After three decades of appeals, Philadelphia’s district attorney gave up and decided to drop the death penalty against cop killer Mumia Abu-Jamal, a former Black Panther. A federal appeals court had ruled that this sorry piece of shit deserved a new sentencing hearing because of potentially misleading death-penalty instructions the jury received at his 1982 trial. The Supreme Court refused to intervene in that ruling.
Abu-Jamal, born Wesley Cook, was convicted in the killing of Philadelphia police officer Daniel Faulkner. He shot Faulkner after witnessing the officer stop a car his brother was driving.
Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams said, "There's never been any doubt in my mind that Mumia Abu-Jamal shot and killed Officer Faulkner. I believe that the appropriate sentence was handed down by a jury of his peers in 1982."
Williams said he made his decision because some of the witnesses had died and others would not have been available to testify. And he wanted to avoid another round of endless appeals. "While Abu-Jamal will no longer be facing the death penalty, he will remain behind bars for the rest of his life, and that is where he belongs."
Abu-Jamal had a worldwide movement – ‘Free Mumia’ – working on his behalf along with the usual death penalty opponents and Hollywood luminaries.
Responding to the DA’s decision, the officer's widow, Maureen Faulkner, said, "My family and I have endured a three-decade ordeal at the hands of Mumia Abu-Jamal, his attorneys and his supporters, who in many cases never even took the time to educate themselves about the case before lending their names, giving their support and advocating for his freedom. All of this has taken an unimaginable physical, emotional and financial toll on each of us."
I am outraged at the turn of events, even though I do understand the DA’s decision. It is a travesty of justice that this case has been appealed over and over again for 30 years due to the outcry by a bunch of bleeding hearts that, as Maureen Faulkner said, never even took the time to educate themselves about the case. Justice has been denied to Officer Daniel Faulkner and his family.
Friday, December 09, 2011
POT GROWING BIG BUSINESS IN THE GOLDEN STATE, EMERGES FROM NATIONAL FORESTS
Fresno County Sheriff's deputies and federal agents found as many as 50,000 marijuana plants, worth an estimated $400 million, growing in a sophisticated operation protected by a six foot barbed wire fence. About 50 workers were taken into custody. The farm was located less than a mile from an elementary school. (The Sanger Herald)
CALIFORNIA POT GROWERS SHIFTING CROP TO PRIVATE FARMLANDS
by Michael Doyle
McClatchy
December 7, 2011
WASHINGTON — California's commercial pot growers are moving plots from national forests to Central Valley farmland, Fresno County Sheriff Margaret Mims told senators Wednesday.
Citing a "conspicuous shift" in drug cultivation tactics, Mims added that growers also are increasingly using the "guise" of medical marijuana in an effort to protect their work that, arrest records show, frequently relies on illegal immigrants.
"Rather than growing marijuana in the relative secrecy and anonymity afforded by remote public lands, many moved illicit operations onto private agricultural lands," Mims advised the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control, which held a hearing Wednesday on marijuana cultivation on public lands.
Fresno County has seen a drop in marijuana plots on public lands. In 2009, for instance, law enforcement investigators identified 81 marijuana-growing sites on public lands in Fresno County. In 2010, the number fell to 19. This year, only eight have been found.
While Mims called these reductions "appreciable measures of success," she warned of the flip side, which includes growing operations on Valley farmland. Last year, she told senators, 36 multi-acre cultivation sites were found on conventional farmland in Fresno County.
This year, one Fresno County farmland site devoted to marijuana was said by officials to span 57 acres.
"(The) Central Valley in particular has become a hot spot for marijuana cultivation because of the conditions there, including abundant sunlight, irrigation and fertilizer," declared Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, chair of the narcotics control caucus.
More often than not, illegal immigrants supply the marijuana labor force, officials said.
In July, for instance, the Forest Service and other agencies arrested 159 individuals as part of what officials called Operation Full Court Press. The operation included sweeps through Mendocino, Glenn, Colusa, Lake, Trinity and Tehama counties in Northern California.
Roughly 95 percent of those arrested were illegal immigrants, the U.S. Forest Service's law enforcement director, David Ferrell, told senators. More broadly, Ferrell reported that illegal immigrants were caught tending 1,437 of the 2,334 marijuana sites seized on Forest Service land in California between 2005 and 2010.
"These are Mexican nationals who are running these operations," Feinstein said. "They are armed and dangerous, and we ought to go after them."
During the summer's Operation Full Court Press, in addition to 632,058 marijuana plants, officers reported seizing 38 weapons, including some assault rifles. A similar multi-agency operation last year, called Trident, resulted in 33 weapons and 432,271 marijuana plants being seized in Fresno, Tulare and Madera counties.
All told, Obama administration drug czar R. Gil Kerlikowske testified, 7.4 million marijuana plants were eradicated in California last year, primarily from outdoor growing sites.
"Our public lands have been taken away from us, and that's wrong," said Rep. Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena, Calif.
Feinstein joined Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, in pressing the case that California's allowance for medical marijuana has given Mexican-run drug trafficking gangs cover for their illegal operations.
"The professed medical premise for cultivating this marijuana is predominantly a ruse," Mims agreed. "Marijuana grown in these quantities is largely intended for distribution and sales, often to out-of-state destinations."
CALIFORNIA POT GROWERS SHIFTING CROP TO PRIVATE FARMLANDS
by Michael Doyle
McClatchy
December 7, 2011
WASHINGTON — California's commercial pot growers are moving plots from national forests to Central Valley farmland, Fresno County Sheriff Margaret Mims told senators Wednesday.
Citing a "conspicuous shift" in drug cultivation tactics, Mims added that growers also are increasingly using the "guise" of medical marijuana in an effort to protect their work that, arrest records show, frequently relies on illegal immigrants.
"Rather than growing marijuana in the relative secrecy and anonymity afforded by remote public lands, many moved illicit operations onto private agricultural lands," Mims advised the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics Control, which held a hearing Wednesday on marijuana cultivation on public lands.
Fresno County has seen a drop in marijuana plots on public lands. In 2009, for instance, law enforcement investigators identified 81 marijuana-growing sites on public lands in Fresno County. In 2010, the number fell to 19. This year, only eight have been found.
While Mims called these reductions "appreciable measures of success," she warned of the flip side, which includes growing operations on Valley farmland. Last year, she told senators, 36 multi-acre cultivation sites were found on conventional farmland in Fresno County.
This year, one Fresno County farmland site devoted to marijuana was said by officials to span 57 acres.
"(The) Central Valley in particular has become a hot spot for marijuana cultivation because of the conditions there, including abundant sunlight, irrigation and fertilizer," declared Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, chair of the narcotics control caucus.
More often than not, illegal immigrants supply the marijuana labor force, officials said.
In July, for instance, the Forest Service and other agencies arrested 159 individuals as part of what officials called Operation Full Court Press. The operation included sweeps through Mendocino, Glenn, Colusa, Lake, Trinity and Tehama counties in Northern California.
Roughly 95 percent of those arrested were illegal immigrants, the U.S. Forest Service's law enforcement director, David Ferrell, told senators. More broadly, Ferrell reported that illegal immigrants were caught tending 1,437 of the 2,334 marijuana sites seized on Forest Service land in California between 2005 and 2010.
"These are Mexican nationals who are running these operations," Feinstein said. "They are armed and dangerous, and we ought to go after them."
During the summer's Operation Full Court Press, in addition to 632,058 marijuana plants, officers reported seizing 38 weapons, including some assault rifles. A similar multi-agency operation last year, called Trident, resulted in 33 weapons and 432,271 marijuana plants being seized in Fresno, Tulare and Madera counties.
All told, Obama administration drug czar R. Gil Kerlikowske testified, 7.4 million marijuana plants were eradicated in California last year, primarily from outdoor growing sites.
"Our public lands have been taken away from us, and that's wrong," said Rep. Mike Thompson, D-St. Helena, Calif.
Feinstein joined Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, in pressing the case that California's allowance for medical marijuana has given Mexican-run drug trafficking gangs cover for their illegal operations.
"The professed medical premise for cultivating this marijuana is predominantly a ruse," Mims agreed. "Marijuana grown in these quantities is largely intended for distribution and sales, often to out-of-state destinations."
LEAF BLOWERS OUT-POLLUTE FORD RAPTOR BY A COUNTRY MILE
The environmentalists won’t like this, but these tests cast real doubt on ‘how much good the government's increasingly strict fuel-economy standards will do to reduce emissions.’
YOU CAN'T JUDGE A BOOK (OR A TRUCK) BY ITS COVER
By Jerry Reynolds
The Car Pro Weekly
December 8, 2011
The Ford Raptor big-engine pickup, which environmental advocates love to hate for its poor fuel economy(13 mpg in combined city/highway driving) and its aggressive, shameless statement as a go-buggy, pollutes less than a common leaf blower, according to tests by Edmunds.com.
The Raptor also did better on some emissions tests than the Fiat 500 minicar, Edmunds.com says.
Edmunds has questioned how much good the government's increasingly strict fuel-economy standards will do to reduce emissions. Here's Edmunds.com's summary of the pollution report pitting two different leafblowers against the Raptor and the Fiat:
The tests found that a Ryobi four-stroke leaf blower kicked out almost seven times more oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and 13.5 times more carbon monoxide (CO) than the Raptor, which InsideLine.com once called "the ultimate Michigan mudslinger." An Echo two-stroke leaf blower performed even worse, generating 23 times CO and nearly300 times more non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC) than the Raptor.
"The hydrocarbon emissions from a half-hour of yard work with the two-stroke leaf blower are about the same as a 3,900-mile drive from Texas to Alaska in a Raptor," said Jason Kavanagh, engineering editor at Edmunds.com. "As ridiculous as it may sound, it is more 'green' to ditch your yard equipment and find a way to blow leaves using a Raptor."
The InsideLine.com test also found that the Raptor, which was chosen to represent the extreme heavy-duty end of the light-vehicle spectrum, actually reduced the amount of hydrocarbons in the air in the test lab. The ambient air measured prior to the test contained 2.821 parts per million (ppm) of total hydrocarbons, and the amount of total hydrocarbons coming out the Raptor's tailpipe measured 2.639 ppm.
InsideLine also tested a subcompact 2012 Fiat 500 for comparison and found that the Fiat actually emitted more hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen but dispatched less carbon monoxide than the Raptor. But like the Raptor, the 500 tested much cleaner than the leaf blowers.
YOU CAN'T JUDGE A BOOK (OR A TRUCK) BY ITS COVER
By Jerry Reynolds
The Car Pro Weekly
December 8, 2011
The Ford Raptor big-engine pickup, which environmental advocates love to hate for its poor fuel economy(13 mpg in combined city/highway driving) and its aggressive, shameless statement as a go-buggy, pollutes less than a common leaf blower, according to tests by Edmunds.com.
The Raptor also did better on some emissions tests than the Fiat 500 minicar, Edmunds.com says.
