and opiates when he died. Funny but most of the articles on the late lamented Mr. Gray seem to ignore that detail.
It is also noteworthy in that the conclusion states that the alleged fact that the officers failed to follow safety procedures made his death a homicide rather than an accidental death.
The prosecutor, Marilyn Mosby (who was recently featured in Vogue magazine and stated firmly that she had no regrets for anything she said at any time about this case) is seemingly livid about the release of the autopsy results. She is trying hard to muzzle any release of information favorable to the defense while she continues to pollute the jury pool with inflammatory statements from her office.
RETIRED COP USES TWITTER TO ACCUSE BALTIMORE POLICE OF BRUTALITY AND CORRUPTION
By Nancy Dillon
New York Daily News
June 24, 2015
A retired Baltimore cop is blowing the whistle on police brutality and misconduct he allegedly witnessed during his decade on the force.
Former Sgt. Michael A. Wood Jr. listed his disturbing allegations in a Twitter firestorm Wednesday but stopped short of naming names or providing dates and locations.
"So here we go," the ex-detective and U.S. Marine, 35, wrote to his thousands of followers. "I'm going to start Tweeting the things I've seen & participated in, in policing that is corrupt, intentional or not."
The claims read like a blotter.
"A detective slapping a completely innocent female in the face for bumping into him, coming out of a corner chicken store," he said in his first example.
"Punting a handcuffed, face down, suspect in the face, after a foot chase. My handcuffs, not my boot or suspect," the officer who served from 2003 until an injury forced his retirement January 2014 said in his second.
A third tweet claimed fellow officers would turn video cameras away from any action as soon as a suspect was close to being caught.
"Pissing and sh---ing inside suspects homes during raids, on their beds and clothes," he claimed in one tweet that quickly racked up more than 880 re-tweets.
Wood claimed he also had knowledge of officers lying in court and "jacking up and illegally searching thousands of people with no legal justification."
He said he didn't remember "any particular person" who was searched illegally because it happened every day.
"I'm one person relying on a flawed memory system. This is an indictment on the culture of the profession, not a witch-hunt. Sorry," he tweeted.
A spokesman for Baltimore Police questioned the lack of "names and addresses" in Wood's tweets and asked why he waited so long to report the allegations.
"We'll look into this and his background. This is news I'm getting right now," Detective Shawn Strong said.
"What's really hard to convey is that some things are so common place, they didn't register until I was on the other side," Wood tweeted in response to similar challenges on Twitter.
Wood said he made the comments on Twitter in hopes that the police department makes changes to prevent brutality and corruption.
“I have no desire to verify the allegations. If anyone wants to look into them, fine. But I’m not looking for retribution. My purpose is to admit these things and help make policies and training materials to prevent them in the future," Wood told The News in a phone interview Wednesday.
Wood said he would testify if any of the civilians in the cases he mentioned stepped forward and asked for justice, but the incidents involving the slapping of the woman and the suspect who got kicked in the face were from 2004 or 2005.
He said the officer who allegedly kicked the suspect already was off the force.
“The kicking was the most egregious. Yeah I should have done something. Of course. But I was blinded. I was a complete rookie at the time. The truth is that I just said, ‘That’s your suspect. I’m out of here,’” he told The News.
"It wasn’t until I got out of the police department and saw things from a different perspective and got educated that I realized the things that happened were so wrong," he said.
Wood said he plans to keep posting similar examples at a rate of about 10 per day for the next few days.
“I remember one detective who staged a hit and run because he wrecked his car and didn’t want to get in trouble,” he said. “At the time, I was thinking, 'Who cares, he’s not hurting anyone.’ That was the sentiment.”
One former colleague said he had no reason to doubt Wood.
"Sgt Wood was probably one of the most intelligent guys I ever met in the department," former Baltimore Police Detective Joseph Crystal told The News.
Crystal, who resigned from the force in August after reporting a case of police brutality, said he worked directly under Wood in 2009 during his field training.
"He was great," Crystal said of Wood. "He was well versed in department policy and could articulate himself so well."
The son of two NYPD cops, Crystal said he had no direct knowledge of the instances described in Wood's tweets but assumed he was telling the truth.
"I don't know why he's coming forward now, but I'm happy if it will bring him peace," Crystal said. "I wish everyone spoke up when these things happened. If we speak up when we see abuse, we have a chance to fix it. But I understand why officers are reluctant."
In Crystal's case, the married detective says he left the force when fellow cops turned on him because he reported a 2011 beating of a drug suspect by a fellow officer.
They stopped providing backup and didn't want to ride with him in the field, he said.
"The first really horrible thing I saw, I came forward and reported it. My conscience is clear," he said Wednesday.
"I've seen a handcuffed suspect beaten. So can I believe it happened in front of Sgt. Wood too? Of course I can," he said.
New York Daily News
June 24, 2015
A retired Baltimore cop is blowing the whistle on police brutality and misconduct he allegedly witnessed during his decade on the force.
Former Sgt. Michael A. Wood Jr. listed his disturbing allegations in a Twitter firestorm Wednesday but stopped short of naming names or providing dates and locations.
"So here we go," the ex-detective and U.S. Marine, 35, wrote to his thousands of followers. "I'm going to start Tweeting the things I've seen & participated in, in policing that is corrupt, intentional or not."
The claims read like a blotter.
"A detective slapping a completely innocent female in the face for bumping into him, coming out of a corner chicken store," he said in his first example.
"Punting a handcuffed, face down, suspect in the face, after a foot chase. My handcuffs, not my boot or suspect," the officer who served from 2003 until an injury forced his retirement January 2014 said in his second.
A third tweet claimed fellow officers would turn video cameras away from any action as soon as a suspect was close to being caught.
"Pissing and sh---ing inside suspects homes during raids, on their beds and clothes," he claimed in one tweet that quickly racked up more than 880 re-tweets.
Wood claimed he also had knowledge of officers lying in court and "jacking up and illegally searching thousands of people with no legal justification."
He said he didn't remember "any particular person" who was searched illegally because it happened every day.
"I'm one person relying on a flawed memory system. This is an indictment on the culture of the profession, not a witch-hunt. Sorry," he tweeted.
A spokesman for Baltimore Police questioned the lack of "names and addresses" in Wood's tweets and asked why he waited so long to report the allegations.
"We'll look into this and his background. This is news I'm getting right now," Detective Shawn Strong said.
"What's really hard to convey is that some things are so common place, they didn't register until I was on the other side," Wood tweeted in response to similar challenges on Twitter.
Wood said he made the comments on Twitter in hopes that the police department makes changes to prevent brutality and corruption.
“I have no desire to verify the allegations. If anyone wants to look into them, fine. But I’m not looking for retribution. My purpose is to admit these things and help make policies and training materials to prevent them in the future," Wood told The News in a phone interview Wednesday.
Wood said he would testify if any of the civilians in the cases he mentioned stepped forward and asked for justice, but the incidents involving the slapping of the woman and the suspect who got kicked in the face were from 2004 or 2005.
He said the officer who allegedly kicked the suspect already was off the force.
“The kicking was the most egregious. Yeah I should have done something. Of course. But I was blinded. I was a complete rookie at the time. The truth is that I just said, ‘That’s your suspect. I’m out of here,’” he told The News.
"It wasn’t until I got out of the police department and saw things from a different perspective and got educated that I realized the things that happened were so wrong," he said.
Wood said he plans to keep posting similar examples at a rate of about 10 per day for the next few days.
“I remember one detective who staged a hit and run because he wrecked his car and didn’t want to get in trouble,” he said. “At the time, I was thinking, 'Who cares, he’s not hurting anyone.’ That was the sentiment.”
One former colleague said he had no reason to doubt Wood.
"Sgt Wood was probably one of the most intelligent guys I ever met in the department," former Baltimore Police Detective Joseph Crystal told The News.
Crystal, who resigned from the force in August after reporting a case of police brutality, said he worked directly under Wood in 2009 during his field training.
"He was great," Crystal said of Wood. "He was well versed in department policy and could articulate himself so well."
The son of two NYPD cops, Crystal said he had no direct knowledge of the instances described in Wood's tweets but assumed he was telling the truth.
"I don't know why he's coming forward now, but I'm happy if it will bring him peace," Crystal said. "I wish everyone spoke up when these things happened. If we speak up when we see abuse, we have a chance to fix it. But I understand why officers are reluctant."
In Crystal's case, the married detective says he left the force when fellow cops turned on him because he reported a 2011 beating of a drug suspect by a fellow officer.
They stopped providing backup and didn't want to ride with him in the field, he said.
"The first really horrible thing I saw, I came forward and reported it. My conscience is clear," he said Wednesday.
"I've seen a handcuffed suspect beaten. So can I believe it happened in front of Sgt. Wood too? Of course I can," he said.
Wednesday, June 24, 2015
MEDICAL MARIJUANA MYTHS DEBUNKED
A Bristol University study conducted with 6,500 volunteers showed that cannabis does not ease pain, nausea and vomiting in chemotherapy patients, MS muscle contractions, sleep disorders or Tourette’s symptoms
Along comes yet another study by a reputable scientific team which debunks the medical marijuana myths. A study by Dr. Penny Whiting and her team at England’s University of Bristol found that cannabis does not ease pain, nausea and vomiting in chemotherapy patients, MS muscle contractions, sleep disorders or Tourette’s symptoms.
The proponents of pot claim that marijuana is a medical miracle. They are either ignorant of the true facts or deliberately lying.
In the Bristol University study, Dr. Whiting’s team used 6,500 volunteers and conducted 79 random trials. That seems to meet the standard of scientific inquiry.
The Whiting Study found weak evidence that cannabis eases pain and even weaker evidence that it provides relief for chemotherapy, MS and Tourette patients.
The study further indicates that marijuana contributes to psychosis and does little to ease anxiety.
The researchers also debunked studies which purported to show the beneficial aspects of medical marijuana by pointing out that they did not reach statistical significance.
Twenty three states have legalized the use of pot for medical purposes. The medical marijuana industry has enriched the growers, distributors and dealers of pot and the doctors who prescribe it.
California’s medical marijuana law is a farce and has become a de facto legalization of pot for recreational use. Pot heads can go to almost any doctor licensed to dispense marijuana and get a pot prescription for any number of imaginable faked symptoms. At the end of the day, the doctor can go laughing all the way to the bank.
The Whiting study comes on the heels of a study showing that medical marijuana does not provide any relief to glaucoma patients. The American Glaucoma Society has written: "There is no scientific basis for marijuana's use in treatment," and there is evidence that it could actually do damage.
The American Epilepsy Society says: "Marijuana itself has major shortcomings as an epilepsy treatment ... evidence for efficacy in treating seizures does not meet the necessary standard to recommend it to patients." Worse, researchers state that "marijuana use or withdrawal could potentially trigger seizures in susceptible [epilepsy] patients."
Drs. Deepak Cyril and Mohini Ranganathan of Yale University caution against the rush to legalize medical marijuana and suggest that “perhaps it is time to place the horse back in front of the cart.”
So, smoking pot ain’t the cure-all claimed by its advocates. Medical marijuana is a fraud that has been perpetrated on the pubic and on the legislators in the 23 states that have legalized it.
Along comes yet another study by a reputable scientific team which debunks the medical marijuana myths. A study by Dr. Penny Whiting and her team at England’s University of Bristol found that cannabis does not ease pain, nausea and vomiting in chemotherapy patients, MS muscle contractions, sleep disorders or Tourette’s symptoms.
The proponents of pot claim that marijuana is a medical miracle. They are either ignorant of the true facts or deliberately lying.
In the Bristol University study, Dr. Whiting’s team used 6,500 volunteers and conducted 79 random trials. That seems to meet the standard of scientific inquiry.
The Whiting Study found weak evidence that cannabis eases pain and even weaker evidence that it provides relief for chemotherapy, MS and Tourette patients.
The study further indicates that marijuana contributes to psychosis and does little to ease anxiety.
The researchers also debunked studies which purported to show the beneficial aspects of medical marijuana by pointing out that they did not reach statistical significance.
Twenty three states have legalized the use of pot for medical purposes. The medical marijuana industry has enriched the growers, distributors and dealers of pot and the doctors who prescribe it.
California’s medical marijuana law is a farce and has become a de facto legalization of pot for recreational use. Pot heads can go to almost any doctor licensed to dispense marijuana and get a pot prescription for any number of imaginable faked symptoms. At the end of the day, the doctor can go laughing all the way to the bank.