Edmunds has questioned how much good the government's increasingly strict fuel-economy standards will do to reduce emissions. Here's Edmunds.com's summary of the pollution report pitting two different leafblowers against the Raptor and the Fiat:
The tests found that a Ryobi four-stroke leaf blower kicked out almost seven times more oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and 13.5 times more carbon monoxide (CO) than the Raptor, which InsideLine.com once called "the ultimate Michigan mudslinger." An Echo two-stroke leaf blower performed even worse, generating 23 times CO and nearly300 times more non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC) than the Raptor.
"The hydrocarbon emissions from a half-hour of yard work with the two-stroke leaf blower are about the same as a 3,900-mile drive from Texas to Alaska in a Raptor," said Jason Kavanagh, engineering editor at Edmunds.com. "As ridiculous as it may sound, it is more 'green' to ditch your yard equipment and find a way to blow leaves using a Raptor."
The InsideLine.com test also found that the Raptor, which was chosen to represent the extreme heavy-duty end of the light-vehicle spectrum, actually reduced the amount of hydrocarbons in the air in the test lab. The ambient air measured prior to the test contained 2.821 parts per million (ppm) of total hydrocarbons, and the amount of total hydrocarbons coming out the Raptor's tailpipe measured 2.639 ppm.
InsideLine also tested a subcompact 2012 Fiat 500 for comparison and found that the Fiat actually emitted more hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen but dispatched less carbon monoxide than the Raptor. But like the Raptor, the 500 tested much cleaner than the leaf blowers.
Thursday, December 08, 2011
DAUGHTER OBJECTS TO HER MURDERING FATHER GETTING ONLY TWO MEALS A DAY ON WEEKENDS
I wonder if the petition signers and the people at change.org would be willing to have their taxes raised in order to provide inmates with three instead of two meals a day on weekends? My bet is they would not.
THREE MEALS A DAY FOR TEXAS PRISONERS: THE PETITION CAMPAIGN
By Richard Connelly
Houston Press Hair Balls
December 6, 2011
The daughter of a Texas inmate is getting thousands of people to sign a petition demanding the state resume feeding its prisoners three times a day seven days a week.
The Texas Department of Criminal Justice announced this fall that budget constraints were forcing them to feed prisoners at some units only twice a day on the weekends, a move that raised eyebrows around the country.
Destiny Bowser has collected more than 4,000 signatures in a month on a petition entitled "Give Texas Prisoners Three Meals a Day" on the change.org Web site.
"If you cut the budget, the last thing you should cut is food," she tells Hair Balls. "TDCJ is responsible for the health and well-being of its inmates."
Bowser says her father is a TDCJ inmate who has a health condition that forces him to take medicine that causes him to lose weight. (Blake Bowser is serving time for a 1999 Travis County murder.)
"In just a few days, thousands of people have joined my campaign on Change.org, and many more are sure to join in," Bowser said in a release. "As a civilized society, we have an obligation to set an example and protect the human rights of all individuals, even prisoners."
She hopes to put pressure on Texas legislators and also on the American Correctional Association. She's asking the ACA to remove its accreditation of TDCJ.
"What Destiny Bowser has accomplished in just a few days is remarkable," said Change.org's Jon Perri in the release. "With no budget and armed with only a laptop, Ms. Bowser has managed to recruit thousands of supporters from across the country and the endorsement of the Texas Prisoner Family Association. Change.org is about empowering anyone, anywhere to demand action on the issues that matter to them, and it has been incredible to watch Destiny's campaign take off."
THREE MEALS A DAY FOR TEXAS PRISONERS: THE PETITION CAMPAIGN
By Richard Connelly
Houston Press Hair Balls
December 6, 2011
The daughter of a Texas inmate is getting thousands of people to sign a petition demanding the state resume feeding its prisoners three times a day seven days a week.
The Texas Department of Criminal Justice announced this fall that budget constraints were forcing them to feed prisoners at some units only twice a day on the weekends, a move that raised eyebrows around the country.
Destiny Bowser has collected more than 4,000 signatures in a month on a petition entitled "Give Texas Prisoners Three Meals a Day" on the change.org Web site.
"If you cut the budget, the last thing you should cut is food," she tells Hair Balls. "TDCJ is responsible for the health and well-being of its inmates."
Bowser says her father is a TDCJ inmate who has a health condition that forces him to take medicine that causes him to lose weight. (Blake Bowser is serving time for a 1999 Travis County murder.)
"In just a few days, thousands of people have joined my campaign on Change.org, and many more are sure to join in," Bowser said in a release. "As a civilized society, we have an obligation to set an example and protect the human rights of all individuals, even prisoners."
She hopes to put pressure on Texas legislators and also on the American Correctional Association. She's asking the ACA to remove its accreditation of TDCJ.
"What Destiny Bowser has accomplished in just a few days is remarkable," said Change.org's Jon Perri in the release. "With no budget and armed with only a laptop, Ms. Bowser has managed to recruit thousands of supporters from across the country and the endorsement of the Texas Prisoner Family Association. Change.org is about empowering anyone, anywhere to demand action on the issues that matter to them, and it has been incredible to watch Destiny's campaign take off."
WHO NEEDS EXPENSIVE CRUISE MISSILES WHEN OLD-TIME CANNONBALLS WORK JUST AS WELL?
Instead of arming our drones with multimillion dollar missiles, why not just arm them with cheap old-time cannonballs?
TV STUNT GOES AWRY, SENDS CANNONBALL ROCKETING THROUGH HOMES
CBS Los Angeles
December 6, 2011
DUBLIN, CALIF. — A cast iron cannonball rocketed through two homes and landed inside a minivan Tuesday when a “Mythbusters” TV experiment went wrong.
Jamie Hyneman and Adam Savage are hosts of the scientific experimentation show, which airs on The Discovery Channel. The pair was reportedly trying to figure out how fast a cannonball would travel, when it misfired and shot hundreds of feet in the air.
“This cannonball was supposed to go through several barrels of water and through a cinder block, and then ultimately into the side of the hill,” said J.D. Nelson of the Alameda County Sheriff’s Department.
Instead the cannonball flew over the foothills surrounding Camp Parks Military Firing Reservation, before spiraling back toward Dublin like a cruise missile.
It flew straight though the front door of a home on Cassata Place, and bounced around like a pinball, flying up to the second floor before blasting through a back bedroom wall.
The wayward cannonball then blasted across a busy road and through a second home some 50 yards away, demolishing roof tiles.
The homeowner’s mother was frightened.
“”It was a very loud boom; she thought a tree fell, maybe a meteor,” said Ming Jiang. “It wasn’t clear that it was a cannonball landing on the roof.”
The out of control cannonball finally came to a stop inside Jasper Gill’s minivan.
“It hit the dash, through the passenger window,” said Gill, who had gotten out of the vehicle just 10 minutes before the ball struck. “I’m lucky I’m alive.”
Incredibly, no one was injured in the mishap.
Officials said Mythbusters had been using the firing reservation for the last eight years for similar experiments, but none had gone awry.
TV STUNT GOES AWRY, SENDS CANNONBALL ROCKETING THROUGH HOMES
CBS Los Angeles
December 6, 2011
DUBLIN, CALIF. — A cast iron cannonball rocketed through two homes and landed inside a minivan Tuesday when a “Mythbusters” TV experiment went wrong.
Jamie Hyneman and Adam Savage are hosts of the scientific experimentation show, which airs on The Discovery Channel. The pair was reportedly trying to figure out how fast a cannonball would travel, when it misfired and shot hundreds of feet in the air.
“This cannonball was supposed to go through several barrels of water and through a cinder block, and then ultimately into the side of the hill,” said J.D. Nelson of the Alameda County Sheriff’s Department.
Instead the cannonball flew over the foothills surrounding Camp Parks Military Firing Reservation, before spiraling back toward Dublin like a cruise missile.
It flew straight though the front door of a home on Cassata Place, and bounced around like a pinball, flying up to the second floor before blasting through a back bedroom wall.
The wayward cannonball then blasted across a busy road and through a second home some 50 yards away, demolishing roof tiles.
The homeowner’s mother was frightened.
“”It was a very loud boom; she thought a tree fell, maybe a meteor,” said Ming Jiang. “It wasn’t clear that it was a cannonball landing on the roof.”
The out of control cannonball finally came to a stop inside Jasper Gill’s minivan.
“It hit the dash, through the passenger window,” said Gill, who had gotten out of the vehicle just 10 minutes before the ball struck. “I’m lucky I’m alive.”
Incredibly, no one was injured in the mishap.
Officials said Mythbusters had been using the firing reservation for the last eight years for similar experiments, but none had gone awry.
WILL LAB TEST TESTIMONY BECOME TOO CUMBERSOME AND EXPENSIVE?
This pending Supreme Court decision may change the way laboratory evidence is presented in court trials. It could even result in DNA evidence no longer being used.
CAN LAB TESTS STAND IN COURT, SHORT OF EXPERT TESTIMONY?
By Joan Biskupic
Jewish World Review
December 7, 2011
The Supreme Court on Tuesday tackled the consequences of its recent decisions that broadly interpret a defendant's right to confront witnesses against him, including when DNA and other lab reports are used at trial.
Justice Stephen Breyer expressed concerns that a "sea change in normal criminal law practices" may be underway that could require "up to 10 technicians" from a multistep DNA analysis to testify if a report is cited.
Breyer said requiring multiple technicians to appear at trial could cause prosecutors to forgo reliable lab evidence and use less reliable eyewitness testimony.
Other justices, notably Antonin Scalia, who has led the trend expanding confrontation rights, suggested that a need for as many as 10 technicians was unlikely. Scalia has continued to insist that reports from blood or semen evidence should not be offered, even indirectly, without key people who prepared them being available for cross-examination.
Scalia said a prosecutor could bring in just one technician "if he thinks the jury will be sufficiently persuaded."
Tuesday's appeal by an Illinois rape convict is part of a recent series of cases testing the reach of a defendant's right to be "confronted by the witnesses against him." A narrow majority has expanded that Sixth Amendment right in cases involving a range of witness testimony, including the introduction of forensic reports. By a 5-4 vote in a 2009 Massachusetts case, the court said defendants have the right to cross-examine the person who prepares such blood, ballistic and other laboratory reports used at trial.
The new dispute, closely watched by prosecutors and defense lawyers nationwide, tests situations in which a report is not introduced at trial but is used as the basis for testimony by another expert witness. A ruling would refine the rules for when analysts must be available for trial.
Ohio and 41 other states have entered the case on the side of Illinois, arguing that scientific witnesses should be able to offer independent analyses of forensic evidence without the need to bring in the people who generated the underlying data. Defense groups such as the California Public Defenders Association counter that if those who prepared the underlying reports are not called, a defendant will not be able to probe their qualifications or record.
No consensus from the justices seemed clear Tuesday.
At the heart of the Illinois case is a DNA analysis prepared by the Maryland-based Cellmark Diagnostics. The Cellmark report was not introduced at the trial of defendant Sandy Williams but was incorporated into conclusions offered by an Illinois forensic analyst who testified that the DNA from Williams' blood sample matched semen obtained from a swab of the rape victim analyzed by Cellmark.
The Illinois Supreme Court ruled that the Cellmark report did not touch on the Constitution's confrontation right because it was used only "to show the underlying facts and data" that the Illinois analyst employed before giving her expert opinion.
Appealing that ruling Tuesday, Williams' lawyer, Brian Carroll, told the justices that Cellmark analysts should have appeared at trial so that Williams could effectively challenge witnesses against him.
Justice Samuel Alito, who like Breyer has dissented from the recent line of cases on confrontation rights, questioned why any Cellmark witnesses would have been needed: "Hasn't it long been accepted that experts may testify to the facts that form the basis for their opinions," he asked, adding that such experts are "mentioning facts that form the basis of the opinion but not testifying to the truth of those."
Along those lines, lawyers for the state of Illinois have insisted that the forensic analyst's testimony consisted of her independent judgment, rather than a parroting of the Cellmark analysis.
State's Attorney Anita Alvarez told the justices Tuesday that the forensic analyst "gave her own independent expert opinion based on her skills, her knowledge, her expertise."
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who has been in the court majority expanding confrontation rights, was skeptical. "I don't understand how (the) testimony can be independent of test results supplied" by Cellmark, she said. "It is entirely dependent on them."
Scalia added that it's crucial for the judge or jury to know how a lab is run and whether it has "incompetent people there."
"The last case we had involving this kind of issue," he said, "the reason they didn't bring in the lab technician to testify, was that he had been fired in the interim for some reason, which we didn't know. But it was pretty clear why he would not have been a very good witness."
In the Williams case, Scalia added, "We don't know how good the individuals who did the test were. And that's why it's up to the state to bring forward testimony saying what the lab did. And the only testimony they brought forward was the testimony of this witness who was not there."
Justice Anthony Kennedy has dissented as the majority has required additional witnesses, yet he voiced concerns Tuesday about the Illinois situation. He said in a related case last term, "At least you had an expert say how the laboratory works. Here, you don't even have that."
A ruling in the case of Williams v. Illinois is likely by the end of June when the justices recess for the summer.
CAN LAB TESTS STAND IN COURT, SHORT OF EXPERT TESTIMONY?
By Joan Biskupic
Jewish World Review
December 7, 2011
The Supreme Court on Tuesday tackled the consequences of its recent decisions that broadly interpret a defendant's right to confront witnesses against him, including when DNA and other lab reports are used at trial.
Justice Stephen Breyer expressed concerns that a "sea change in normal criminal law practices" may be underway that could require "up to 10 technicians" from a multistep DNA analysis to testify if a report is cited.
Breyer said requiring multiple technicians to appear at trial could cause prosecutors to forgo reliable lab evidence and use less reliable eyewitness testimony.
Other justices, notably Antonin Scalia, who has led the trend expanding confrontation rights, suggested that a need for as many as 10 technicians was unlikely. Scalia has continued to insist that reports from blood or semen evidence should not be offered, even indirectly, without key people who prepared them being available for cross-examination.
Scalia said a prosecutor could bring in just one technician "if he thinks the jury will be sufficiently persuaded."
Tuesday's appeal by an Illinois rape convict is part of a recent series of cases testing the reach of a defendant's right to be "confronted by the witnesses against him." A narrow majority has expanded that Sixth Amendment right in cases involving a range of witness testimony, including the introduction of forensic reports. By a 5-4 vote in a 2009 Massachusetts case, the court said defendants have the right to cross-examine the person who prepares such blood, ballistic and other laboratory reports used at trial.
The new dispute, closely watched by prosecutors and defense lawyers nationwide, tests situations in which a report is not introduced at trial but is used as the basis for testimony by another expert witness. A ruling would refine the rules for when analysts must be available for trial.
Ohio and 41 other states have entered the case on the side of Illinois, arguing that scientific witnesses should be able to offer independent analyses of forensic evidence without the need to bring in the people who generated the underlying data. Defense groups such as the California Public Defenders Association counter that if those who prepared the underlying reports are not called, a defendant will not be able to probe their qualifications or record.
No consensus from the justices seemed clear Tuesday.
At the heart of the Illinois case is a DNA analysis prepared by the Maryland-based Cellmark Diagnostics. The Cellmark report was not introduced at the trial of defendant Sandy Williams but was incorporated into conclusions offered by an Illinois forensic analyst who testified that the DNA from Williams' blood sample matched semen obtained from a swab of the rape victim analyzed by Cellmark.
The Illinois Supreme Court ruled that the Cellmark report did not touch on the Constitution's confrontation right because it was used only "to show the underlying facts and data" that the Illinois analyst employed before giving her expert opinion.
Appealing that ruling Tuesday, Williams' lawyer, Brian Carroll, told the justices that Cellmark analysts should have appeared at trial so that Williams could effectively challenge witnesses against him.
Justice Samuel Alito, who like Breyer has dissented from the recent line of cases on confrontation rights, questioned why any Cellmark witnesses would have been needed: "Hasn't it long been accepted that experts may testify to the facts that form the basis for their opinions," he asked, adding that such experts are "mentioning facts that form the basis of the opinion but not testifying to the truth of those."
Along those lines, lawyers for the state of Illinois have insisted that the forensic analyst's testimony consisted of her independent judgment, rather than a parroting of the Cellmark analysis.
State's Attorney Anita Alvarez told the justices Tuesday that the forensic analyst "gave her own independent expert opinion based on her skills, her knowledge, her expertise."
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who has been in the court majority expanding confrontation rights, was skeptical. "I don't understand how (the) testimony can be independent of test results supplied" by Cellmark, she said. "It is entirely dependent on them."
Scalia added that it's crucial for the judge or jury to know how a lab is run and whether it has "incompetent people there."
"The last case we had involving this kind of issue," he said, "the reason they didn't bring in the lab technician to testify, was that he had been fired in the interim for some reason, which we didn't know. But it was pretty clear why he would not have been a very good witness."
In the Williams case, Scalia added, "We don't know how good the individuals who did the test were. And that's why it's up to the state to bring forward testimony saying what the lab did. And the only testimony they brought forward was the testimony of this witness who was not there."
Justice Anthony Kennedy has dissented as the majority has required additional witnesses, yet he voiced concerns Tuesday about the Illinois situation. He said in a related case last term, "At least you had an expert say how the laboratory works. Here, you don't even have that."
A ruling in the case of Williams v. Illinois is likely by the end of June when the justices recess for the summer.
Wednesday, December 07, 2011
WWII NAZI FUGITIVES TEAMED UP WITH THE VATICAN
Why am I not surprised?
POST-WORLD WAR II SECRET NAZI, VATICAN ARMY
By Paul Bedard
Jewish World Review
December 6, 2011
A secret plot by ex-Nazis, the Vatican, Spain, and even some in the United States to form a post-World War II military force to challenge Communist Russia's feared expansion into West Germany is going on the auction block this week.
According to the documents uncovered by Alexander Historical Auctions, there was such concern about Soviet expansion into West Germany and eventually all of Europe after the war that the plan drawn up by an ex-Nazi SS officer almost went into effect.
Probably the most explosive element of the package is a letter from a priest and co-conspirator of former Nazi Lt. Col. Otto Skorzeny, a Hitler favorite, to the Vatican official who would become Pope Paul VI. In that 1952 letter marked with a church stamp, Pope Paul VI, then deputy of foreign affairs for the Vatican, is praised for helping fund Nazi refugees living in Spain.
The blockbuster documents are the first ever to surface that lay out postwar plans by ex-Nazis, members of Franco's Spain, and the Church to build a rogue army that would be stationed in Africa.
Alexander President Bill Panagopulos said that the plot began in September 1950, after Skorzeny fled a German prison. That year, he ended up in Spain, and historical documents show that he became one of the masterminds of ODESSA, a secret organization formed to find safe havens around the world for top Nazis.
In his catalog for the December 8-9 auction, Panagopulos writes: "Skorzeny entered Spain under an alias to begin a collaboration with Spain's top military leaders, ex-SS generals and officers, and even the highest levels of the Vatican to plan the formation of a secret army of ex-Nazis and Spanish military in Spain or North Africa, prepared at any time to counter a Russian attack from East Germany. This grouping of documents, directly from Skorzeny's estate, documents his efforts to form such an 'army in exile,' perhaps with even more sinister intent. Its contents have remained hidden for over sixty years, totally unknown to journalists and historians alike."
The documents show that U.S. officials were aware of the plot and also worried about Moscow advancing into West Germany, but also feared that it could revive Nazism.
The secret army was never formed and Panagopulos suggests that Skorzeny's motives might have included elements of ODESSA.
"On the face of it, it appears that Skorzeny's motives were altruistic. Germany was indeed defenseless in 1950, having no army of her own and only a token occupation force with which to face any attack," he says.
"The church's involvement can easily be explained: There was no place in communism for organized religion, a fact the Catholic Church made clear through its non-involvement in politics during the world war," adds Panagopulos.
But, he adds, Skorzeny's discussion in the letters, reports, and notes up for auction of freeing political prisoners "strongly suggests another motivation," namely protecting some of Hitler's most ruthless military men with him in Spain.
"It is no secret at all that Spain became a well-known 'resting place' for ex-Nazis on the run while en route to South America and the Middle East. As a matter of fact, it is believed that a wide swath of coastline owned by Skorzeny near Majorca was used to smuggle his comrades in and out of Spain. This archive, carefully researched, may help put together the pieces of the history of the postwar Nazi escape routes and 'rat lines,'" says Panagopulos.
POST-WORLD WAR II SECRET NAZI, VATICAN ARMY
By Paul Bedard
Jewish World Review
December 6, 2011
A secret plot by ex-Nazis, the Vatican, Spain, and even some in the United States to form a post-World War II military force to challenge Communist Russia's feared expansion into West Germany is going on the auction block this week.
According to the documents uncovered by Alexander Historical Auctions, there was such concern about Soviet expansion into West Germany and eventually all of Europe after the war that the plan drawn up by an ex-Nazi SS officer almost went into effect.
Probably the most explosive element of the package is a letter from a priest and co-conspirator of former Nazi Lt. Col. Otto Skorzeny, a Hitler favorite, to the Vatican official who would become Pope Paul VI. In that 1952 letter marked with a church stamp, Pope Paul VI, then deputy of foreign affairs for the Vatican, is praised for helping fund Nazi refugees living in Spain.
The blockbuster documents are the first ever to surface that lay out postwar plans by ex-Nazis, members of Franco's Spain, and the Church to build a rogue army that would be stationed in Africa.
Alexander President Bill Panagopulos said that the plot began in September 1950, after Skorzeny fled a German prison. That year, he ended up in Spain, and historical documents show that he became one of the masterminds of ODESSA, a secret organization formed to find safe havens around the world for top Nazis.