The Whiting study comes on the heels of a study showing that medical marijuana does not provide any relief to glaucoma patients. The American Glaucoma Society has written: "There is no scientific basis for marijuana's use in treatment," and there is evidence that it could actually do damage.
The American Epilepsy Society says: "Marijuana itself has major shortcomings as an epilepsy treatment ... evidence for efficacy in treating seizures does not meet the necessary standard to recommend it to patients." Worse, researchers state that "marijuana use or withdrawal could potentially trigger seizures in susceptible [epilepsy] patients."
Drs. Deepak Cyril and Mohini Ranganathan of Yale University caution against the rush to legalize medical marijuana and suggest that “perhaps it is time to place the horse back in front of the cart.”
So, smoking pot ain’t the cure-all claimed by its advocates. Medical marijuana is a fraud that has been perpetrated on the pubic and on the legislators in the 23 states that have legalized it.
WHY HILLARY WILL BE OUR NEXT PRESIDENT
The traditional American virtues – liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness - no longer inspire or energize a majority of the electorate
The following article was published on November 7, 2012 by Rabbi Steven Pruzansky, leader of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in Teaneck, New Jersey. Although the article is nearly three years old, it is well worth another look because it explains why Romney lost and, since nothing has changed with the electorate since then, foretells why Hillary Clinton will become our next president.
The Decline And Fall Of The American Empire
If the 2012 election proves one thing, it is that the Old America is gone. And, sad for the world, it is not coming back
By Rabbi Steven Pruzansky
The most charitable way of explaining the election results of 2012 is that Americans voted for the status quo – for the incumbent President and for a divided Congress. They must enjoy gridlock, partisanship, incompetence, economic stagnation and avoidance of responsibility. And fewer people voted. At the time of this writing (election day), with almost all the votes counted, President Obama has won fewer votes than John McCain won in 2008, and more than ten million off his own 2008 total.
But as we awake from the nightmare, it is important to eschew the facile explanations for the Romney defeat that will prevail among the chattering classes. Romney did not lose because of the effects of Hurricane Sandy that devastated this area, nor did he lose because he ran a poor campaign, nor did he lose because the Republicans could have chosen better candidates, nor did he lose because Obama benefited from a slight uptick in the economy due to the business cycle.
Romney lost because he didn’t get enough votes to win.
That might seem obvious, but not for the obvious reasons. Romney lost because the conservative virtues – the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness – no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate. The notion of the “Reagan Democrat” is one cliché that should be permanently retired.
Ronald Reagan himself could not win an election in today’s America.
The simplest reason why Romney lost was because it is impossible to compete against free stuff. Every businessman knows this; that is why the “loss leader” or the giveaway is such a powerful marketing tool. Obama’s America is one in which free stuff is given away: the adults among the 47,000,000 on food stamps clearly recognized for whom they should vote, and so they did, by the tens of millions; those who – courtesy of Obama – receive two full years of unemployment benefits (which, of course, both disincentivizes looking for work and also motivates people to work off the books while collecting their windfall) surely know for whom to vote; so too those who anticipate “free” health care, who expect the government to pay their mortgages, who look for the government to give them jobs. The lure of free stuff is irresistible.
Imagine two restaurants side by side. One sells its customers fine cuisine at a reasonable price, and the other offers a free buffet, all-you-can-eat as long as supplies last. Few – including me – could resist the attraction of the free food. Now imagine that the second restaurant stays in business because the first restaurant is forced to provide it with the food for the free buffet, and we have the current economy, until, at least, the first restaurant decides to go out of business. (Then, the government takes over the provision of free food to its patrons.)
The defining moment of the whole campaign was the revelation (by the amoral Obama team) of the secretly-recorded video in which Romney acknowledged the difficulty of winning an election in which “47% of the people” start off against him because they pay no taxes and just receive money – “free stuff” – from the government. Almost half of the population has no skin in the game – they don’t care about high taxes, promoting business, or creating jobs, nor do they care that the money for their free stuff is being borrowed from their children and from the Chinese. They just want the free stuff that comes their way at someone else’s expense. In the end, that 47% leaves very little margin for error for any Republican, and does not bode well for the future.
It is impossible to imagine a conservative candidate winning against such overwhelming odds. People do vote their pocketbooks. In essence, the people vote for a Congress who will not raise their taxes, and for a President who will give them free stuff, never mind who has to pay for it.
That suggests the second reason why Romney lost: the inescapable conclusion that, as Winston Churchill stated so tartly, “the best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.” Voters – a clear majority – are easily swayed by emotion and raw populism. Said another way, too many people vote with their hearts and not their heads. That is why Obama did not have to produce a second term agenda, or even defend his first-term record. He needed only to portray Mitt Romney as a rapacious capitalist who throws elderly women over a cliff, when he is not just snatching away their cancer medication, while starving the poor and cutting taxes for the rich. Obama could get away with saying that “Romney wants the rich to play by a different set of rules” – without ever defining what those different rules were; with saying that the “rich should pay their fair share” – without ever defining what a “fair share” is; with saying that Romney wants the poor, elderly and sick to “fend for themselves” – without even acknowledging that all these government programs are going bankrupt, their current insolvency only papered over by deficit spending. How could Obama get away with such rants to squealing sign-wavers? See Churchill, above.
During his 1956 presidential campaign, a woman called out to Adlai Stevenson: “Senator, you have the vote of every thinking person!” Stevenson called back: “That’s not enough, madam, we need a majority!” Truer words were never spoken.
Similarly, Obama (or his surrogates) could hint to blacks that a Romney victory would lead them back into chains and proclaim to women that their abortions and birth control would be taken away. He could appeal to Hispanics that Romney would have them all arrested and shipped to Mexico (even if they came from Cuba or Honduras), and unabashedly state that he will not enforce the current immigration laws. He could espouse the furtherance of the incestuous relationship between governments and unions – in which politicians ply the unions with public money, in exchange for which the unions provide the politicians with votes, in exchange for which the politicians provide more money and the unions provide more votes, etc., even though the money is gone. How could he do and say all these things ? See Churchill, above.
One might reasonably object that not every Obama supporter could be unintelligent. But they must then rationally explain how the Obama agenda can be paid for, aside from racking up multi-trillion dollar deficits. “Taxing the rich” does not yield even 10% of what is required and does not solve any discernible problem – so what is the answer, i.e., an intelligent answer?
Obama also knows that the electorate has changed – that whites will soon be a minority in America (they’re already a minority in California) and that the new immigrants to the U.S. are primarily from the Third World and do not share the traditional American values that attracted immigrants in the 19th and 20th centuries. It is a different world, and a different America. Obama is part of that different America, knows it, and knows how to tap into it. That is why he won.
Obama also proved again that negative advertising works, invective sells, and harsh personal attacks succeed. That Romney never engaged in such diatribes points to his essential goodness as a person; his “negative ads” were simple facts, never personal abuse – facts about high unemployment, lower take-home pay, a loss of American power and prestige abroad, a lack of leadership, etc. As a politician, though, Romney failed because he did not embrace the devil’s bargain of making unsustainable promises, and by talking as the adult and not the adolescent. Obama has spent the last six years campaigning; even his governance has been focused on payoffs to his favored interest groups. The permanent campaign also won again, to the detriment of American life.
It turned out that it was not possible for Romney and Ryan – people of substance, depth and ideas – to compete with the shallow populism and platitudes of their opponents. Obama mastered the politics of envy – of class warfare – never reaching out to Americans as such but to individual groups, and cobbling together a winning majority from these minority groups. Conservative ideas failed to take root and states that seemed winnable, and amenable to traditional American values, have simply disappeared from the map. If an Obama could not be defeated – with his record and his vision of America, in which free stuff seduces voters – it is hard to envision any change in the future. The road to Hillary Clinton in 2016 and to a European-socialist economy – those very economies that are collapsing today in Europe – is paved.
A second cliché that should be retired is that America is a center-right country. It clearly is not. It is a divided country with peculiar voting patterns, and an appetite for free stuff. Studies will invariably show that Republicans in Congress received more total votes than Democrats in Congress, but that means little. The House of Representatives is not truly representative of the country. That people would vote for a Republican Congressmen or Senator and then Obama for President would tend to reinforce point two above: the empty-headedness of the electorate. Americans revile Congress but love their individual Congressmen. Go figure.
The mass media’s complicity in Obama’s re-election cannot be denied. One example suffices. In 2004, CBS News forged a letter in order to imply that President Bush did not fulfill his Air National Guard service during the Vietnam War, all to impugn Bush and impair his re-election prospects. In 2012, President Obama insisted – famously – during the second debate that he had stated all along that the Arab attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was “terror” (a lie that Romney fumbled and failed to exploit). Yet, CBS News sat on a tape of an interview with Obama in which Obama specifically avoided and rejected the claim of terrorism – on the day after the attack – clinging to the canard about the video. (This snippet of a “60 Minutes” interview was not revealed – until two days before the election!) In effect, CBS News fabricated evidence in order to harm a Republican president, and suppressed evidence in order to help a Democratic president. Simply shameful, as was the media’s disregard of any scandal or story that could have jeopardized the Obama re-election.
One of the more irritating aspects of this campaign was its limited focus, odd in light of the billions of dollars spent. Only a few states were contested, a strategy that Romney adopted, and that clearly failed. The Democrat begins any race with a substantial advantage. The liberal states – like the bankrupt California and Illinois – and other states with large concentrations of minority voters as well as an extensive welfare apparatus, like New York, New Jersey and others – give any Democratic candidate an almost insurmountable edge in electoral votes. In New Jersey, for example, it literally does not pay for a conservative to vote. It is not worth the fuel expended driving to the polls. As some economists have pointed generally, and it resonates here even more, the odds are greater that a voter will be killed in a traffic accident on his way to the polls than that his vote will make a difference in the election. It is an irrational act. That most states are uncompetitive means that people are not amenable to new ideas, or new thinking, or even having an open mind. If that does not change, and it is hard to see how it can change, then the die is cast. America is not what it was, and will never be again.
For Jews, mostly assimilated anyway and staunch Democrats, the results demonstrate again that liberalism is their Torah. Almost 70% voted for a president widely perceived by Israelis and most committed Jews as hostile to Israel. They voted to secure Obama’s future at America’s expense and at Israel’s expense – in effect, preferring Obama to Netanyahu by a wide margin. A dangerous time is ahead. Under present circumstances, it is inconceivable that the U.S. will take any aggressive action against Iran and will more likely thwart any Israeli initiative.
That Obama’s top aide Valerie Jarrett (i.e., Iranian-born Valerie Jarrett) spent last week in Teheran is not a good sign. The U.S. will preach the importance of negotiations up until the production of the first Iranian nuclear weapon – and then state that the world must learn to live with this new reality. As Obama has committed himself to abolishing America’s nuclear arsenal, it is more likely that that unfortunate circumstance will occur than that he will succeed in obstructing Iran’s plans.
The American empire began to decline in 2007, and the deterioration has been exacerbated in the last five years. This election only hastens that decline. Society is permeated with sloth, greed, envy and materialistic excess. It has lost its moorings and its moral foundations. The takers outnumber the givers, and that will only increase in years to come. Across the world, America under Bush was feared but not respected. Under Obama, America is neither feared nor respected. Radical Islam has had a banner four years under Obama, and its prospects for future growth look excellent. The “Occupy” riots across this country in the last two years were mere dress rehearsals for what lies ahead – years of unrest sparked by the increasing discontent of the unsuccessful who want to seize the fruits and the bounty of the successful, and do not appreciate the slow pace of redistribution.
If this election proves one thing, it is that the Old America is gone. And, sad for the world, it is not coming back.
The following article was published on November 7, 2012 by Rabbi Steven Pruzansky, leader of Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in Teaneck, New Jersey. Although the article is nearly three years old, it is well worth another look because it explains why Romney lost and, since nothing has changed with the electorate since then, foretells why Hillary Clinton will become our next president.
The Decline And Fall Of The American Empire
If the 2012 election proves one thing, it is that the Old America is gone. And, sad for the world, it is not coming back
By Rabbi Steven Pruzansky
The most charitable way of explaining the election results of 2012 is that Americans voted for the status quo – for the incumbent President and for a divided Congress. They must enjoy gridlock, partisanship, incompetence, economic stagnation and avoidance of responsibility. And fewer people voted. At the time of this writing (election day), with almost all the votes counted, President Obama has won fewer votes than John McCain won in 2008, and more than ten million off his own 2008 total.