In his catalog for the December 8-9 auction, Panagopulos writes: "Skorzeny entered Spain under an alias to begin a collaboration with Spain's top military leaders, ex-SS generals and officers, and even the highest levels of the Vatican to plan the formation of a secret army of ex-Nazis and Spanish military in Spain or North Africa, prepared at any time to counter a Russian attack from East Germany. This grouping of documents, directly from Skorzeny's estate, documents his efforts to form such an 'army in exile,' perhaps with even more sinister intent. Its contents have remained hidden for over sixty years, totally unknown to journalists and historians alike."
The documents show that U.S. officials were aware of the plot and also worried about Moscow advancing into West Germany, but also feared that it could revive Nazism.
The secret army was never formed and Panagopulos suggests that Skorzeny's motives might have included elements of ODESSA.
"On the face of it, it appears that Skorzeny's motives were altruistic. Germany was indeed defenseless in 1950, having no army of her own and only a token occupation force with which to face any attack," he says.
"The church's involvement can easily be explained: There was no place in communism for organized religion, a fact the Catholic Church made clear through its non-involvement in politics during the world war," adds Panagopulos.
But, he adds, Skorzeny's discussion in the letters, reports, and notes up for auction of freeing political prisoners "strongly suggests another motivation," namely protecting some of Hitler's most ruthless military men with him in Spain.
"It is no secret at all that Spain became a well-known 'resting place' for ex-Nazis on the run while en route to South America and the Middle East. As a matter of fact, it is believed that a wide swath of coastline owned by Skorzeny near Majorca was used to smuggle his comrades in and out of Spain. This archive, carefully researched, may help put together the pieces of the history of the postwar Nazi escape routes and 'rat lines,'" says Panagopulos.
REACTION TO ISLAMIC CLERIC'S SERMON ON HOMOSEXUALS AND GAY MARRIAGE
By Adolf der Schweinehund
The Schalotte
December 6, 2011
According to Monday’s issue of Vanguard, one of Nigeria’s leading newspapers, prominent Islamic cleric Malam Abdulkadir Apaokagi preached a sermon Sunday on the position of Islam on gay men and lesbians in which he condemned same-sex marriage and called for the killing of homosexuals and the desecration of their corpses.
Malam Abdulkadir Apaokagi said gays were worse than murderers, and deserve stiffer penalty than those accused of killing fellow human beings. “Homosexuality and lesbianism are just too dirty in the sight of Allah, those who engage in them deserve more than capital punishment. When they are killed, their corpse should also be mistreated.”
This reporter sought out and interviewed several well-known politicians and other newsmakers to get their reaction to Malam Abdulkadir Apaokagi’s sermon.
Rick Perry said he was surprised because, “I thought they only wanted to kill all the Jews. The governor added, “Hmm, I think I’ll have my friends at Mossad [Israel’s CIA] grab ole Malam-what’s-his-face and bring that piece of filth over here so we can show him justice Texas style. I’m sure we can squeeze him into Polunsky [the prison where death row inmates are held] to await his maker. And since he’s all for mistreating corpses, we can wrap his body in bacon.”
Congressman Barney Frank strongly condemned the cleric’s sermon and said, “I guess I better not ever visit Nigeria.” When reminded that the cleric said this was the position of Islam, Frank said, “Oh, then I just better not visit any Muslim country and I better stay out of Detroit too.”
Pastor Steve Anderson from the Faithful Word Baptist Church in Arizona says that “Sodomy is the abominable sin in all faiths and by urging his congregants to kill the queers, that Muslim preacher is just carrying out the will of the Lord, Hallelujah!”
Rocky Suhayda, head of the American Nazi Party, said, “Our party is in complete agreement with this great Nigerian. Our only request is that he also call for the killing of all Jews. Oh, by the way … if you get in touch with him, would you ask him to preach for the Nigerians and all other Africans to stay out of this white Christian country of ours!”
Herman Cain thought the sermon was despicable. As for gay marriages, Cain said, “My marriage hasn’t been very gay the last few days, what with Ginger [White] telling everyone that I shacked up with her. The way Gloria [his wife] reacted … well … our marriage is anything but gay right now.”
Sarah Palin condemned the sermon and asked, “Did I hear you mention that Nigeria is a country? No kidding … and here I’ve always thought that Nigerian was the term for an African-American scam artist. Oh, and by the way, where is Nigeria?”
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, “Diplomatically speaking, I am sure that President Obama will reach out to Malam Abdulkadir Apaokagi and suggest that it would be nice if he were to tone down some of his more controversial statements.”
Ron Paul said, “As a Libertarian I believe that we should not be sticking our noses into the affairs of others. And, of course, as a physician I am strongly opposed to the mistreatment of corpses.”
Mitt Romney said that right now he condemns the sermon. As for gay marriages, Romney said, “When I was governor of Massachusetts, I was in favor of gay marriages. Now that I am seeking the presidential nomination of the Republican Party, I am opposed to gay marriages.”
The Schalotte
December 6, 2011
According to Monday’s issue of Vanguard, one of Nigeria’s leading newspapers, prominent Islamic cleric Malam Abdulkadir Apaokagi preached a sermon Sunday on the position of Islam on gay men and lesbians in which he condemned same-sex marriage and called for the killing of homosexuals and the desecration of their corpses.
Malam Abdulkadir Apaokagi said gays were worse than murderers, and deserve stiffer penalty than those accused of killing fellow human beings. “Homosexuality and lesbianism are just too dirty in the sight of Allah, those who engage in them deserve more than capital punishment. When they are killed, their corpse should also be mistreated.”
This reporter sought out and interviewed several well-known politicians and other newsmakers to get their reaction to Malam Abdulkadir Apaokagi’s sermon.
Rick Perry said he was surprised because, “I thought they only wanted to kill all the Jews. The governor added, “Hmm, I think I’ll have my friends at Mossad [Israel’s CIA] grab ole Malam-what’s-his-face and bring that piece of filth over here so we can show him justice Texas style. I’m sure we can squeeze him into Polunsky [the prison where death row inmates are held] to await his maker. And since he’s all for mistreating corpses, we can wrap his body in bacon.”
Congressman Barney Frank strongly condemned the cleric’s sermon and said, “I guess I better not ever visit Nigeria.” When reminded that the cleric said this was the position of Islam, Frank said, “Oh, then I just better not visit any Muslim country and I better stay out of Detroit too.”
Pastor Steve Anderson from the Faithful Word Baptist Church in Arizona says that “Sodomy is the abominable sin in all faiths and by urging his congregants to kill the queers, that Muslim preacher is just carrying out the will of the Lord, Hallelujah!”
Rocky Suhayda, head of the American Nazi Party, said, “Our party is in complete agreement with this great Nigerian. Our only request is that he also call for the killing of all Jews. Oh, by the way … if you get in touch with him, would you ask him to preach for the Nigerians and all other Africans to stay out of this white Christian country of ours!”
Herman Cain thought the sermon was despicable. As for gay marriages, Cain said, “My marriage hasn’t been very gay the last few days, what with Ginger [White] telling everyone that I shacked up with her. The way Gloria [his wife] reacted … well … our marriage is anything but gay right now.”
Sarah Palin condemned the sermon and asked, “Did I hear you mention that Nigeria is a country? No kidding … and here I’ve always thought that Nigerian was the term for an African-American scam artist. Oh, and by the way, where is Nigeria?”
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, “Diplomatically speaking, I am sure that President Obama will reach out to Malam Abdulkadir Apaokagi and suggest that it would be nice if he were to tone down some of his more controversial statements.”
Ron Paul said, “As a Libertarian I believe that we should not be sticking our noses into the affairs of others. And, of course, as a physician I am strongly opposed to the mistreatment of corpses.”
Mitt Romney said that right now he condemns the sermon. As for gay marriages, Romney said, “When I was governor of Massachusetts, I was in favor of gay marriages. Now that I am seeking the presidential nomination of the Republican Party, I am opposed to gay marriages.”
GOD WAS NOT HER CO-PILOT
She won’t get my vote for Christian of the Year.
AIDA HILLEN: LOBBED CHRISTIAN PAMPHLET AT KD SHE RAN OVER, THEN DROVE AWAY (ALLEGEDLY)
By John Nova Lomax
Houston Press Hair Balls
December 6, 2011
What would Jesus do if he hit a youth with His car, asked the kid if he was okay and got "no" for an answer?
If you answered, "Toss him a book about Himself, peel out and haul ass like the Dukes of Hazzard," you are cut from the same religious cloth police say Aida Hillen comes from.
According to court documents, the victim, a Milby High School student, told police he was crossing Broadway near the school on October 14 at around 5:15 p.m. when he was struck by the 58-year-old Hillen's 1996 Honda Accord.
As he struggled to his feet, Hillen, of League City, is alleged to have stopped and asked if he was okay. According to the complaint, when the victim said "No," Hillen tossed him a religious pamphlet and attempted to flee, much like her operatic namesake, albeit in her case toward the swamps of Galveston County and not the Egyptian desert.
Another Milby student tried to wave her down, the complaint states, but Hillen only waved "Bye" and kept on driving.
Fortunately this heroic witness was able to scrawl Hillen's license plate number on his arm and waited with the injured victim for police and paramedics to arrive.
The victim was treated by firemen at the scene and released, but suffered chest pains several days later and visited an emergency room, where he was diagnosed with a bruised rib cage and handed a bill for $730.50.
Meanwhile, using the license plate number, cops tracked down Hillen. The victim later picked her picture out of a photo array. Hillen admits to driving her car down Broadway that day but denies hitting anyone. A felony warrant for her arrest -- for accident causing injury -- has been issued.
A month after the incident, but before police issued the warrant, she posted a sermonette, "To Christian Buddy Warriors," on the "I Love Jesus My Savior" Facebook page.
The gist of her testimony? That worry is the enemy of faith.
__"Worry is the Opposite of Faith! You must understand, we all endure challenges. We all face mountains in our lives. Knowing this, it is very important that we live our lives knowing God can and He will. Thought to Ponder: When was the last time your worrying helped you?"
Um, maybe when our conscience bothered us and we admitted some wrong and asked for forgiveness. Perhaps Hillen would do well to set aside her Good Book for however long it takes her to read Crime and Punishment.
And perhaps instead of absolving herself, Aida Hillen should study up on how faith also involves action and an (alleged) sin of this magnitude requires the sort of redemption you can't bestow on yourself.
Police don't think she can redeem herself. The cops want to find her so they can arrest her.
AIDA HILLEN: LOBBED CHRISTIAN PAMPHLET AT KD SHE RAN OVER, THEN DROVE AWAY (ALLEGEDLY)
By John Nova Lomax
Houston Press Hair Balls
December 6, 2011
What would Jesus do if he hit a youth with His car, asked the kid if he was okay and got "no" for an answer?
If you answered, "Toss him a book about Himself, peel out and haul ass like the Dukes of Hazzard," you are cut from the same religious cloth police say Aida Hillen comes from.
According to court documents, the victim, a Milby High School student, told police he was crossing Broadway near the school on October 14 at around 5:15 p.m. when he was struck by the 58-year-old Hillen's 1996 Honda Accord.
As he struggled to his feet, Hillen, of League City, is alleged to have stopped and asked if he was okay. According to the complaint, when the victim said "No," Hillen tossed him a religious pamphlet and attempted to flee, much like her operatic namesake, albeit in her case toward the swamps of Galveston County and not the Egyptian desert.
Another Milby student tried to wave her down, the complaint states, but Hillen only waved "Bye" and kept on driving.
Fortunately this heroic witness was able to scrawl Hillen's license plate number on his arm and waited with the injured victim for police and paramedics to arrive.
The victim was treated by firemen at the scene and released, but suffered chest pains several days later and visited an emergency room, where he was diagnosed with a bruised rib cage and handed a bill for $730.50.
Meanwhile, using the license plate number, cops tracked down Hillen. The victim later picked her picture out of a photo array. Hillen admits to driving her car down Broadway that day but denies hitting anyone. A felony warrant for her arrest -- for accident causing injury -- has been issued.
A month after the incident, but before police issued the warrant, she posted a sermonette, "To Christian Buddy Warriors," on the "I Love Jesus My Savior" Facebook page.
The gist of her testimony? That worry is the enemy of faith.
__"Worry is the Opposite of Faith! You must understand, we all endure challenges. We all face mountains in our lives. Knowing this, it is very important that we live our lives knowing God can and He will. Thought to Ponder: When was the last time your worrying helped you?"
Um, maybe when our conscience bothered us and we admitted some wrong and asked for forgiveness. Perhaps Hillen would do well to set aside her Good Book for however long it takes her to read Crime and Punishment.
And perhaps instead of absolving herself, Aida Hillen should study up on how faith also involves action and an (alleged) sin of this magnitude requires the sort of redemption you can't bestow on yourself.
Police don't think she can redeem herself. The cops want to find her so they can arrest her.
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE EXPLAINED
COSTELLO: I want to talk about the unemployment rate in America.
ABBOTT: Good Subject. Terrible times. It's 9%
COSTELLO: That many people are out of work?
ABBOTT: No, that's 17%
COSTELLO: You just said 9%.
ABBOTT: 9% Unemployed.
COSTELLO: Right 9% out of work.
ABBOTT: No, that's 17%.
COSTELLO: Okay, so it's 17% unemployed.
ABBOTT: No, that's 9%...
COSTELLO: WAIT A MINUTE. Is it 9% or 17%?
ABBOTT: 9% are unemployed. 17% are out of work.
COSTELLO: IF you are out of work you are unemployed?
ABBOTT: No, you can't count the "Out of Work" as the unemployed. You have to look for work to be unemployed.
COSTELLO: BUT THEY ARE OUT OF WORK!!!
ABBOTT: No, you miss my point.
COSTELLO: What point?
ABBOTT: Someone who doesn't look for work, can't be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn't be fair.
COSTELLO: To who?
ABBOTT: The unemployed.
COSTELLO: But they are ALL out of work.
ABBOTT: No, the unemployed are actively looking for work... Those who are out of work stopped looking. They gave up. And, if you give up, you are no longer in the ranks of the unemployed.
COSTELLO: So if you're off the unemployment rolls, that would count as less unemployment?
ABBOTT: Unemployment would go down. Absolutely!
COSTELLO: The unemployment rate just goes down because you don't look for work?
ABBOTT: Absolutely it goes down. That's how you get to 9%. Otherwise it would be 17%. You don't want to read about 17% unemployment do ya?
COSTELLO: That would be frightening.
ABBOTT: Absolutely.
COSTELLO: Wait, I got a question for you. That means they're two ways to bring down the unemployment number?
ABBOTT: Two ways is correct.
COSTELLO: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?
ABBOTT: Correct.
COSTELLO: And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job?
ABBOTT: Bingo.
COSTELLO: So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of the two is to just stop looking for work.
ABBOTT: Now you're thinking like an economist.
COSTELLO: I don't even know what the hell I just said!
ABBOTT: Good Subject. Terrible times. It's 9%
COSTELLO: That many people are out of work?
ABBOTT: No, that's 17%
COSTELLO: You just said 9%.
ABBOTT: 9% Unemployed.
COSTELLO: Right 9% out of work.
ABBOTT: No, that's 17%.
COSTELLO: Okay, so it's 17% unemployed.
ABBOTT: No, that's 9%...
COSTELLO: WAIT A MINUTE. Is it 9% or 17%?
ABBOTT: 9% are unemployed. 17% are out of work.
COSTELLO: IF you are out of work you are unemployed?
ABBOTT: No, you can't count the "Out of Work" as the unemployed. You have to look for work to be unemployed.
COSTELLO: BUT THEY ARE OUT OF WORK!!!
ABBOTT: No, you miss my point.
COSTELLO: What point?
ABBOTT: Someone who doesn't look for work, can't be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn't be fair.
COSTELLO: To who?
ABBOTT: The unemployed.
COSTELLO: But they are ALL out of work.
ABBOTT: No, the unemployed are actively looking for work... Those who are out of work stopped looking. They gave up. And, if you give up, you are no longer in the ranks of the unemployed.
COSTELLO: So if you're off the unemployment rolls, that would count as less unemployment?
ABBOTT: Unemployment would go down. Absolutely!
COSTELLO: The unemployment rate just goes down because you don't look for work?
ABBOTT: Absolutely it goes down. That's how you get to 9%. Otherwise it would be 17%. You don't want to read about 17% unemployment do ya?
COSTELLO: That would be frightening.
ABBOTT: Absolutely.
COSTELLO: Wait, I got a question for you. That means they're two ways to bring down the unemployment number?
ABBOTT: Two ways is correct.
COSTELLO: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?
ABBOTT: Correct.
COSTELLO: And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job?
ABBOTT: Bingo.
COSTELLO: So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of the two is to just stop looking for work.
ABBOTT: Now you're thinking like an economist.
COSTELLO: I don't even know what the hell I just said!
Tuesday, December 06, 2011
THE POSITION OF ISLAM ON GAY MEN AND LESBIANS
While I am a strong advocate for the death penalty, the call by this Islamic cleric for the killing of gay men and lesbians, and the desecration of their corpses, is absolutely outrageous. Thanks to Dorina Lisson for the heads-up on this appalling report.
CLERIC ADVOCATES DEATH PENALTY FOR SAME SEX MARRIAGE
“Homosexuality and lesbianism are just too dirty in the sight of Allah, those who engage in them deserve more than capital punishment. When they are killed, their corpses should also be mistreated.”
Vanguard
December 5, 2011
Malam Abdulkadir Apaokagi, an Abuja-based Islamic scholar, on Sunday in Abuja, called for death penalty for same sex marriage in Nigeria.
Apaokagi in a sermon at the weekly prayer session of Nasrul –lahi-L-Fatih Society of Nigeria (NASFAT), said gays in Nigeria were perverts who did not deserve to co-exist with right thinking and decent people.
He said gays were worse than murderers, and deserve stiffer penalty than those accused of killing fellow human beings.
“Homosexuality and lesbianism are just too dirty in the sight of Allah, those who engage in them deserve more than capital punishment. When they are killed, their corpses should also be mistreated.”
Apaokagi, who is the deputy chief Imam at the Abuja branch of NASFAT, said in his lecture entitled: “The position of Islam on gay marriage” that gay people were mentally unstable and could bring severe instability to the society in which they lived.
“None of them can pass a psychiatric test, because they are not normal,” he said.
The scholar’s sermon came against the background of a recent law passed by the Senate banning same-sex marriage and public display of affection by gays in Nigeria.
The bill, “Same Sex Marriage (Prohibition) bill 2011” also prescribed 14 years jail sentence for convicted gays in Nigeria.
Quoting from the Quran, Apaokagi hailed the Senate for passing the law, saying that Allah decreed marriages only between members of the opposite sex.
“Any society that tolerates gay marriage would come to destruction the way God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for sodomy.
“They are criminals, Allah Himself describes them so, and it is great that the Senate has criminalised what they are trying to do.”
He urged the House of Representatives to take a cue from the Senate, and pass its own version of the bill without delay so that President Goodluck Jonathan could sign a harmonised version into law.
Apaokagi also urged Nigerians to ignore criticisms from the West, and come together as one to fight practices that might bring destruction to the country.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Vanguard is one of the leading newspapers in Nigeria.
CLERIC ADVOCATES DEATH PENALTY FOR SAME SEX MARRIAGE
“Homosexuality and lesbianism are just too dirty in the sight of Allah, those who engage in them deserve more than capital punishment. When they are killed, their corpses should also be mistreated.”
Vanguard
December 5, 2011
Malam Abdulkadir Apaokagi, an Abuja-based Islamic scholar, on Sunday in Abuja, called for death penalty for same sex marriage in Nigeria.
Apaokagi in a sermon at the weekly prayer session of Nasrul –lahi-L-Fatih Society of Nigeria (NASFAT), said gays in Nigeria were perverts who did not deserve to co-exist with right thinking and decent people.
He said gays were worse than murderers, and deserve stiffer penalty than those accused of killing fellow human beings.
“Homosexuality and lesbianism are just too dirty in the sight of Allah, those who engage in them deserve more than capital punishment. When they are killed, their corpses should also be mistreated.”
Apaokagi, who is the deputy chief Imam at the Abuja branch of NASFAT, said in his lecture entitled: “The position of Islam on gay marriage” that gay people were mentally unstable and could bring severe instability to the society in which they lived.
“None of them can pass a psychiatric test, because they are not normal,” he said.
The scholar’s sermon came against the background of a recent law passed by the Senate banning same-sex marriage and public display of affection by gays in Nigeria.
The bill, “Same Sex Marriage (Prohibition) bill 2011” also prescribed 14 years jail sentence for convicted gays in Nigeria.
Quoting from the Quran, Apaokagi hailed the Senate for passing the law, saying that Allah decreed marriages only between members of the opposite sex.
“Any society that tolerates gay marriage would come to destruction the way God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for sodomy.
“They are criminals, Allah Himself describes them so, and it is great that the Senate has criminalised what they are trying to do.”
He urged the House of Representatives to take a cue from the Senate, and pass its own version of the bill without delay so that President Goodluck Jonathan could sign a harmonised version into law.
Apaokagi also urged Nigerians to ignore criticisms from the West, and come together as one to fight practices that might bring destruction to the country.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Vanguard is one of the leading newspapers in Nigeria.
IT WAS ALMOST A REALLY BAD OOPS
The failure of this Japanese film crew to notify the authorities that they were going to shoot a robbery scene almost led to a deadly confrontation.
COPS DISARM ‘ROBBER’ DURING FILM CREW SHOOT
A passer-by called 911 and reported a masked gunman inside a liquor store
Contra Costa Times
December 3, 2011
SAN FRANCISCO — A film crew shooting a robbery scene without a permit at a liquor store in San Francisco's Cole Valley neighborhood Wednesday almost caused a different kind of shooting by police who thought the robbery was real, a police captain said.