But as we awake from the nightmare, it is important to eschew the facile explanations for the Romney defeat that will prevail among the chattering classes. Romney did not lose because of the effects of Hurricane Sandy that devastated this area, nor did he lose because he ran a poor campaign, nor did he lose because the Republicans could have chosen better candidates, nor did he lose because Obama benefited from a slight uptick in the economy due to the business cycle.
Romney lost because he didn’t get enough votes to win.
That might seem obvious, but not for the obvious reasons. Romney lost because the conservative virtues – the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness – no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate. The notion of the “Reagan Democrat” is one cliché that should be permanently retired.
Ronald Reagan himself could not win an election in today’s America.
The simplest reason why Romney lost was because it is impossible to compete against free stuff. Every businessman knows this; that is why the “loss leader” or the giveaway is such a powerful marketing tool. Obama’s America is one in which free stuff is given away: the adults among the 47,000,000 on food stamps clearly recognized for whom they should vote, and so they did, by the tens of millions; those who – courtesy of Obama – receive two full years of unemployment benefits (which, of course, both disincentivizes looking for work and also motivates people to work off the books while collecting their windfall) surely know for whom to vote; so too those who anticipate “free” health care, who expect the government to pay their mortgages, who look for the government to give them jobs. The lure of free stuff is irresistible.
Imagine two restaurants side by side. One sells its customers fine cuisine at a reasonable price, and the other offers a free buffet, all-you-can-eat as long as supplies last. Few – including me – could resist the attraction of the free food. Now imagine that the second restaurant stays in business because the first restaurant is forced to provide it with the food for the free buffet, and we have the current economy, until, at least, the first restaurant decides to go out of business. (Then, the government takes over the provision of free food to its patrons.)
The defining moment of the whole campaign was the revelation (by the amoral Obama team) of the secretly-recorded video in which Romney acknowledged the difficulty of winning an election in which “47% of the people” start off against him because they pay no taxes and just receive money – “free stuff” – from the government. Almost half of the population has no skin in the game – they don’t care about high taxes, promoting business, or creating jobs, nor do they care that the money for their free stuff is being borrowed from their children and from the Chinese. They just want the free stuff that comes their way at someone else’s expense. In the end, that 47% leaves very little margin for error for any Republican, and does not bode well for the future.
It is impossible to imagine a conservative candidate winning against such overwhelming odds. People do vote their pocketbooks. In essence, the people vote for a Congress who will not raise their taxes, and for a President who will give them free stuff, never mind who has to pay for it.
That suggests the second reason why Romney lost: the inescapable conclusion that, as Winston Churchill stated so tartly, “the best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.” Voters – a clear majority – are easily swayed by emotion and raw populism. Said another way, too many people vote with their hearts and not their heads. That is why Obama did not have to produce a second term agenda, or even defend his first-term record. He needed only to portray Mitt Romney as a rapacious capitalist who throws elderly women over a cliff, when he is not just snatching away their cancer medication, while starving the poor and cutting taxes for the rich. Obama could get away with saying that “Romney wants the rich to play by a different set of rules” – without ever defining what those different rules were; with saying that the “rich should pay their fair share” – without ever defining what a “fair share” is; with saying that Romney wants the poor, elderly and sick to “fend for themselves” – without even acknowledging that all these government programs are going bankrupt, their current insolvency only papered over by deficit spending. How could Obama get away with such rants to squealing sign-wavers? See Churchill, above.
During his 1956 presidential campaign, a woman called out to Adlai Stevenson: “Senator, you have the vote of every thinking person!” Stevenson called back: “That’s not enough, madam, we need a majority!” Truer words were never spoken.
Similarly, Obama (or his surrogates) could hint to blacks that a Romney victory would lead them back into chains and proclaim to women that their abortions and birth control would be taken away. He could appeal to Hispanics that Romney would have them all arrested and shipped to Mexico (even if they came from Cuba or Honduras), and unabashedly state that he will not enforce the current immigration laws. He could espouse the furtherance of the incestuous relationship between governments and unions – in which politicians ply the unions with public money, in exchange for which the unions provide the politicians with votes, in exchange for which the politicians provide more money and the unions provide more votes, etc., even though the money is gone. How could he do and say all these things ? See Churchill, above.
One might reasonably object that not every Obama supporter could be unintelligent. But they must then rationally explain how the Obama agenda can be paid for, aside from racking up multi-trillion dollar deficits. “Taxing the rich” does not yield even 10% of what is required and does not solve any discernible problem – so what is the answer, i.e., an intelligent answer?
Obama also knows that the electorate has changed – that whites will soon be a minority in America (they’re already a minority in California) and that the new immigrants to the U.S. are primarily from the Third World and do not share the traditional American values that attracted immigrants in the 19th and 20th centuries. It is a different world, and a different America. Obama is part of that different America, knows it, and knows how to tap into it. That is why he won.
Obama also proved again that negative advertising works, invective sells, and harsh personal attacks succeed. That Romney never engaged in such diatribes points to his essential goodness as a person; his “negative ads” were simple facts, never personal abuse – facts about high unemployment, lower take-home pay, a loss of American power and prestige abroad, a lack of leadership, etc. As a politician, though, Romney failed because he did not embrace the devil’s bargain of making unsustainable promises, and by talking as the adult and not the adolescent. Obama has spent the last six years campaigning; even his governance has been focused on payoffs to his favored interest groups. The permanent campaign also won again, to the detriment of American life.
It turned out that it was not possible for Romney and Ryan – people of substance, depth and ideas – to compete with the shallow populism and platitudes of their opponents. Obama mastered the politics of envy – of class warfare – never reaching out to Americans as such but to individual groups, and cobbling together a winning majority from these minority groups. Conservative ideas failed to take root and states that seemed winnable, and amenable to traditional American values, have simply disappeared from the map. If an Obama could not be defeated – with his record and his vision of America, in which free stuff seduces voters – it is hard to envision any change in the future. The road to Hillary Clinton in 2016 and to a European-socialist economy – those very economies that are collapsing today in Europe – is paved.
A second cliché that should be retired is that America is a center-right country. It clearly is not. It is a divided country with peculiar voting patterns, and an appetite for free stuff. Studies will invariably show that Republicans in Congress received more total votes than Democrats in Congress, but that means little. The House of Representatives is not truly representative of the country. That people would vote for a Republican Congressmen or Senator and then Obama for President would tend to reinforce point two above: the empty-headedness of the electorate. Americans revile Congress but love their individual Congressmen. Go figure.
The mass media’s complicity in Obama’s re-election cannot be denied. One example suffices. In 2004, CBS News forged a letter in order to imply that President Bush did not fulfill his Air National Guard service during the Vietnam War, all to impugn Bush and impair his re-election prospects. In 2012, President Obama insisted – famously – during the second debate that he had stated all along that the Arab attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi was “terror” (a lie that Romney fumbled and failed to exploit). Yet, CBS News sat on a tape of an interview with Obama in which Obama specifically avoided and rejected the claim of terrorism – on the day after the attack – clinging to the canard about the video. (This snippet of a “60 Minutes” interview was not revealed – until two days before the election!) In effect, CBS News fabricated evidence in order to harm a Republican president, and suppressed evidence in order to help a Democratic president. Simply shameful, as was the media’s disregard of any scandal or story that could have jeopardized the Obama re-election.
One of the more irritating aspects of this campaign was its limited focus, odd in light of the billions of dollars spent. Only a few states were contested, a strategy that Romney adopted, and that clearly failed. The Democrat begins any race with a substantial advantage. The liberal states – like the bankrupt California and Illinois – and other states with large concentrations of minority voters as well as an extensive welfare apparatus, like New York, New Jersey and others – give any Democratic candidate an almost insurmountable edge in electoral votes. In New Jersey, for example, it literally does not pay for a conservative to vote. It is not worth the fuel expended driving to the polls. As some economists have pointed generally, and it resonates here even more, the odds are greater that a voter will be killed in a traffic accident on his way to the polls than that his vote will make a difference in the election. It is an irrational act. That most states are uncompetitive means that people are not amenable to new ideas, or new thinking, or even having an open mind. If that does not change, and it is hard to see how it can change, then the die is cast. America is not what it was, and will never be again.
For Jews, mostly assimilated anyway and staunch Democrats, the results demonstrate again that liberalism is their Torah. Almost 70% voted for a president widely perceived by Israelis and most committed Jews as hostile to Israel. They voted to secure Obama’s future at America’s expense and at Israel’s expense – in effect, preferring Obama to Netanyahu by a wide margin. A dangerous time is ahead. Under present circumstances, it is inconceivable that the U.S. will take any aggressive action against Iran and will more likely thwart any Israeli initiative.
That Obama’s top aide Valerie Jarrett (i.e., Iranian-born Valerie Jarrett) spent last week in Teheran is not a good sign. The U.S. will preach the importance of negotiations up until the production of the first Iranian nuclear weapon – and then state that the world must learn to live with this new reality. As Obama has committed himself to abolishing America’s nuclear arsenal, it is more likely that that unfortunate circumstance will occur than that he will succeed in obstructing Iran’s plans.
The American empire began to decline in 2007, and the deterioration has been exacerbated in the last five years. This election only hastens that decline. Society is permeated with sloth, greed, envy and materialistic excess. It has lost its moorings and its moral foundations. The takers outnumber the givers, and that will only increase in years to come. Across the world, America under Bush was feared but not respected. Under Obama, America is neither feared nor respected. Radical Islam has had a banner four years under Obama, and its prospects for future growth look excellent. The “Occupy” riots across this country in the last two years were mere dress rehearsals for what lies ahead – years of unrest sparked by the increasing discontent of the unsuccessful who want to seize the fruits and the bounty of the successful, and do not appreciate the slow pace of redistribution.
If this election proves one thing, it is that the Old America is gone. And, sad for the world, it is not coming back.
Tuesday, June 23, 2015
FIRST THEY SHOOT UNARMED BLACKS ...
… now, on the way to jail, they stop and treat a racist killer to a Burger King meal
Do you want more proof that cops are racists? Well here it is. After Dylan Roof shot nine African-Americans to death at the Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina, he fled to North Carolina where he was arrested in Shelby, some 200 miles from the scene of the shootings.
And what dastardly deed did the Shelby cops do to prove they are racists? Shelby Police Chief Jeff Ledford revealed that when they arrested Roof, he told the cops he was hungry. Instead of taking him directly to jail, they stopped off at a Burger King and treated the white racist killer to a burger, fries and soda.
Had Roof been black and killed nine white churchgoers, the Shelby cops, or any other white cops, would have shot the black man dead, preferably in the back, of course.
People are now outraged that the Shelby cops had the audacity to take Roof for a treat at a Burger King.
First the cops shoot unarmed blacks in the back and now they treat a white racist killer to a Burger King meal. What more proof do you need that cops are racists?
Do you want more proof that cops are racists? Well here it is. After Dylan Roof shot nine African-Americans to death at the Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina, he fled to North Carolina where he was arrested in Shelby, some 200 miles from the scene of the shootings.
And what dastardly deed did the Shelby cops do to prove they are racists? Shelby Police Chief Jeff Ledford revealed that when they arrested Roof, he told the cops he was hungry. Instead of taking him directly to jail, they stopped off at a Burger King and treated the white racist killer to a burger, fries and soda.
Had Roof been black and killed nine white churchgoers, the Shelby cops, or any other white cops, would have shot the black man dead, preferably in the back, of course.
People are now outraged that the Shelby cops had the audacity to take Roof for a treat at a Burger King.
First the cops shoot unarmed blacks in the back and now they treat a white racist killer to a Burger King meal. What more proof do you need that cops are racists?
KEEPING THE KID OCCUPIED FOR THAT AFTERNOON QUICKIE
The Unconventional Gazette
June 23, 2015
The only way to pull off a Sunday afternoon "quickie " with their 8-year-old son in the apartment was to send him out onto the balcony with a Popsicle and tell him to report on all the neighborhood activities...
He began his commentary as his parents got naked and jumped into bed:
"There's a car being towed from the parking lot," he shouted.
"An ambulance just drove by!"
"Looks like the Anderson's have company," he called out.
"Matt's riding a new bike!"