The incident was reported at 10:48 a.m. Wednesday at Alpha Market, located at 960 Cole St., said police Capt. Denis O'Leary from the department's Park Station.
A passer-by called 911 and reported a masked gunman inside the store, O'Leary said.
Officers responded and found the man behind the store counter. He was pointing a gun at the ceiling of the store when the officers overpowered and disarmed him, O'Leary said.
At that point, the officers discovered the gun was a replica and that a crew was filming the scene from across the street. The Japan-based crew had gotten the store's permission to film but had not applied for a permit to shoot the scene from the San Francisco Film Commission, according to O'Leary.
Police confiscated the replica gun but did not arrest the man, a 41-year-old city resident.
"The guy's lucky he didn't get shot," he said.
Officers also reported the incident to the Film Commission, O'Leary said.
COPS DISARM ‘ROBBER’ DURING FILM CREW SHOOT
A passer-by called 911 and reported a masked gunman inside a liquor store
Contra Costa Times
December 3, 2011
SAN FRANCISCO — A film crew shooting a robbery scene without a permit at a liquor store in San Francisco's Cole Valley neighborhood Wednesday almost caused a different kind of shooting by police who thought the robbery was real, a police captain said.
The incident was reported at 10:48 a.m. Wednesday at Alpha Market, located at 960 Cole St., said police Capt. Denis O'Leary from the department's Park Station.
A passer-by called 911 and reported a masked gunman inside the store, O'Leary said.
Officers responded and found the man behind the store counter. He was pointing a gun at the ceiling of the store when the officers overpowered and disarmed him, O'Leary said.
At that point, the officers discovered the gun was a replica and that a crew was filming the scene from across the street. The Japan-based crew had gotten the store's permission to film but had not applied for a permit to shoot the scene from the San Francisco Film Commission, according to O'Leary.
Police confiscated the replica gun but did not arrest the man, a 41-year-old city resident.
"The guy's lucky he didn't get shot," he said.
Officers also reported the incident to the Film Commission, O'Leary said.
CATASTROPHE AMONG THE 1%
This had to bring joy to the 99% of the Occupy Wall Street rabble.
THE $4 MILLION HIGHWAY CRASH INVOLVING 8 FERRARIS, 3 MERCEDES, A LAMBORGHINI, A SKYLINE AND A HUMBLE TOYOTA PRIUS (WHICH WAS IN THE WRONG PLACE AT THE WRONG TIME)
Mail Online
December 5, 2011
Thirteen high-end sports car owners - and one driver of a Toyota Prius - were probably close to tears last night after a $4 million motorway pile-up.
A single miscalculation from a Ferrari driver leading a convoy of sports car connoisseurs left a trail of twisted Italian and German metal trailing across this motorway in Japan.
Ten people were rushed to hospital after the smash on the Chugoku Expressway in Shimonoseki, Yamaguchi Prefecture, yesterday afternoon, but none of their injuries were said to be serious.
But the damage to their wallets may be far more grievous. Among the wrecked vehicles were eight Ferraris, three Mercedes, a Lamborghini, and a Skyline, as well as a Prius hybrid that was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Police said the accident occurred on an uphill curve when the 60-year-old driver of the Ferrari leading the pack lost control while trying to overtake another vehicle.
The trailing cars then proceeded to crash one by one, with the ensuing carnage closing down the express way for six hours while emergency services cleared up the mess.
The cars involved in the epic smash included at least two Ferrari F430s, two Ferrari 360 Modenas, two Ferrari F355s and a Lamborghini Diablo.
There was also a Nissan Skyline GT-R - the only current Japanese supercar - and two Mercedes Benz [a third Benz headed in the opposite direction was hit by flying parts], while the cheapest involved in the crash was the Toyota Prius hybrid.
Sports Nippon estimates the value of the vehicles to be 300million yen ($4 million).
THE $4 MILLION HIGHWAY CRASH INVOLVING 8 FERRARIS, 3 MERCEDES, A LAMBORGHINI, A SKYLINE AND A HUMBLE TOYOTA PRIUS (WHICH WAS IN THE WRONG PLACE AT THE WRONG TIME)
Mail Online
December 5, 2011
Thirteen high-end sports car owners - and one driver of a Toyota Prius - were probably close to tears last night after a $4 million motorway pile-up.
A single miscalculation from a Ferrari driver leading a convoy of sports car connoisseurs left a trail of twisted Italian and German metal trailing across this motorway in Japan.
Ten people were rushed to hospital after the smash on the Chugoku Expressway in Shimonoseki, Yamaguchi Prefecture, yesterday afternoon, but none of their injuries were said to be serious.
But the damage to their wallets may be far more grievous. Among the wrecked vehicles were eight Ferraris, three Mercedes, a Lamborghini, and a Skyline, as well as a Prius hybrid that was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Police said the accident occurred on an uphill curve when the 60-year-old driver of the Ferrari leading the pack lost control while trying to overtake another vehicle.
The trailing cars then proceeded to crash one by one, with the ensuing carnage closing down the express way for six hours while emergency services cleared up the mess.
The cars involved in the epic smash included at least two Ferrari F430s, two Ferrari 360 Modenas, two Ferrari F355s and a Lamborghini Diablo.
There was also a Nissan Skyline GT-R - the only current Japanese supercar - and two Mercedes Benz [a third Benz headed in the opposite direction was hit by flying parts], while the cheapest involved in the crash was the Toyota Prius hybrid.
Sports Nippon estimates the value of the vehicles to be 300million yen ($4 million).
WHILE OBAMA BOASTS - OR SHOULD THAT READ 'LIES' - OF HIS FRIENDSHIP FOR THE JEWISH STATE, HIS SURROGATES BLAST ISRAEL
What is really sad is that America’s liberal Jews continue to support Obama, and the wealthy among them will continue making their contributions to the president’s campaign coffers.
AN ADMINISTRATION READY TO BLAME ISRAEL FOR EVERYTHING … INCLUDING ANTI-SEMITISM
By Jonathan Tobin
Jewish World Review
December 5, 2011
The ground is fast sinking beneath the feet of President Obama's Jewish defenders. While the president is trying to raise money from Jewish donors by patting himself on the back as Israel's greatest friend in the White House, the Secretary of Defense has now made it clear that he sees the Jewish state as responsible for the isolation it faces. Equally as egregious is the fact that Howard Gutman, Obama's ambassador to Belgium, told an audience this week he thinks Israel's policy toward the Palestinians is responsible for the creation of a new kind of anti-Semitism that he believes is understandable on some level.
Panetta's speech on Friday at the Brooking Institution in Washington and Gutman's comments to a conference held by the European Jewish Union were obviously not coordinated, but they combine to give us a clear view of the distorted mindset of administration officials. This is an administration that sees Israel as a source of trouble, not an ally. Combined with the sorry history of three years of Obama's picking fights with Jerusalem, the positions of both Panetta and Gutman give the lie to the notion this is an administration friends of Israel can trust.
That the secretary of defense would choose to blast Israel in this manner just as Obama is starting to crank up his re-election campaign speaks to the cognitive dissonance many Jewish Democrats are experiencing. For Panetta to claim Israel is responsible for its own isolation just as Obama boasted of his friendship for the Jewish state shows either a lack of coordination between the Pentagon and the White House or a desire on the president's part to signal the Arab world he is prepared to put the screws to the Israelis as soon as the election is concluded.
As for Panetta's assertions, while sandwiched between some of the usual boilerplate rhetoric about supporting the alliance, they made it clear that Washington views the hardening of anti-Israel positions on the part of Turkey, Egypt and the Palestinian Authority as Israel's fault. Even more, he made it plain that the administration's belief is this rising tide of anti-Israel hate can only be dealt with by a new round of concessions on Israel's part to the Palestinians.
Israel's peace treaty with Egypt is now endangered by the victory of Islamists. Their former ally Turkey is now aligning itself with Hamas terrorists. The Palestinian Authority is about to conclude a unity pact with Hamas that will end its experiment with good government and expand the reach of the Gaza-based terrorists. These events are not the fault of Israel, but are the result of the embrace of Islamism and extremism by a Muslim world that seems to be sinking into the abyss of extremism.
But the administration looks at this and says it is the fault of the Israelis who have spent the last 18 years trying to make peace, to no avail. Rather than drawing conclusions from the Palestinians' rejection of peace and the bloodthirsty hatred for Jews at the heart of the siege of the Jewish state, Panetta believes the time is ripe for Israel to weaken its defenses and hand over more territory that may become another safe haven for terrorists, as Gaza has proved to be.
The secretary's remarks were a not-so-subtle hint that pressuring Israel is still Obama's priority. That key officials of this administration could hold onto a belief in a peace process even the so-called moderates of the Palestinian Authority have rejected speaks volumes not so much about their naivete as it does the grip of ideology on their thinking.
As for Gutman's remarks, they speak not so much to policy as to the thinking behind it. Contrary to his poorly reasoned formulation, hatred for Israel and Zionism is just a modern variant of traditional Jew-hatred, and not a different belief system that can be rationalized. Anyone who would deny Israel the same right to existence and self-defense they would grant any other country is a bigot. Palestinian suffering is real, but the hatred for the Jews and Israel in the Arab and Islamic world has little to do with policy and everything to do with prejudice.
That an American diplomat would stoop so low as to rationalize that hatred is a disgrace. While the White House sought to distance itself from Gutman's remarks, his views give those of us who have wondered about the source of the animus for Israel in this administration new insights about the advice Obama has been getting.
Taken together, these two speeches paint a portrait of a government that is at its heart hostile to the Jewish state. Only a blind partisan would think such an administration could be trusted to deal fairly with Israel once the constraints of Obama's re-election efforts are removed.
AN ADMINISTRATION READY TO BLAME ISRAEL FOR EVERYTHING … INCLUDING ANTI-SEMITISM
By Jonathan Tobin
Jewish World Review
December 5, 2011
The ground is fast sinking beneath the feet of President Obama's Jewish defenders. While the president is trying to raise money from Jewish donors by patting himself on the back as Israel's greatest friend in the White House, the Secretary of Defense has now made it clear that he sees the Jewish state as responsible for the isolation it faces. Equally as egregious is the fact that Howard Gutman, Obama's ambassador to Belgium, told an audience this week he thinks Israel's policy toward the Palestinians is responsible for the creation of a new kind of anti-Semitism that he believes is understandable on some level.
Panetta's speech on Friday at the Brooking Institution in Washington and Gutman's comments to a conference held by the European Jewish Union were obviously not coordinated, but they combine to give us a clear view of the distorted mindset of administration officials. This is an administration that sees Israel as a source of trouble, not an ally. Combined with the sorry history of three years of Obama's picking fights with Jerusalem, the positions of both Panetta and Gutman give the lie to the notion this is an administration friends of Israel can trust.
That the secretary of defense would choose to blast Israel in this manner just as Obama is starting to crank up his re-election campaign speaks to the cognitive dissonance many Jewish Democrats are experiencing. For Panetta to claim Israel is responsible for its own isolation just as Obama boasted of his friendship for the Jewish state shows either a lack of coordination between the Pentagon and the White House or a desire on the president's part to signal the Arab world he is prepared to put the screws to the Israelis as soon as the election is concluded.
As for Panetta's assertions, while sandwiched between some of the usual boilerplate rhetoric about supporting the alliance, they made it clear that Washington views the hardening of anti-Israel positions on the part of Turkey, Egypt and the Palestinian Authority as Israel's fault. Even more, he made it plain that the administration's belief is this rising tide of anti-Israel hate can only be dealt with by a new round of concessions on Israel's part to the Palestinians.
Israel's peace treaty with Egypt is now endangered by the victory of Islamists. Their former ally Turkey is now aligning itself with Hamas terrorists. The Palestinian Authority is about to conclude a unity pact with Hamas that will end its experiment with good government and expand the reach of the Gaza-based terrorists. These events are not the fault of Israel, but are the result of the embrace of Islamism and extremism by a Muslim world that seems to be sinking into the abyss of extremism.
But the administration looks at this and says it is the fault of the Israelis who have spent the last 18 years trying to make peace, to no avail. Rather than drawing conclusions from the Palestinians' rejection of peace and the bloodthirsty hatred for Jews at the heart of the siege of the Jewish state, Panetta believes the time is ripe for Israel to weaken its defenses and hand over more territory that may become another safe haven for terrorists, as Gaza has proved to be.
The secretary's remarks were a not-so-subtle hint that pressuring Israel is still Obama's priority. That key officials of this administration could hold onto a belief in a peace process even the so-called moderates of the Palestinian Authority have rejected speaks volumes not so much about their naivete as it does the grip of ideology on their thinking.
As for Gutman's remarks, they speak not so much to policy as to the thinking behind it. Contrary to his poorly reasoned formulation, hatred for Israel and Zionism is just a modern variant of traditional Jew-hatred, and not a different belief system that can be rationalized. Anyone who would deny Israel the same right to existence and self-defense they would grant any other country is a bigot. Palestinian suffering is real, but the hatred for the Jews and Israel in the Arab and Islamic world has little to do with policy and everything to do with prejudice.
That an American diplomat would stoop so low as to rationalize that hatred is a disgrace. While the White House sought to distance itself from Gutman's remarks, his views give those of us who have wondered about the source of the animus for Israel in this administration new insights about the advice Obama has been getting.
Taken together, these two speeches paint a portrait of a government that is at its heart hostile to the Jewish state. Only a blind partisan would think such an administration could be trusted to deal fairly with Israel once the constraints of Obama's re-election efforts are removed.
Monday, December 05, 2011
WILL RON PAUL REELECT OBAMA?
I have written several times in my belief that unless the economy takes another bad downturn in 2012, President Obama will be reelected to a second term.
There just isn’t a good Republican candidate to take on the president. If Mitt ‘All Sides’ Romney is the Republican candidate, he will get clobbered for the political expediency changes of his positions on global warming, abortion, immigration and gay rights, and I’m sure the media and the Obama campaign will find additional contradictory positions he has taken. And Obama will also blame the Republicans for the Congressional gridlock that is infuriating the American people.
On Sunday’s ABC This Week, a panel discussion ensued on Ron Paul’s campaign and the possibility that if he doesn’t win the Republican primary, he will run as an independent in 2012. The four panelists agreed that Paul’s supporters are passionately dedicated to his election.
George Will thinks there is a good chance that Ron Paul will run as a third party candidate and noted that he “has the infrastructure in place to reelect Obama.”
I agree with George Will. If Paul does run as a third party candidate, he will almost certainly guarantee the reelection of Obama to a second term, the state of the economy notwithstanding.
There just isn’t a good Republican candidate to take on the president. If Mitt ‘All Sides’ Romney is the Republican candidate, he will get clobbered for the political expediency changes of his positions on global warming, abortion, immigration and gay rights, and I’m sure the media and the Obama campaign will find additional contradictory positions he has taken. And Obama will also blame the Republicans for the Congressional gridlock that is infuriating the American people.
On Sunday’s ABC This Week, a panel discussion ensued on Ron Paul’s campaign and the possibility that if he doesn’t win the Republican primary, he will run as an independent in 2012. The four panelists agreed that Paul’s supporters are passionately dedicated to his election.
George Will thinks there is a good chance that Ron Paul will run as a third party candidate and noted that he “has the infrastructure in place to reelect Obama.”
I agree with George Will. If Paul does run as a third party candidate, he will almost certainly guarantee the reelection of Obama to a second term, the state of the economy notwithstanding.
HE WILL NO LONGER HAVE TO PRETEND TO TRY TO BE NICE TO PEOPLE HE DOESN'T LIKE
Barney Frank, D-Massachusetts, announced his retirement from Congress after 16 terms in office. While I’ve disagreed with many of his positions, I do believe that he was a positive force in Congress.
In announcing his retirement, Frank said that “One of the advantages to me of not running for office is I don’t even have to pretend to try to be nice to people I don’t like,”
Barney sure hit the nail on the head with that quip. I’ve always been bemused by the phoniness of Senators and House members in how polite they are to each other during TV interviews when in fact it’s obvious that they really can’t stand each other.
In announcing his retirement, Frank said that “One of the advantages to me of not running for office is I don’t even have to pretend to try to be nice to people I don’t like,”
Barney sure hit the nail on the head with that quip. I’ve always been bemused by the phoniness of Senators and House members in how polite they are to each other during TV interviews when in fact it’s obvious that they really can’t stand each other.
ANTI-SEMITISM: IF NOT THE JEWS, BLAME ISRAEL
Gutman was rewarded with his appointment as ambassador to Belgium for having been a major fund raiser for Obama’s election campaign. His statement shows that he is one of many liberal American Israel-hating Jews.
Gutman is completely wrong. The Middle Eastern and North Afreican Muslims strong hatred of Jews goes back to way before there ever was a State of Israel. And the European Jew-hating Muslims immigrated to Europe from Middle Eastern and North African countries.
JEWISH GROUPS DEMAND OBAMA ACTION OVER BELGIUM ENVOY’S ANTI-SEMITISM REMARKS
U.S. Ambassador to Belgium Howard Gutman said Muslim anti-Semitism stems from Israeli-Palestinian conflict; White House issues statement condemning all forms of anti-Semitism
By Danna Harman
Haaretz.com
December 4, 2011
Some Jewish groups and others were demanding Sunday that United States President Barak Obama take action against his ambassador to Belgium, following comments the envoy made to the effect that Israel’s political positions serve as some sort of explanation for anti-Semitism amongst Muslims.
Ambassador Howard Gutman, who is Jewish, made the controversial remarks at a conference on anti-Semitism organized by the European Jewish Union in Brussels last week.
“A distinction should be made between traditional anti-Semitism, which should be condemned, and Muslim hatred for Jews, which stems from the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians,” Gutman reportedly told those gathered, going on to argue that “…an Israeli-Palestinian peace treaty will significantly diminish Muslim anti-Semitism.”
In reaction to the comments, and the subsequent uproar they caused, the White House released a statement distancing itself from Gutman's words: "We condemn anti-Semitism in all its forms, and that there is never any justification for prejudice against the Jewish people or Israel," read the statement, which was sent out over the weekend to Jewish leaders.
But Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich joined those arguing that a verbal rebuke was not enough. "Pres Obama should fire his ambassador to Brussels for being so wrong about anti-Semitism," Gingrich tweeted on his account.
Republican Jewish Coalition Executive Director Matthew Brooks echoed these sentiments, adding that: "The linkage in the ambassador's remarks, blaming Israel for anti-Semitism, is a short step from the linkage that President Obama has expressed several times himself, that Israel is to blame for the unrest and instability in the Middle East. Both forms of linkage are fundamentally wrong.”
Gutman, a lawyer by profession, was appointed ambassador to Belgium after raising major funds for Obama’s 2008 elections campaign.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Gutman is not the only Obama administration official on the Blame Israel rant. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta deliberately ignores the oft and continuing declarations by President Abbas and other ‘moderate’ Palestinian leaders to wipe the Jewish state off the map: “There will be only one [Palestinian] state from the [Jordan] river to the [Mediterranean] sea.”
PANETTA: IT’S ISRAEL’S FAULT
By Ryan Jones
Israel Today
December 4, 2011
American Defense Secretary Leon Panetta at the weekend suggested that all of Israel's problems in the region can be traced back to its own behavior.
"Just get to the damn [negotiating] table," Panetta told Israel during a briefing at the Brookings Institute. Panetta insisted that Israel needs to be more flexible in order to "reach out and mend fences" with the Arabs, or risk facing even greater isolation.
Panetta's outburst was typical of American foreign policy when it comes to Israel in that it completely ignored the dealings of the past several years.
Panetta failed to recognize that it was Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who had been waiting at the negotiating table all along, and publicly urging Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas to join him. For the past two years, Abbas has been explicitly refusing to negotiate with Israel until the Jewish state met preconditions that were never part of currently signed peace deals.
Panetta's claim that Israel should make risky political gestures even if the Arabs are not sincere in order to unmask its enemies similarly displayed a very short-term memory.
"If the gestures are rebuked, the world will see those rebukes for what they are, and Israel's moral standing will grow even higher," Panetta said, presumably in all seriousness.
Of course, that is precisely what Israel was told before it uprooted 10,000 Jews from the Gaza Strip, before it handed over the ancient Jewish capital of Hebron and before it signed a peace agreement with terrorist mass-murderer Yasser Arafat. Ongoing anti-Israel terrorism and incitement following all of those gestures failed to win Israel any moral standing in the eyes of the international community.
Continuing the emulation of his predecessors, Panetta finished by warning that Israel would increasingly find itself all alone if it did not heed his advice. "We have seen Israel's isolation from its traditional security partners in the region grow," said Panetta.
It's almost as though each successive American administration does a foreign policy reset, and totally wipes its memory of anything that happened before it was elected. Otherwise, how could Panetta claim with a straight face that Israel has any "traditional" security partners in the region?
Sure, Egypt and Jordan have for years been at peace with Israel, and even cooperated to some small degree in security matters. But neither is a "traditional" security partner. In fact, until just a few decades ago, Egypt was the country that most often went to war against Israel, with Jordan not far behind. While regrettable, a return to that situation would not be something new, and certainly would not be the result of any adjustment in Israel's behavior.
Unfortunately, Panetta's failed attempt at reading the Israeli-Arab situation received far less coverage than it should after being overshadowed by another Obama Administration appointee blaming the Jews for Muslim anti-Semitism.