"Looks like the Sanders are moving!"
"Jason is on his skate board!"
After a few moments he announced... "The Coopers are having sex!"
Startled, his mother and dad shot up in bed. Dad cautiously called out..."How do you know they're having sex?"
"Jimmy Cooper is standing on his balcony with a Popsicle."
June 23, 2015
The only way to pull off a Sunday afternoon "quickie " with their 8-year-old son in the apartment was to send him out onto the balcony with a Popsicle and tell him to report on all the neighborhood activities...
He began his commentary as his parents got naked and jumped into bed:
"There's a car being towed from the parking lot," he shouted.
"An ambulance just drove by!"
"Looks like the Anderson's have company," he called out.
"Matt's riding a new bike!"
"Looks like the Sanders are moving!"
"Jason is on his skate board!"
After a few moments he announced... "The Coopers are having sex!"
Startled, his mother and dad shot up in bed. Dad cautiously called out..."How do you know they're having sex?"
"Jimmy Cooper is standing on his balcony with a Popsicle."
Monday, June 22, 2015
COULD TRAINING STEM POLICE SHOOTINGS? LAS VEGAS IS A TEST
By Adam Geller
Associated Press
June 20, 2015
LAS VEGAS --By 2 a.m., nearly five hours had ticked by since Stanley Gibson's last call.
"I want to come home," the 43-year-old Gulf War veteran told his wife, Rondha, his voice edged by post-traumatic stress disorder.
But Rondha Gibson did not know where to find him until a white Cadillac, bathed in spotlights, filled her television screen. "Local man shot by Metro police," a headline announced.
"I think that's my husband you guys killed," she recalls telling the dispatcher who answered her 911 call.
On that night in 2011, local leaders had just started acknowledging two decades of shootings by Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department officers. But Gibson's death was a flash point.
Las Vegas, now the first department in the country to complete a "collaborative" Justice Department review, has rewritten its use-of-force rules and ramped up training to de-escalate tense encounters. Some criticized it as not enough. But shootings by officers, which peaked at 25 in 2010, declined to 13 in 2013 and 16 last year. Through mid-June, Metro officers shot three people, killing one. Even critics credit the decrease at least partly to new training.
Shootings by police recently led Ohio officials, dismayed that the state requires just four hours of annual police training, to recommend a ten-fold increase. A Missouri panel recommended training encouraging police to increase distance between themselves and suspects, though some critics say stepping back could heighten risk.
Debate continues over how to stem shootings.
"I think what has happened is the culture has changed now, as a result of the training and as a result of the policy, that you have officers who are ... essentially avoiding situations where they have to make that split-second decision," says William Sousa, a professor at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
Others are skeptical, including Rondha Gibson, who won a $1.5 million settlement from Las Vegas police.
"They can say we believe in training," Gibson says. "But at the end of the day they are trained for the cops to go home."
Policing experts say training often falls short.
A 2008 survey of more than 300 departments found one-third limited deadly-force training to requalifying in shooting skills, without focusing on judgment or tactics. More than three-fourths did not share findings from police shooting investigations with trainers.
That raises serious "concerns about how prepared many police officers are" for encounters where they might use deadly force, concluded survey author Gregory Morrison, a professor of criminal justice at Ball State University.
More departments have embraced "reality-based training," using computer simulations or live scenarios. But there's little research on what works, Morrison said.
Meanwhile, calls for police to slow fast-moving confrontations and step back to defuse them have sparked tensions and concerns for officers' safety.
"How is it we can enter situations in a smarter way to create space between us and our adversaries?" says David Klinger, a criminology professor at the University of Missouri-St. Louis who, as a rookie officer in California in 1981, shot and killed a man who was attacking his partner. "I think if we train officers in sound field tactics and hold them to a high standard of performance, that we can reduce shootings."
Critics long complained about aggressive policing in Las Vegas.
But in late 2011, The Las Vegas Review-Journal published an investigation detailing 115 killings by officers over two decades. Weeks later, Stanley Gibson, short of medication for his mental illness, called police, demanding an officer come to his home. Over the next 37 hours, officers found him wandering through traffic and throwing chips from a casino table. He was arrested, released, briefly hospitalized, then refused an ambulance.
Finally, police were called to an apartment complex next to one the Gibsons had moved to less than a month earlier, by a woman reporting two black men trying to break in.
Officers blocked Gibson's Cadillac. He ignored commands barked through bullhorns. Commanders devised a plan to fire a bean bag through the rear window and gas him out. But "a series of failures ensued," the Clark County District Attorney found. When the bag shattered a side window, an officer fired, striking Gibson four times.
Afterward, Metro and an arm of the Justice Department announced what they called "collaborative reform."
The resulting audit found many officers designated to deal with Las Vegas' sizable mentally ill population had gone nine years without recertification training. Las Vegas had a history of traffic stops leading to shootings, and errors in situations involving large numbers of officers. But the department did little to prepare for those unpredictable scenarios, a Justice consultant found. Officers were getting no instruction in de-escalating tense situations.
"We had to fix what we knew was not right," says Capt. Matt McCarthy, who leads the department's Office of Internal Oversight.
Gunning across the pavement, a white SUV screeches to a stop.
A man in wraparound shades jumps out and forces his way into a black sedan, as a police cruiser pulls up off the rear bumper. Two Las Vegas officers crouch low, pistols drawn.
"Put the knife down!" one shouts. Slowly, the man steps out and he's taken into custody.
Then all the participants in this training scenario populated entirely by cops sit down to dissect decisions made during the mock confrontation.
"Do you think maybe it would've been better to get at least one car back to create a little ... more time and distance?", instructor Pete Crews asks.
The question is key given findings that Las Vegas police routinely failed to slow high-stakes encounters, resulting in "errors and fatalities."
When the review began, Metro was just rolling out reality-based training, four-hour sessions now required annually for all officers.
Las Vegas has since trained hundreds to deal with people with mental illnesses. It has struggled to incorporate de-escalation into other training.
Some instructors "expressed outright disapproval" of the new use-of-force protocol, the consultant found.
"When you have the trainers actually mocking the training, how seriously are the trainees going to take it?" said Andre Lagomarsino, a lawyer for the family of Trevon Cole, killed by an officer.
McCarthy acknowledges dissent, but says that problem was corrected.
Critics say training appears to have reduced shootings. Trainees are measured in praising its value.
Jason de la Garrigue, says such training reminds him of the split-second decisions of street patrol he largely left behind during five years on the vice squad. But he questioned its impact.
"I can't say it's going to help us reduce (shootings)," he says, "but it's a start."
The radio in Dave Milewski's cruiser crackles: "Subject in a blue sedan fired one shot out of a vehicle at a residence."
This is no training scenario.
Pulling up alongside apartments with bars on second-floor windows, Milewski learns a man shot at a building. Residents describe a second man with a gun, running through a neighboring complex.
With evening light fading, officers' questions lead to a unit below the stairs — and the second gunman.
Only his long-barreled revolver turns out to be a BB gun that resembles a real weapon, but is perfectly legal.
It's a reminder of miscues training can't always anticipate.
"You run out and a cop sees you in a dark alley with one of those, you're getting shot," Lt. Dave Valenta says.
Back on patrol, Milewski recounts the only time he fired his gun on duty — two shots that missed a woman trying to run down him and his partner. That night, he says, he didn't recognize the threat until it was bearing down on him.
"You have weeks where every night you're drawing your gun," he says. "You just never know."
Associated Press
June 20, 2015
LAS VEGAS --By 2 a.m., nearly five hours had ticked by since Stanley Gibson's last call.
"I want to come home," the 43-year-old Gulf War veteran told his wife, Rondha, his voice edged by post-traumatic stress disorder.
But Rondha Gibson did not know where to find him until a white Cadillac, bathed in spotlights, filled her television screen. "Local man shot by Metro police," a headline announced.
"I think that's my husband you guys killed," she recalls telling the dispatcher who answered her 911 call.
On that night in 2011, local leaders had just started acknowledging two decades of shootings by Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department officers. But Gibson's death was a flash point.
Las Vegas, now the first department in the country to complete a "collaborative" Justice Department review, has rewritten its use-of-force rules and ramped up training to de-escalate tense encounters. Some criticized it as not enough. But shootings by officers, which peaked at 25 in 2010, declined to 13 in 2013 and 16 last year. Through mid-June, Metro officers shot three people, killing one. Even critics credit the decrease at least partly to new training.
Shootings by police recently led Ohio officials, dismayed that the state requires just four hours of annual police training, to recommend a ten-fold increase. A Missouri panel recommended training encouraging police to increase distance between themselves and suspects, though some critics say stepping back could heighten risk.
Debate continues over how to stem shootings.
"I think what has happened is the culture has changed now, as a result of the training and as a result of the policy, that you have officers who are ... essentially avoiding situations where they have to make that split-second decision," says William Sousa, a professor at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.
Others are skeptical, including Rondha Gibson, who won a $1.5 million settlement from Las Vegas police.
"They can say we believe in training," Gibson says. "But at the end of the day they are trained for the cops to go home."
Policing experts say training often falls short.
A 2008 survey of more than 300 departments found one-third limited deadly-force training to requalifying in shooting skills, without focusing on judgment or tactics. More than three-fourths did not share findings from police shooting investigations with trainers.
That raises serious "concerns about how prepared many police officers are" for encounters where they might use deadly force, concluded survey author Gregory Morrison, a professor of criminal justice at Ball State University.
More departments have embraced "reality-based training," using computer simulations or live scenarios. But there's little research on what works, Morrison said.
Meanwhile, calls for police to slow fast-moving confrontations and step back to defuse them have sparked tensions and concerns for officers' safety.
"How is it we can enter situations in a smarter way to create space between us and our adversaries?" says David Klinger, a criminology professor at the University of Missouri-St. Louis who, as a rookie officer in California in 1981, shot and killed a man who was attacking his partner. "I think if we train officers in sound field tactics and hold them to a high standard of performance, that we can reduce shootings."
Critics long complained about aggressive policing in Las Vegas.
But in late 2011, The Las Vegas Review-Journal published an investigation detailing 115 killings by officers over two decades. Weeks later, Stanley Gibson, short of medication for his mental illness, called police, demanding an officer come to his home. Over the next 37 hours, officers found him wandering through traffic and throwing chips from a casino table. He was arrested, released, briefly hospitalized, then refused an ambulance.
Finally, police were called to an apartment complex next to one the Gibsons had moved to less than a month earlier, by a woman reporting two black men trying to break in.
Officers blocked Gibson's Cadillac. He ignored commands barked through bullhorns. Commanders devised a plan to fire a bean bag through the rear window and gas him out. But "a series of failures ensued," the Clark County District Attorney found. When the bag shattered a side window, an officer fired, striking Gibson four times.
Afterward, Metro and an arm of the Justice Department announced what they called "collaborative reform."
The resulting audit found many officers designated to deal with Las Vegas' sizable mentally ill population had gone nine years without recertification training. Las Vegas had a history of traffic stops leading to shootings, and errors in situations involving large numbers of officers. But the department did little to prepare for those unpredictable scenarios, a Justice consultant found. Officers were getting no instruction in de-escalating tense situations.
"We had to fix what we knew was not right," says Capt. Matt McCarthy, who leads the department's Office of Internal Oversight.
Gunning across the pavement, a white SUV screeches to a stop.
A man in wraparound shades jumps out and forces his way into a black sedan, as a police cruiser pulls up off the rear bumper. Two Las Vegas officers crouch low, pistols drawn.
"Put the knife down!" one shouts. Slowly, the man steps out and he's taken into custody.
Then all the participants in this training scenario populated entirely by cops sit down to dissect decisions made during the mock confrontation.
"Do you think maybe it would've been better to get at least one car back to create a little ... more time and distance?", instructor Pete Crews asks.
The question is key given findings that Las Vegas police routinely failed to slow high-stakes encounters, resulting in "errors and fatalities."
When the review began, Metro was just rolling out reality-based training, four-hour sessions now required annually for all officers.
Las Vegas has since trained hundreds to deal with people with mental illnesses. It has struggled to incorporate de-escalation into other training.
Some instructors "expressed outright disapproval" of the new use-of-force protocol, the consultant found.
"When you have the trainers actually mocking the training, how seriously are the trainees going to take it?" said Andre Lagomarsino, a lawyer for the family of Trevon Cole, killed by an officer.
McCarthy acknowledges dissent, but says that problem was corrected.
Critics say training appears to have reduced shootings. Trainees are measured in praising its value.
Jason de la Garrigue, says such training reminds him of the split-second decisions of street patrol he largely left behind during five years on the vice squad. But he questioned its impact.
"I can't say it's going to help us reduce (shootings)," he says, "but it's a start."
The radio in Dave Milewski's cruiser crackles: "Subject in a blue sedan fired one shot out of a vehicle at a residence."
This is no training scenario.
Pulling up alongside apartments with bars on second-floor windows, Milewski learns a man shot at a building. Residents describe a second man with a gun, running through a neighboring complex.
With evening light fading, officers' questions lead to a unit below the stairs — and the second gunman.
Only his long-barreled revolver turns out to be a BB gun that resembles a real weapon, but is perfectly legal.
It's a reminder of miscues training can't always anticipate.
"You run out and a cop sees you in a dark alley with one of those, you're getting shot," Lt. Dave Valenta says.
Back on patrol, Milewski recounts the only time he fired his gun on duty — two shots that missed a woman trying to run down him and his partner. That night, he says, he didn't recognize the threat until it was bearing down on him.
"You have weeks where every night you're drawing your gun," he says. "You just never know."
Sunday, June 21, 2015
JEWS ACCORDING TO DYLAN ROOF
Before he went on his shooting rampage at the Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, 21-year-old Dylan Roof left a 2,500 word manifesto, one section of which was devoted to Jews
Being Jewish myself, the 'Jews' section of Dylan Roof's manifesto was of particular interest to me. Roof wants to “destroy the Jewish identity.” He doesn’t have to worry. With the high rate of intermarriages between those who identify themselves as Jews and those of another faith, it will not be too long before the Jewish identity will have disappeared, at least in America.
Here is what Dylan Roof wrote about Jews in his manifesto:
Jews
Unlike many White naitonalists [sic], I am of the opinion that the majority of American and European Jews are White.
In my opinion the issues with Jews is not their blood, but their identity. I think that if we could somehow destroy the Jewish identity, then they wouldnt [sic] cause much of a problem.
The problem is that Jews look White, and in many cases are White, yet they see themselves as minorities.
Just like niggers, most Jews [sic] are always thinking about the fact that they are Jewish. The other issue is that they network. If we could somehow turn every Jew blue for 24 hours, I think there would be a mass awakening, because people would be able to see plainly what is going on.
I dont [sic] pretend to understand why Jews do what they do. They are enigma [sic].
EDITOR’S NOTE: I too do not understand why my fellow Jews do what they do. American Jews consistently support Democratic candidates by a majority of 70 percent or more. They often take positions in favor of the Palestinians whose leadership has repeatedly vowed to obliterate Israel and to make the region judenrein. Roof is right, America’s Jews are an enigma.
Being Jewish myself, the 'Jews' section of Dylan Roof's manifesto was of particular interest to me. Roof wants to “destroy the Jewish identity.” He doesn’t have to worry. With the high rate of intermarriages between those who identify themselves as Jews and those of another faith, it will not be too long before the Jewish identity will have disappeared, at least in America.
Here is what Dylan Roof wrote about Jews in his manifesto:
Jews
Unlike many White naitonalists [sic], I am of the opinion that the majority of American and European Jews are White.
In my opinion the issues with Jews is not their blood, but their identity. I think that if we could somehow destroy the Jewish identity, then they wouldnt [sic] cause much of a problem.
The problem is that Jews look White, and in many cases are White, yet they see themselves as minorities.
Just like niggers, most Jews [sic] are always thinking about the fact that they are Jewish. The other issue is that they network. If we could somehow turn every Jew blue for 24 hours, I think there would be a mass awakening, because people would be able to see plainly what is going on.
I dont [sic] pretend to understand why Jews do what they do. They are enigma [sic].
EDITOR’S NOTE: I too do not understand why my fellow Jews do what they do. American Jews consistently support Democratic candidates by a majority of 70 percent or more. They often take positions in favor of the Palestinians whose leadership has repeatedly vowed to obliterate Israel and to make the region judenrein. Roof is right, America’s Jews are an enigma.
Saturday, June 20, 2015
TEXAS IS THE ‘PRISON RAPE CAPITAL OF THE U.S.’
Nationwide, prison staff are the accused perpetrators in half of all reports of sexual abuse in prisons and jails
From “Preying on Texas Prisoners: When Guards Demand Sex” by Alysia Santo, The Marshall Project, June 17, 2015:
In Texas, sexual contact between staff and inmates is a state jail felony, punishable by up to two years in prison, but it is rare for prison staff there to be imprisoned for sexually abusing the people in their charge. Since 2000, the state prison system’s inspector general has referred nearly 400 cases of staff sex crimes against inmates to prosecutors. An analysis by The Marshall Project found that prosecutors refused to pursue almost half of those cases. Of 126 prison workers, mostly correctional officers, convicted of sexual misconduct or assault, just nine were sentenced to serve time in state jail. The majority of the rest received fines ranging from $200 to $4,000 and a few years on a type of probation called deferred adjudication, which results in a clean criminal record if conditions are met.
Texas leads the nation in prison sex abuse. In federal surveys of inmates, Texas has had more facilities deemed “high rate” for sexual abuse than any other state, leading the Dallas Observer to declare Texas the “prison rape capital of the U.S.”
Nationwide, prison staff are the accused perpetrators in half of all reports of sexual abuse in prisons and jails, according to the latest justice department survey, which broadly defines any sexual contact, from unwanted touching to romantic relationships to rape, as “staff sexual misconduct.” Most of these allegations are not substantiated by prison investigators. But even when there is enough evidence to prove a staff member had sexual contact with an inmate, criminal sanctions are rare. Fewer than half are referred for prosecution.
Accountability dwindles further from there. Proving sex abuse in prisons is difficult. An inmate’s word may hold little credibility, and prosecutors often refuse to prosecute. The most common punishment for corrections staffers caught sexually abusing inmates is the loss of their jobs.
__________
Texas, the capital of capital punishment - Texas proud! The prison rape capital – not so proud!
From “Preying on Texas Prisoners: When Guards Demand Sex” by Alysia Santo, The Marshall Project, June 17, 2015:
In Texas, sexual contact between staff and inmates is a state jail felony, punishable by up to two years in prison, but it is rare for prison staff there to be imprisoned for sexually abusing the people in their charge. Since 2000, the state prison system’s inspector general has referred nearly 400 cases of staff sex crimes against inmates to prosecutors. An analysis by The Marshall Project found that prosecutors refused to pursue almost half of those cases. Of 126 prison workers, mostly correctional officers, convicted of sexual misconduct or assault, just nine were sentenced to serve time in state jail. The majority of the rest received fines ranging from $200 to $4,000 and a few years on a type of probation called deferred adjudication, which results in a clean criminal record if conditions are met.
Texas leads the nation in prison sex abuse. In federal surveys of inmates, Texas has had more facilities deemed “high rate” for sexual abuse than any other state, leading the Dallas Observer to declare Texas the “prison rape capital of the U.S.”
Nationwide, prison staff are the accused perpetrators in half of all reports of sexual abuse in prisons and jails, according to the latest justice department survey, which broadly defines any sexual contact, from unwanted touching to romantic relationships to rape, as “staff sexual misconduct.” Most of these allegations are not substantiated by prison investigators. But even when there is enough evidence to prove a staff member had sexual contact with an inmate, criminal sanctions are rare. Fewer than half are referred for prosecution.
Accountability dwindles further from there. Proving sex abuse in prisons is difficult. An inmate’s word may hold little credibility, and prosecutors often refuse to prosecute. The most common punishment for corrections staffers caught sexually abusing inmates is the loss of their jobs.
__________
Texas, the capital of capital punishment - Texas proud! The prison rape capital – not so proud!
THERE IS NOTHING POLITICALLY CORRECT IN A GUNFIGHT
Polk County, Florida Sheriff Grady Judd says that if you point a gun at us, we are going to shoot you
Last January, Polk County Florida deputies engaged four armed robbers in a gunfight. The foursome had held up a pawn shop and viciously killed a mother and her daughter. Unfortunately, the robbers were taken alive. Afterwards, Sheriff Grady Judd made a remark that his officers were prepared for a gunfight with the murderous robbers. The Sheriff’s remarks apparently set off some alarm bells in the liberal mindset of a reporter.
Here, during a press conference, is the exchange between Sheriff Judd and that reporter:
REPORTER: “I think everybody understands the gravity of what happened and the urgency and the response that you took. Some of the comments you made last night about shooting the suspects, possibly, and the comments today about ‘ready for a gunfight’ — was that in the heat of the moment? Do you have any regret about that?”
SHERIFF JUDD: “I not only have no regret, I’m pretty excited about telling you that — that’s exactly what would’ve happened. Make no mistake about it, there’s nothing about politically correct in a gunfight. There’s nothing about politically correct when you are keeping people alive and well and safe. And the people of this community and these law enforcement officers come first.”
“I meant every word of it then, and I mean every word of it now. If you surrender peacefully, that’s the way we prefer it. You start pointing guns at us, you can not only plan on, but you can guarantee that we are going to shoot you.”
Last January, Polk County Florida deputies engaged four armed robbers in a gunfight. The foursome had held up a pawn shop and viciously killed a mother and her daughter. Unfortunately, the robbers were taken alive. Afterwards, Sheriff Grady Judd made a remark that his officers were prepared for a gunfight with the murderous robbers. The Sheriff’s remarks apparently set off some alarm bells in the liberal mindset of a reporter.
Here, during a press conference, is the exchange between Sheriff Judd and that reporter:
REPORTER: “I think everybody understands the gravity of what happened and the urgency and the response that you took. Some of the comments you made last night about shooting the suspects, possibly, and the comments today about ‘ready for a gunfight’ — was that in the heat of the moment? Do you have any regret about that?”
SHERIFF JUDD: “I not only have no regret, I’m pretty excited about telling you that — that’s exactly what would’ve happened. Make no mistake about it, there’s nothing about politically correct in a gunfight. There’s nothing about politically correct when you are keeping people alive and well and safe. And the people of this community and these law enforcement officers come first.”
“I meant every word of it then, and I mean every word of it now. If you surrender peacefully, that’s the way we prefer it. You start pointing guns at us, you can not only plan on, but you can guarantee that we are going to shoot you.”
Friday, June 19, 2015
BRIAN WILLIANS AT THE FRONT LINES
The anchor of NBC Nightly News for 10 years has been dumped into MSNBC after telling a bunch of whoppers about himself while broadcasting the news
By Pamela Putz
The Unconventional Gazette
June 19, 2015
Brian Williams was the anchor and managing editor of NBC Nightly News for 10 years until he got caught lying about being in a helicopter over Iran which nearly got shot down. He was suspended for six month and has been dumped into the uber left-wing MSNBC where he will join such luminaries as ultra-leftie Rachel Maddow and fellow phony Al Sharpton.
Here are some of the whoppers Williams told on the NBC Nightly News:
I witnessed the resurrection of Jesus.
I was no more than 10 feet from Julius caesar as the Roman senators stabbed him to death.
I accompanied Columbus on his voyage to the new world.
I was shot at during the Battle of Waterloo.
I accompanied Pickett during his charge at Gettysburg.
I helped write Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address.
I accompanied Gen. Robert E. Lee to Appomattox for the surrender to Gen. Ulysses S. Grant.
I nearly got shot when I accompanied Teddy Roosevelt’s Rough Riders during the Battle of San Juan Hill.
I was in the trenches with the French during the Battle of Verdun.
I helped deliver the Dionne Quintuplets.
I landed at Omaha Brach with the 1st Infantry Division.
I was standing next to Joe Rosenthal when he took his famous picture of the flag raising on top of Iwo Jima’s Mt. Suribachi.
I was on the Enola Gay when it dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima.
I was on the U.S.S. Missouri when the Japanese surrendered to MacArthur.
I accompanied the US Eighth Army during its long retreat from the Yahoo River.
I was with the U.S. Marines during the Battle of Huế.
I got hit by a brick during the Rodney King riot.
I rode with the Hells Angels.
I escorted Monica Lewinsky to and from the White House so she could service President Clinton in the Oval Office.
I was with SEAL Team 6 when it got Osama bin Laden.
Etc., etc., etc.
Please feel free to add any other whoppers you heard Williams tell.
By Pamela Putz
The Unconventional Gazette
June 19, 2015
Brian Williams was the anchor and managing editor of NBC Nightly News for 10 years until he got caught lying about being in a helicopter over Iran which nearly got shot down. He was suspended for six month and has been dumped into the uber left-wing MSNBC where he will join such luminaries as ultra-leftie Rachel Maddow and fellow phony Al Sharpton.
Here are some of the whoppers Williams told on the NBC Nightly News:
I witnessed the resurrection of Jesus.
I was no more than 10 feet from Julius caesar as the Roman senators stabbed him to death.
I accompanied Columbus on his voyage to the new world.
I was shot at during the Battle of Waterloo.
I accompanied Pickett during his charge at Gettysburg.
I helped write Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address.
I accompanied Gen. Robert E. Lee to Appomattox for the surrender to Gen. Ulysses S. Grant.
I nearly got shot when I accompanied Teddy Roosevelt’s Rough Riders during the Battle of San Juan Hill.
I was in the trenches with the French during the Battle of Verdun.
I helped deliver the Dionne Quintuplets.
I landed at Omaha Brach with the 1st Infantry Division.
I was standing next to Joe Rosenthal when he took his famous picture of the flag raising on top of Iwo Jima’s Mt. Suribachi.
I was on the Enola Gay when it dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima.
I was on the U.S.S. Missouri when the Japanese surrendered to MacArthur.
I accompanied the US Eighth Army during its long retreat from the Yahoo River.
I was with the U.S. Marines during the Battle of Huế.
I got hit by a brick during the Rodney King riot.
I rode with the Hells Angels.
I escorted Monica Lewinsky to and from the White House so she could service President Clinton in the Oval Office.
I was with SEAL Team 6 when it got Osama bin Laden.
Etc., etc., etc.
Please feel free to add any other whoppers you heard Williams tell.
Thursday, June 18, 2015
WANT A PEN PAL?
Jennifer Hyatte, #394869, is a lonely and bored woman doing life in the Tennessee Prison For Women
By Bob Walsh
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
June 17, 2015
Jennifer Hyatte wants a pen pal to help her pass the hours-days-years.
She had been a nurse in the prison system in Tennessee when she became involved with and eventually married her husband-prisoner in 2005.
She murdered Officer Wayne Morgan in August 2005 while he and another correctional officer were transporting her inmate-husband George Hyatte from a court date where he had just pleaded guilty to robbery. They managed to evade capture for one day.
She is now divorced and lonely.
Any bites?
By Bob Walsh
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
June 17, 2015
Jennifer Hyatte wants a pen pal to help her pass the hours-days-years.
She had been a nurse in the prison system in Tennessee when she became involved with and eventually married her husband-prisoner in 2005.
She murdered Officer Wayne Morgan in August 2005 while he and another correctional officer were transporting her inmate-husband George Hyatte from a court date where he had just pleaded guilty to robbery. They managed to evade capture for one day.
She is now divorced and lonely.
Any bites?
CAN’T KEEP THIS TRUE HORSE LOVER FROM HORSING AROUND
Cirilo Castillo Jr. is arraigned yet again for having sex with a horse, or rather for attempting to, because when the mare said no, she meant no!
Back in January 2012, I posted “A True Horse Lover,” a story about Cirilo Castillo Jr. having been arrested for having sex with a horse. At the time it was reported that Cirilo of Alamo, Texas had sex with a number of horses on previous occasions. Well, apparently they can’t keep a true horse lover from horsing around.
Cirilo, 45, was at it again. He was busted for yet another horsing around incident which occurred February 17 when he was found injured in an Edinburg rancher’s barn. Evidently when a mare says no, she means no! The horse Cirilo chose to have sex with was not in the mood. She kicked the supreme shit out of our horse lover, breaking poor ole Cirilo’s leg.
Castillo was charged with criminal trespassing, a Class B misdemeanor punishable by up to 180 days in jail. He was arraigned June 3 before Hidalgo County Justice of the Peace Charlie Espinoza, who set his bond at $1,000.
I wonder which mares Cirilo favored - white, black or brown?
It’s a mystery to me how a man would want to have sex with a horse. Sheep yes, horses no. Pigs yes, horses no. Eureka, I’ve solved it. Cirilo Castillo Jr. and Bruce Jenner are much alike. Jenner thinks he’s a woman and Cirilo thinks he’s a horse. Both need to undergo some serious head shrinking.
Back in January 2012, I posted “A True Horse Lover,” a story about Cirilo Castillo Jr. having been arrested for having sex with a horse. At the time it was reported that Cirilo of Alamo, Texas had sex with a number of horses on previous occasions. Well, apparently they can’t keep a true horse lover from horsing around.
Cirilo, 45, was at it again. He was busted for yet another horsing around incident which occurred February 17 when he was found injured in an Edinburg rancher’s barn. Evidently when a mare says no, she means no! The horse Cirilo chose to have sex with was not in the mood. She kicked the supreme shit out of our horse lover, breaking poor ole Cirilo’s leg.
Castillo was charged with criminal trespassing, a Class B misdemeanor punishable by up to 180 days in jail. He was arraigned June 3 before Hidalgo County Justice of the Peace Charlie Espinoza, who set his bond at $1,000.
I wonder which mares Cirilo favored - white, black or brown?
It’s a mystery to me how a man would want to have sex with a horse. Sheep yes, horses no. Pigs yes, horses no. Eureka, I’ve solved it. Cirilo Castillo Jr. and Bruce Jenner are much alike. Jenner thinks he’s a woman and Cirilo thinks he’s a horse. Both need to undergo some serious head shrinking.
Wednesday, June 17, 2015
TWIN PEAKS MASS ARRESTS LEAD TO LAWSUITS
The cops in Waco busted 177 bikers after a deadly brawl and each was held on $1 million bond
Unless you live under a rock, you know that on May 17 there was a deadly brawl between biker gangs at the Twin Peaks restaurant in Waco, Texas during which nine bikers were killed by gunfire or stabbings and 18 injured. The cops rounded up everyone at Twin peaks, arresting 177 suspects who were charged with engaging in organized crime with bond set at $1 million each.
In order to bail out, each defendant would have to come up with $100,000. Only 34 suspects were able to bail out by June 4, leaving 143 roosting in the McLennan County pokey. Judge Ralph Strother said they would have to wait until next month for a bond-reduction hearing.
The lawsuits have started. Matthew Clendennen, 30, a Baylor University graduate and the owner of a landscaping business, managed to come up with $100,000 and bailed out of jail June 2. He insists he did nothing criminally wrong, claiming he was just sitting with some friends on the Twin Peaks patio. The only thing he did was to duck for cover into the inside of the restaurant when gunfire erupted in the parking lot. When the cops came they put flex-handcuffs on him. Later he was placed on a bus with other bikers and transported to the Waco convention center for processing. Clendennen thought he was being detained as a witness. Instead he ended up in jail with that $1 million bond.
Clendennen is suing city of Waco, McLennan County, Waco Police Officer Manuel Chavez and other officers involved and District Attorney Abelino Reyna. The lawsuit accuses Chavez “of signing a ‘fill in the name’ warrant he knew lacked individual probable cause and deceiving the Justice of the Peace who signed the criminal complaint.” The City of Waco and McLennan county are accused of "caus[ing] the arrest and detention of numerous individuals...regardless of whether or not there was individualized probable cause to arrest and detain a particular individual." Reyna is accused of creating the ‘fill in the name’ warrants and of violating Clendennen’s Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights.
The lawsuit also claims the two-week confinement caused Clendennen the loss of business and that because of his arrest, his ex-wife has filed suit to deprive him of joint custody of their two children.
The brawl at Twin Peaks was between the Bandidos and the Cossacks. Clendennen is a member of the Scimitar Motorcycle Club which has had some association with the Cossacks. However, the Scimitars are not on the Justice Department’s watch list for outlaw biker gangs.
Two other bikers are also preparing lawsuits. And you can bet they will be followed by a slew of suits before this is all over.
I could see the lawsuits coming. Anytime cops resort to making mass arrests they are likely to sweep up some innocent persons in the process. The police cannot arrest people just for belonging to biker clubs, and that includes the outlaw bikers. If they could, all the Hells Angels, Bandidos and other outlaw bikers would have already been locked up.
On this occasion, Twin Peaks had foolishly invited bikers for a social get-together. There was a large police presence at the establishment in anticipation of possible trouble. The cops should have arrested only the bikers they observed fighting or who were pointed out by witnesses, any of those present who were in possession of prohibited weapons, and anyone with an outstanding warrant. They should have released the others after obtaining their names, addresses and other identifiers.
When this is finally all over, the city of Waco and McLennan County will be many millions of dollars poorer.
Unless you live under a rock, you know that on May 17 there was a deadly brawl between biker gangs at the Twin Peaks restaurant in Waco, Texas during which nine bikers were killed by gunfire or stabbings and 18 injured. The cops rounded up everyone at Twin peaks, arresting 177 suspects who were charged with engaging in organized crime with bond set at $1 million each.
In order to bail out, each defendant would have to come up with $100,000. Only 34 suspects were able to bail out by June 4, leaving 143 roosting in the McLennan County pokey. Judge Ralph Strother said they would have to wait until next month for a bond-reduction hearing.
The lawsuits have started. Matthew Clendennen, 30, a Baylor University graduate and the owner of a landscaping business, managed to come up with $100,000 and bailed out of jail June 2. He insists he did nothing criminally wrong, claiming he was just sitting with some friends on the Twin Peaks patio. The only thing he did was to duck for cover into the inside of the restaurant when gunfire erupted in the parking lot. When the cops came they put flex-handcuffs on him. Later he was placed on a bus with other bikers and transported to the Waco convention center for processing. Clendennen thought he was being detained as a witness. Instead he ended up in jail with that $1 million bond.
Clendennen is suing city of Waco, McLennan County, Waco Police Officer Manuel Chavez and other officers involved and District Attorney Abelino Reyna. The lawsuit accuses Chavez “of signing a ‘fill in the name’ warrant he knew lacked individual probable cause and deceiving the Justice of the Peace who signed the criminal complaint.” The City of Waco and McLennan county are accused of "caus[ing] the arrest and detention of numerous individuals...regardless of whether or not there was individualized probable cause to arrest and detain a particular individual." Reyna is accused of creating the ‘fill in the name’ warrants and of violating Clendennen’s Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights.
The lawsuit also claims the two-week confinement caused Clendennen the loss of business and that because of his arrest, his ex-wife has filed suit to deprive him of joint custody of their two children.
The brawl at Twin Peaks was between the Bandidos and the Cossacks. Clendennen is a member of the Scimitar Motorcycle Club which has had some association with the Cossacks. However, the Scimitars are not on the Justice Department’s watch list for outlaw biker gangs.
Two other bikers are also preparing lawsuits. And you can bet they will be followed by a slew of suits before this is all over.
I could see the lawsuits coming. Anytime cops resort to making mass arrests they are likely to sweep up some innocent persons in the process. The police cannot arrest people just for belonging to biker clubs, and that includes the outlaw bikers. If they could, all the Hells Angels, Bandidos and other outlaw bikers would have already been locked up.
On this occasion, Twin Peaks had foolishly invited bikers for a social get-together. There was a large police presence at the establishment in anticipation of possible trouble. The cops should have arrested only the bikers they observed fighting or who were pointed out by witnesses, any of those present who were in possession of prohibited weapons, and anyone with an outstanding warrant. They should have released the others after obtaining their names, addresses and other identifiers.
When this is finally all over, the city of Waco and McLennan County will be many millions of dollars poorer.
Tuesday, June 16, 2015
HEADS KEEP ROLLING IN SAUDIA ARABIA
Two beheadings on Monday bring the total executions by the Saudis so far this year to 100
According to the Saudi Press Agency, Ismael al-Tawm, a Syrian, was beheaded Monday in the northern region of Jawf for smuggling "a large amount of banned amphetamine pills into the kingdom."
Also on Monday, Rami al-Khaldi, a Saudi national, was beheaded in the western province of Taef for stabbing another Saudi to death.
The two beheadings bring the total Saudi executions so far this year to 100. According to AFP, in all of last year there were ‘only’ 87 beheadings in Saudi Arabia.
According to Amnesty International, the record year for executions in the Saudi kingdom was 1995 when a total of 192 heads were sent rolling.
It was just last month that Saudi Arabia advertised for eight new executioners to carry out public beheadings. Since no experience was required, I suspect all of those positions have been filled by now.
100 heads rolled so far this year? Texas, eat your heart out!
And California? With 750 condemned inmates roosting endlessly on its death row, California voters who favor the death penalty should elect King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud as their next governor.
According to the Saudi Press Agency, Ismael al-Tawm, a Syrian, was beheaded Monday in the northern region of Jawf for smuggling "a large amount of banned amphetamine pills into the kingdom."
Also on Monday, Rami al-Khaldi, a Saudi national, was beheaded in the western province of Taef for stabbing another Saudi to death.
The two beheadings bring the total Saudi executions so far this year to 100. According to AFP, in all of last year there were ‘only’ 87 beheadings in Saudi Arabia.
According to Amnesty International, the record year for executions in the Saudi kingdom was 1995 when a total of 192 heads were sent rolling.
It was just last month that Saudi Arabia advertised for eight new executioners to carry out public beheadings. Since no experience was required, I suspect all of those positions have been filled by now.
100 heads rolled so far this year? Texas, eat your heart out!
And California? With 750 condemned inmates roosting endlessly on its death row, California voters who favor the death penalty should elect King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud as their next governor.
YOU’VE GOT TO CUT OUT UNMARRIED SEX IF YOU WANT TO GO TO HEAVEN
The Unconventional Gazette
June 16, 2015
God visited a woman and told her she must give up smoking, drinking and unmarried sex if she wants to get into heaven.
The woman said she would try her best.
God visited the woman a week later to see how she was getting on.
“Not bad,” said the woman, "I've given up smoking and drinking, but when I bent over to look in the freezer, my boyfriend caught sight of my long slender legs, pushed up my skirt, pulled my panties down to my knees and had sex with me right then and there."
"They don't like that in heaven," said God.
The woman replied: "They're not too happy about it in Costco either!"
June 16, 2015
God visited a woman and told her she must give up smoking, drinking and unmarried sex if she wants to get into heaven.
The woman said she would try her best.
God visited the woman a week later to see how she was getting on.
“Not bad,” said the woman, "I've given up smoking and drinking, but when I bent over to look in the freezer, my boyfriend caught sight of my long slender legs, pushed up my skirt, pulled my panties down to my knees and had sex with me right then and there."
"They don't like that in heaven," said God.
The woman replied: "They're not too happy about it in Costco either!"
WE NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB OF INFORMING THE PUBLIC ABOUT WHAT THOSE ‘INNOCENT’ DEATH ROW DENIZENS ACTUALLY DID
None of those on California’s death row whose appeals have been exhausted have claimed to be innocent
By a San Francisco police captain
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
June 15, 2015
Responding to the fact that California death penalty abolitionists Gov. Jerry Brown and Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris have been dragging their heels in applying the death penalty to those whose appeals have been exhausted, a San Francisco police captain wrote:
When stories like the Anthony Graves case in Texas come out, it causes people to re-think their support for the death penalty, and not take issue with the machinations of Jerry and Kamala. After seeing those rare cases where innocent people like Graves spent years on death row, it should not come as a complete surprise that the majority of Californians do not share our outrage at the delay in executions.
The anti-death penalty media makes sure that stories like the Graves case make front page news. However, it is nearly impossible to find out the horrifying details of what the likes of Michael Morales, the Killer of Terry Winchell, actually did to get on death row. When the media does mention the details of these murderous bastards, we hear things like Tookie Williams writing children’s books, or how Jaturun Siripongs, since arriving on death row, has become a Buddhist monk, and is respectful to the employees at San Quentin. We don’t hear anything about his un-monkly behavior in slaying a few folks in a robbery.
The public needs to realize that of all of those on death row that are cleared for execution (Their appeals are exhausted), not a single one makes a claim of innocence. Some claim that the Jury should have been told they had a tough or less than idyllic childhood, but the information wasn’t conveyed. Some claim that if they would have had a really good lawyer, they would have gotten a life without parole sentence. Others claim the prosecution used their preemptory challenges to exclude Hispanics [and blacks] from the jury etc etc.
Those of us in the know need to do a better job of conveying these facts so we can inform the public about what’s really going on, and force Jerry and Kamala to carry out their constitutionally mandated duties.
EDITOR’S NOTE: I’m glad the San Francisco police captain brought up the Graves case. There is a false public perception that needs to be corrected. It seems as though the cops get blamed for wrongful convictions when in fact overzealous prosecutors hungry to have a sterling conviction record are really to blame in most instances.
Anthony Graves spent 18 years in prison with 12 years on death row for killing six people, a crime he did not commit, because prosecutor Charles Sebesta withheld evidence and falsified testimony to obtain a capital conviction. Graves was released from prison in 2010, but it took the Texas bar association until this month to disbar Sebesta. That bastard should have been disbarred nine years ago when the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered a retrial for Graves because of what this sorry-ass excuse for a prosecutor did.
In this case, us Texans cannot be proud, we should be ashamed!
By a San Francisco police captain
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
June 15, 2015
Responding to the fact that California death penalty abolitionists Gov. Jerry Brown and Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris have been dragging their heels in applying the death penalty to those whose appeals have been exhausted, a San Francisco police captain wrote:
When stories like the Anthony Graves case in Texas come out, it causes people to re-think their support for the death penalty, and not take issue with the machinations of Jerry and Kamala. After seeing those rare cases where innocent people like Graves spent years on death row, it should not come as a complete surprise that the majority of Californians do not share our outrage at the delay in executions.
The anti-death penalty media makes sure that stories like the Graves case make front page news. However, it is nearly impossible to find out the horrifying details of what the likes of Michael Morales, the Killer of Terry Winchell, actually did to get on death row. When the media does mention the details of these murderous bastards, we hear things like Tookie Williams writing children’s books, or how Jaturun Siripongs, since arriving on death row, has become a Buddhist monk, and is respectful to the employees at San Quentin. We don’t hear anything about his un-monkly behavior in slaying a few folks in a robbery.
The public needs to realize that of all of those on death row that are cleared for execution (Their appeals are exhausted), not a single one makes a claim of innocence. Some claim that the Jury should have been told they had a tough or less than idyllic childhood, but the information wasn’t conveyed. Some claim that if they would have had a really good lawyer, they would have gotten a life without parole sentence. Others claim the prosecution used their preemptory challenges to exclude Hispanics [and blacks] from the jury etc etc.
Those of us in the know need to do a better job of conveying these facts so we can inform the public about what’s really going on, and force Jerry and Kamala to carry out their constitutionally mandated duties.
EDITOR’S NOTE: I’m glad the San Francisco police captain brought up the Graves case. There is a false public perception that needs to be corrected. It seems as though the cops get blamed for wrongful convictions when in fact overzealous prosecutors hungry to have a sterling conviction record are really to blame in most instances.
Anthony Graves spent 18 years in prison with 12 years on death row for killing six people, a crime he did not commit, because prosecutor Charles Sebesta withheld evidence and falsified testimony to obtain a capital conviction. Graves was released from prison in 2010, but it took the Texas bar association until this month to disbar Sebesta. That bastard should have been disbarred nine years ago when the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered a retrial for Graves because of what this sorry-ass excuse for a prosecutor did.
In this case, us Texans cannot be proud, we should be ashamed!
Monday, June 15, 2015
SMALL BUT SIGNIFICANT VICTORY FOR POT PROHIBITIONISTS
Colorado Supreme Court rules unanimously that businesses can fire workers for off-the-job marijuana use
In 2010, Brandon Coats, a registered Colorado medical marijuana user, was fired by Dish Network when he tested positive for using pot. Coats, a customer service worker, sued Dish Network with his lawyers arguing a Colorado law prohibiting employees from being fired for “any lawful activity” outside the workplace applied to their client’s use of medical marijuana.
Today, in a unanimous decision, the Colorado Supreme Court upheld two lower court decisions that had ruled against Coats. Here is what Justice Allison H. Eid wrote in the court’s 6-to-0 decision:
“Employees who engage in an activity such as medical marijuana use that is permitted by state law but unlawful under federal law are not protected by the statute.”
The ruling is a small but significant victory for us pot prohibitionists. The court seems to be saying that federal law, which prohibits the manufacture, distribution, sale and possession of marijuana, supersedes state law.
Now if the feds would only enforce the law, but fat chance that this will occur under any Democratic administration. Nevertheless, the decision has left the pro pot crowd pissing and moaning.
Meanwhile all is not gold that glitters. Dozens of cities in Colorado and Washington State have banned marijuana dispensaries from within their city limits.
In 2010, Brandon Coats, a registered Colorado medical marijuana user, was fired by Dish Network when he tested positive for using pot. Coats, a customer service worker, sued Dish Network with his lawyers arguing a Colorado law prohibiting employees from being fired for “any lawful activity” outside the workplace applied to their client’s use of medical marijuana.
Today, in a unanimous decision, the Colorado Supreme Court upheld two lower court decisions that had ruled against Coats. Here is what Justice Allison H. Eid wrote in the court’s 6-to-0 decision:
“Employees who engage in an activity such as medical marijuana use that is permitted by state law but unlawful under federal law are not protected by the statute.”
The ruling is a small but significant victory for us pot prohibitionists. The court seems to be saying that federal law, which prohibits the manufacture, distribution, sale and possession of marijuana, supersedes state law.
Now if the feds would only enforce the law, but fat chance that this will occur under any Democratic administration. Nevertheless, the decision has left the pro pot crowd pissing and moaning.
Meanwhile all is not gold that glitters. Dozens of cities in Colorado and Washington State have banned marijuana dispensaries from within their city limits.
Sunday, June 14, 2015
WILL SEASONS CHANGE? I’M WAITING
The madness surrounding murder and the death penalty in California
By Richard Krupp, PhD
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
June 11, 2015
An Orange County man who freely admitted murdering eight people is still awaiting sentencing about four years after his killing spree. Even if/when he is sentenced to death, the execution may take years or may not even happen at all due to a laborious legal system, special interest groups, and political obstructionists.
Is there an end to the madness in sight?
Over the years California has had a changing relationship with the death penalty. The fluctuations have occurred primarily in the judicial system; sometimes embracing, while other times rejecting, death sentences for murderers.
Are the seasons changing?
The Sacramento Bee had an interesting story about this subject recently:
Is capital punishment dead in California?
Clarence Ray Allen was the 13th man to die in San Quentin’s death chamber since California resumed executing inmates in 1992.
His Jan. 17, 2006, execution was also the last one conducted in this state. Since then, 52 other death row residents have died of old age, suicide or natural causes, but not one has made the short walk from the pre-execution holding cell to the $835,000 lethal injection chamber that was completed in 2010 but never used.
And it’s uncertain if they ever will, despite the state’s announcement last week that it will develop a new drug formula for putting people to death. Today, California has 750 condemned prisoners – up from 646 after Allen, 76, was killed.
Legal challenges and a shortage of the three drugs used in the state’s current execution formula have kept anyone from being executed since Allen. But death penalty advocates who sued in Sacramento Superior Court in 2014 won a critical settlement last week when the state agreed to develop a new method for lethal injection executions that would use just one drug.
The state said it would develop the one-drug policy this year, leading death penalty advocates to predict the executions eventually will resume. Currently, 17 inmates on death row are believed to have exhausted all appeals and be eligible for execution. But the state lacks a court-approved way to kill them.
In December 2006, after a federal judge ruled that the state’s three-drug execution protocol risked causing pain to an inmate that would constitute “cruel and unusual punishment,” the state began preparing changes to make its injection procedures meet judicial approval. (for full story read http://tinyurl.com/nbrcx7e.)
I’m not sure what kind of thought process is involved in showing such concern for the comfort of the soon to be deceased murderer. How would someone even know how it feels to be executed by lethal injection?
Have any executed inmates returned from the dead to speak about the pain they suffered? Why does anyone even care? Opponents keep trying to have the death penalty eliminated by the California voters without success. Will the will of the people change like the seasons?
Of course murderer-supporters have had more luck with sympathetic judges. How long will this present obstacle block executions?
I haven’t heard the anti-death penalty advocates address the families of the victims.
Why are they more interested in the criminals than the victims? This is something I will never comprehend.
What would a “court-approved way to kill” require? Does execution have to be comfortable? Pleasant? By that court-approved standard, perhaps the condemned need not be aware they had drifted into the afterlife.
I’m sure some court somewhere can come up with something. I’ve been waiting for the season to change. The season for death penalty delays and obstacles needs to end.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Here it is June of 2015 and the State of California has yet to resolve the absurd ruling in December 2006 of a federal judge that the state’s three-drug execution protocol risked causing pain to an inmate that would constitute “cruel and unusual punishment. Nearly 10 years ago the state began preparing to present an execution process that would be acceptable to the courts.
Nearly 10 years? Even though a majority of Californians support capital punishment, it is obvious that the state has no appetite to execute anyone. From the June 5 Sacramento Bee:
But death penalty advocates who sued in Sacramento Superior Court in 2014 won a critical settlement last week when the state agreed to develop a new method for lethal injection executions that would use just one drug.
The state said it would develop the one-drug policy this year, leading death penalty advocates to predict the executions eventually will resume.
Texas has been merrily topping the condemned with a single injection dose of pentobarbital. Shortly after the injection, the condemned snort a few times before falling asleep like a baby. So it shouldn’t take California more than 10 minutes to come up with a single execution drug protocol. But with all the legal challenges yet to come, the death penalty is all but dead in California.
By Richard Krupp, PhD
PACOVILLA Corrections blog
June 11, 2015
An Orange County man who freely admitted murdering eight people is still awaiting sentencing about four years after his killing spree. Even if/when he is sentenced to death, the execution may take years or may not even happen at all due to a laborious legal system, special interest groups, and political obstructionists.
Is there an end to the madness in sight?
Over the years California has had a changing relationship with the death penalty. The fluctuations have occurred primarily in the judicial system; sometimes embracing, while other times rejecting, death sentences for murderers.
Are the seasons changing?
The Sacramento Bee had an interesting story about this subject recently:
Is capital punishment dead in California?
Clarence Ray Allen was the 13th man to die in San Quentin’s death chamber since California resumed executing inmates in 1992.
His Jan. 17, 2006, execution was also the last one conducted in this state. Since then, 52 other death row residents have died of old age, suicide or natural causes, but not one has made the short walk from the pre-execution holding cell to the $835,000 lethal injection chamber that was completed in 2010 but never used.
And it’s uncertain if they ever will, despite the state’s announcement last week that it will develop a new drug formula for putting people to death. Today, California has 750 condemned prisoners – up from 646 after Allen, 76, was killed.
Legal challenges and a shortage of the three drugs used in the state’s current execution formula have kept anyone from being executed since Allen. But death penalty advocates who sued in Sacramento Superior Court in 2014 won a critical settlement last week when the state agreed to develop a new method for lethal injection executions that would use just one drug.
The state said it would develop the one-drug policy this year, leading death penalty advocates to predict the executions eventually will resume. Currently, 17 inmates on death row are believed to have exhausted all appeals and be eligible for execution. But the state lacks a court-approved way to kill them.
In December 2006, after a federal judge ruled that the state’s three-drug execution protocol risked causing pain to an inmate that would constitute “cruel and unusual punishment,” the state began preparing changes to make its injection procedures meet judicial approval. (for full story read http://tinyurl.com/nbrcx7e.)
I’m not sure what kind of thought process is involved in showing such concern for the comfort of the soon to be deceased murderer. How would someone even know how it feels to be executed by lethal injection?
Have any executed inmates returned from the dead to speak about the pain they suffered? Why does anyone even care? Opponents keep trying to have the death penalty eliminated by the California voters without success. Will the will of the people change like the seasons?
Of course murderer-supporters have had more luck with sympathetic judges. How long will this present obstacle block executions?
I haven’t heard the anti-death penalty advocates address the families of the victims.
Why are they more interested in the criminals than the victims? This is something I will never comprehend.
What would a “court-approved way to kill” require? Does execution have to be comfortable? Pleasant? By that court-approved standard, perhaps the condemned need not be aware they had drifted into the afterlife.
I’m sure some court somewhere can come up with something. I’ve been waiting for the season to change. The season for death penalty delays and obstacles needs to end.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Here it is June of 2015 and the State of California has yet to resolve the absurd ruling in December 2006 of a federal judge that the state’s three-drug execution protocol risked causing pain to an inmate that would constitute “cruel and unusual punishment. Nearly 10 years ago the state began preparing to present an execution process that would be acceptable to the courts.
Nearly 10 years? Even though a majority of Californians support capital punishment, it is obvious that the state has no appetite to execute anyone. From the June 5 Sacramento Bee:
But death penalty advocates who sued in Sacramento Superior Court in 2014 won a critical settlement last week when the state agreed to develop a new method for lethal injection executions that would use just one drug.
The state said it would develop the one-drug policy this year, leading death penalty advocates to predict the executions eventually will resume.
Texas has been merrily topping the condemned with a single injection dose of pentobarbital. Shortly after the injection, the condemned snort a few times before falling asleep like a baby. So it shouldn’t take California more than 10 minutes to come up with a single execution drug protocol. But with all the legal challenges yet to come, the death penalty is all but dead in California.
Saturday, June 13, 2015
BARE TITTIES AND DICKS BLAMED FOR DEADLY MALAYSIAN EARTHQUAKE
An earthquake on Borneo island that killed 18 people is blamed on ten Western tourists for stripping naked on top of sacred Mount Kinabalu
Mount Kinabalu is a 13,435-foot high peak on the Malaysian part of Borneo island. The mountain is located in the state of Sabah and is considered sacred by the locals. It is also a popular tourist mountain climbing attraction.
On May 30, ten Western tourists stripped naked on the mountain’s summit and took pictures of each other, some of which popped up all over the internet. Four of the tourists, Eleanor Hawkins of Britain, 24, Dutchman Dylan Snel, 23, and Canadian brother and sister Lindsey, 23, and Danielle Petersen, 22, were busted by Malaysian authorities on obscenity charges. The two women had bared their breasts, but the men got completely naked. The cops are seeking the other six miscreants, but they are believed to have left the island.
On June 5, there was a 6.0-magnitude earthquake around the mountain. The quake killed 18 people, including seven schoolchildren from Singapore, along with two of their teachers and another adult who were on a field trip to the mountain.
Earthquakes are rare in that area of Borneo island. The locals blame the earthquake on the ten tourists for defiling the sacred mountain by stripping naked on its summit. They believe the nudity angered tribal spirits believed to dwell on the mountain. Even some government officials agree with the local tribes.
According to AFP:
Last Saturday, Sabah's deputy chief minister Joseph Pairin Kitingan and other officials also suggested a link to the quake.
"This is very offensive behaviour and showed disrespect to the sacred mountain... This will certainly bring misfortune," he had told reporters.
On Friday, the four appeared in a court and pled guilty. They were each sentenced to three days in jail, fined the Malaysian equivalent of $1,332, given credit for time already served, and ordered deported.
I don’t know whether it was the sight of the titties or the dicks which so angered the tribal spirit dwellers on Mount Kinabalu that they made the earth quake, but in either case they must have been some whoppers.
Mount Kinabalu is a 13,435-foot high peak on the Malaysian part of Borneo island. The mountain is located in the state of Sabah and is considered sacred by the locals. It is also a popular tourist mountain climbing attraction.
On May 30, ten Western tourists stripped naked on the mountain’s summit and took pictures of each other, some of which popped up all over the internet. Four of the tourists, Eleanor Hawkins of Britain, 24, Dutchman Dylan Snel, 23, and Canadian brother and sister Lindsey, 23, and Danielle Petersen, 22, were busted by Malaysian authorities on obscenity charges. The two women had bared their breasts, but the men got completely naked. The cops are seeking the other six miscreants, but they are believed to have left the island.
On June 5, there was a 6.0-magnitude earthquake around the mountain. The quake killed 18 people, including seven schoolchildren from Singapore, along with two of their teachers and another adult who were on a field trip to the mountain.
Earthquakes are rare in that area of Borneo island. The locals blame the earthquake on the ten tourists for defiling the sacred mountain by stripping naked on its summit. They believe the nudity angered tribal spirits believed to dwell on the mountain. Even some government officials agree with the local tribes.
According to AFP:
Last Saturday, Sabah's deputy chief minister Joseph Pairin Kitingan and other officials also suggested a link to the quake.
"This is very offensive behaviour and showed disrespect to the sacred mountain... This will certainly bring misfortune," he had told reporters.
On Friday, the four appeared in a court and pled guilty. They were each sentenced to three days in jail, fined the Malaysian equivalent of $1,332, given credit for time already served, and ordered deported.
I don’t know whether it was the sight of the titties or the dicks which so angered the tribal spirit dwellers on Mount Kinabalu that they made the earth quake, but in either case they must have been some whoppers.
CLIMATE CHANGE IS FOR REAL
Life on earth is doomed despite what Rush Limbaugh says about global warming
There have been a lot of arguments about climate change and global warming. Scientists generally agree that we are experiencing a period of global warming which will melt the earth's ice caps. That will raise the sea levels and submerge coast lines worldwide. The left-wing blames it all on man-made emissions. The right-wing claims global warming is one gigantic left-wing hoax. Hardly a week goes by without Rush Limbaugh informing his ditto heads that there is absolutely no truth to global warming.
Here is the real truth as I see it. We are undergoing climate change, like it or not. Dr. Richard Krupp, a former California correctional administrator, points out that “The climate has been changing since before there were people to keep track of it.”
Climate change is cyclical. I do believe that to some extent man-made carbon emissions are contributing to the cycle we are now experiencing, but no amount of government mandated emission controls are going to stop the current period of global warming.
If you don’t believe that global warming is for real, I suggest you look at the before-and-current satellite photos of the Arctic ice shelf. It is disappearing right before our eyes.
Unfortunately the global warming issue has become a political football. In his State of the Union address to Congress, President Obama said, “The Pentagon says that climate change poses immediate risks to our national security.” Say what? Never mind ISIS, Russia and China because, according to Obama and the Pentagon, right now it’s global warming that poses the most serious threat to our national security.
The Pentagon Is going to have to find a way to fire a nuclear missile at the sun and hope that will reverse global warning. But then again that might bring about the Ice Age. Either way, life on earth is doomed.
Bob Walsh says, “I am unwilling to impoverish our country and destroy our lifestyle to appease some radical leftist asshole who wants me to feel guilty about having a decent car and air conditioning.”
I too am unwilling to impoverish our country and destroy our lifestyle, but not for the reason Bob gives. I’m unwilling to do so because man-made emissions only play a small part in the global warming cycle and all the emission controls we can come up with are not going to reverse global warming - they will only delay the inevitable disappearance of life on earth.
There have been a lot of arguments about climate change and global warming. Scientists generally agree that we are experiencing a period of global warming which will melt the earth's ice caps. That will raise the sea levels and submerge coast lines worldwide. The left-wing blames it all on man-made emissions. The right-wing claims global warming is one gigantic left-wing hoax. Hardly a week goes by without Rush Limbaugh informing his ditto heads that there is absolutely no truth to global warming.
Here is the real truth as I see it. We are undergoing climate change, like it or not. Dr. Richard Krupp, a former California correctional administrator, points out that “The climate has been changing since before there were people to keep track of it.”
Climate change is cyclical. I do believe that to some extent man-made carbon emissions are contributing to the cycle we are now experiencing, but no amount of government mandated emission controls are going to stop the current period of global warming.
If you don’t believe that global warming is for real, I suggest you look at the before-and-current satellite photos of the Arctic ice shelf. It is disappearing right before our eyes.
Unfortunately the global warming issue has become a political football. In his State of the Union address to Congress, President Obama said, “The Pentagon says that climate change poses immediate risks to our national security.” Say what? Never mind ISIS, Russia and China because, according to Obama and the Pentagon, right now it’s global warming that poses the most serious threat to our national security.
The Pentagon Is going to have to find a way to fire a nuclear missile at the sun and hope that will reverse global warning. But then again that might bring about the Ice Age. Either way, life on earth is doomed.
Bob Walsh says, “I am unwilling to impoverish our country and destroy our lifestyle to appease some radical leftist asshole who wants me to feel guilty about having a decent car and air conditioning.”
I too am unwilling to impoverish our country and destroy our lifestyle, but not for the reason Bob gives. I’m unwilling to do so because man-made emissions only play a small part in the global warming cycle and all the emission controls we can come up with are not going to reverse global warming - they will only delay the inevitable disappearance of life on earth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)