Speaking at a conference of European Jewish leaders in Brussels on Wednesday, US Ambassador to Belgium Howard Gutman said there should be a distinction between traditional anti-Semitism and Muslim hatred for the Jews, as the latter is the direct (apparently legitimate) result of the ongoing Israeli conflict with the Palestinians.
Gutman was taken to task by several of the speakers who followed him, and many American Jewish leaders called for his removal.
Gutman is completely wrong. The Middle Eastern and North Afreican Muslims strong hatred of Jews goes back to way before there ever was a State of Israel. And the European Jew-hating Muslims immigrated to Europe from Middle Eastern and North African countries.
JEWISH GROUPS DEMAND OBAMA ACTION OVER BELGIUM ENVOY’S ANTI-SEMITISM REMARKS
U.S. Ambassador to Belgium Howard Gutman said Muslim anti-Semitism stems from Israeli-Palestinian conflict; White House issues statement condemning all forms of anti-Semitism
By Danna Harman
Haaretz.com
December 4, 2011
Some Jewish groups and others were demanding Sunday that United States President Barak Obama take action against his ambassador to Belgium, following comments the envoy made to the effect that Israel’s political positions serve as some sort of explanation for anti-Semitism amongst Muslims.
Ambassador Howard Gutman, who is Jewish, made the controversial remarks at a conference on anti-Semitism organized by the European Jewish Union in Brussels last week.
“A distinction should be made between traditional anti-Semitism, which should be condemned, and Muslim hatred for Jews, which stems from the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians,” Gutman reportedly told those gathered, going on to argue that “…an Israeli-Palestinian peace treaty will significantly diminish Muslim anti-Semitism.”
In reaction to the comments, and the subsequent uproar they caused, the White House released a statement distancing itself from Gutman's words: "We condemn anti-Semitism in all its forms, and that there is never any justification for prejudice against the Jewish people or Israel," read the statement, which was sent out over the weekend to Jewish leaders.
But Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich joined those arguing that a verbal rebuke was not enough. "Pres Obama should fire his ambassador to Brussels for being so wrong about anti-Semitism," Gingrich tweeted on his account.
Republican Jewish Coalition Executive Director Matthew Brooks echoed these sentiments, adding that: "The linkage in the ambassador's remarks, blaming Israel for anti-Semitism, is a short step from the linkage that President Obama has expressed several times himself, that Israel is to blame for the unrest and instability in the Middle East. Both forms of linkage are fundamentally wrong.”
Gutman, a lawyer by profession, was appointed ambassador to Belgium after raising major funds for Obama’s 2008 elections campaign.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Gutman is not the only Obama administration official on the Blame Israel rant. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta deliberately ignores the oft and continuing declarations by President Abbas and other ‘moderate’ Palestinian leaders to wipe the Jewish state off the map: “There will be only one [Palestinian] state from the [Jordan] river to the [Mediterranean] sea.”
PANETTA: IT’S ISRAEL’S FAULT
By Ryan Jones
Israel Today
December 4, 2011
American Defense Secretary Leon Panetta at the weekend suggested that all of Israel's problems in the region can be traced back to its own behavior.
"Just get to the damn [negotiating] table," Panetta told Israel during a briefing at the Brookings Institute. Panetta insisted that Israel needs to be more flexible in order to "reach out and mend fences" with the Arabs, or risk facing even greater isolation.
Panetta's outburst was typical of American foreign policy when it comes to Israel in that it completely ignored the dealings of the past several years.
Panetta failed to recognize that it was Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who had been waiting at the negotiating table all along, and publicly urging Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas to join him. For the past two years, Abbas has been explicitly refusing to negotiate with Israel until the Jewish state met preconditions that were never part of currently signed peace deals.
Panetta's claim that Israel should make risky political gestures even if the Arabs are not sincere in order to unmask its enemies similarly displayed a very short-term memory.
"If the gestures are rebuked, the world will see those rebukes for what they are, and Israel's moral standing will grow even higher," Panetta said, presumably in all seriousness.
Of course, that is precisely what Israel was told before it uprooted 10,000 Jews from the Gaza Strip, before it handed over the ancient Jewish capital of Hebron and before it signed a peace agreement with terrorist mass-murderer Yasser Arafat. Ongoing anti-Israel terrorism and incitement following all of those gestures failed to win Israel any moral standing in the eyes of the international community.
Continuing the emulation of his predecessors, Panetta finished by warning that Israel would increasingly find itself all alone if it did not heed his advice. "We have seen Israel's isolation from its traditional security partners in the region grow," said Panetta.
It's almost as though each successive American administration does a foreign policy reset, and totally wipes its memory of anything that happened before it was elected. Otherwise, how could Panetta claim with a straight face that Israel has any "traditional" security partners in the region?
Sure, Egypt and Jordan have for years been at peace with Israel, and even cooperated to some small degree in security matters. But neither is a "traditional" security partner. In fact, until just a few decades ago, Egypt was the country that most often went to war against Israel, with Jordan not far behind. While regrettable, a return to that situation would not be something new, and certainly would not be the result of any adjustment in Israel's behavior.
Unfortunately, Panetta's failed attempt at reading the Israeli-Arab situation received far less coverage than it should after being overshadowed by another Obama Administration appointee blaming the Jews for Muslim anti-Semitism.
Speaking at a conference of European Jewish leaders in Brussels on Wednesday, US Ambassador to Belgium Howard Gutman said there should be a distinction between traditional anti-Semitism and Muslim hatred for the Jews, as the latter is the direct (apparently legitimate) result of the ongoing Israeli conflict with the Palestinians.
Gutman was taken to task by several of the speakers who followed him, and many American Jewish leaders called for his removal.
FROM 9-9-9 TO NEIN, NEIN, NEIN
Editorial / The Schalotte / December 5, 2011
Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain went from telling us about ‘9-9-9’, his oversimplified solution to our economic woes, to telling us and his wife Gloria, ‘Nein, Nein, Nein’ when responding to allegations of sexual harassment and a longtime affair.
Was Cain telling the truth when he called his accusers liars for claiming that he sexually harassed them? He could be telling the truth here because sexual harassment is sometimes seen in the eye of the beholder. The publisher of The Schalotte was once accused of sexual harassment for having a Rigid tools girlie calendar hanging on the wall of his office.
Was he telling the truth when he denied business woman Ginger White’s allegation that she had a 13-year-long affair with Cain? In this case, The Schalotte believes Herman is a liar!
White has publicly stated that her relationship with Cain “wasn’t a love affair, it was a sexual affair.” Cain denies having had a sexual affair with White while admitting that he knew her, but only as a friend.
But here is why the Schalotte believes he is lying. Cain also admitted that he gave White money from time to time to help his financially troubled ‘friend.’ Come on now, does anyone in their right mind really believe that Herman gave his friend money purely out of the kindness of his heart, and that was all there was to it? Not likely.
Maybe, and that’s a big maybe, he was able to persuade his wife that was all there was to it. But the American people should be offended that Herman would think they were so stupid as to believe he gave some woman money off and on for 13 years without obtaining sexual favors in return. Even an Orangutan wouldn’t believe that.
Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain went from telling us about ‘9-9-9’, his oversimplified solution to our economic woes, to telling us and his wife Gloria, ‘Nein, Nein, Nein’ when responding to allegations of sexual harassment and a longtime affair.
Was Cain telling the truth when he called his accusers liars for claiming that he sexually harassed them? He could be telling the truth here because sexual harassment is sometimes seen in the eye of the beholder. The publisher of The Schalotte was once accused of sexual harassment for having a Rigid tools girlie calendar hanging on the wall of his office.
Was he telling the truth when he denied business woman Ginger White’s allegation that she had a 13-year-long affair with Cain? In this case, The Schalotte believes Herman is a liar!
White has publicly stated that her relationship with Cain “wasn’t a love affair, it was a sexual affair.” Cain denies having had a sexual affair with White while admitting that he knew her, but only as a friend.
But here is why the Schalotte believes he is lying. Cain also admitted that he gave White money from time to time to help his financially troubled ‘friend.’ Come on now, does anyone in their right mind really believe that Herman gave his friend money purely out of the kindness of his heart, and that was all there was to it? Not likely.
Maybe, and that’s a big maybe, he was able to persuade his wife that was all there was to it. But the American people should be offended that Herman would think they were so stupid as to believe he gave some woman money off and on for 13 years without obtaining sexual favors in return. Even an Orangutan wouldn’t believe that.
Sunday, December 04, 2011
DO-GOODERS BUSTED FOR SCAM THAT PREYED ON PEOPLE IN NEED
Did they use the group they founded as a cover for the scam they were committing?
ANTI-VIOLENCE GROUP LEADERS FACE CHARGES
State prosecutors allege trio ran foreclosure scam
By Jordan Guinn
The Stockton Record
December 2, 2011
SACRAMENTO - Three women coordinating an anti-gang violence movement in Stockton have been arrested in an alleged foreclosure scam, according to the state attorney general.
Magdalena Salas, 42, Angelina Mireles, 42, and Julissa Garcia, 36, who started Mothers Against Violence earlier this month, were arrested Thursday on suspicion of conspiracy, grand theft and false advertising.
The three are the top officials of a Stockton real estate company authorities allege took thousands of dollars in up-front loan modification fees and made false promises to lower the mortgage payments of homeowners in the Central Valley.
Former Stockton Councilman Ralph White, who attended Mothers Against Violence's Nov. 22 afternoon rally, said the arrest does not diminish the women's intention to reduce gang violence in the city.
"Their effort to stop violence is real; I don't care who it is, I support those who want to stop the killing," he said.
White added that complaints against people offering to help modify home loans or avoid foreclosure are common throughout the country.
An official who investigated Legacy Home Loans and Real Estate said the trio preyed on people in need.
"This operation was nothing more than a scam," Christy Romero, Deputy Special Inspector General for the Office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, said in a prepared statement. "Salas, Mireles, and Garcia lined their pockets with up-front fees while making false promises to homeowners of lowering their mortgage payments."
Garcia, Mireles and Salas took upfront fees of $5,000 from dozens of homeowners in the area for loan modification services that were never performed, according to the Attorney General's Office.
The allegations stem from incidents from November, 2009, to August, in which the company issued fliers in English and Spanish promising to save homes and lower mortgage payments, authorities said.
All three are being held in the San Joaquin County Jail on $100,00 bonds.
ANTI-VIOLENCE GROUP LEADERS FACE CHARGES
State prosecutors allege trio ran foreclosure scam
By Jordan Guinn
The Stockton Record
December 2, 2011
SACRAMENTO - Three women coordinating an anti-gang violence movement in Stockton have been arrested in an alleged foreclosure scam, according to the state attorney general.
Magdalena Salas, 42, Angelina Mireles, 42, and Julissa Garcia, 36, who started Mothers Against Violence earlier this month, were arrested Thursday on suspicion of conspiracy, grand theft and false advertising.
The three are the top officials of a Stockton real estate company authorities allege took thousands of dollars in up-front loan modification fees and made false promises to lower the mortgage payments of homeowners in the Central Valley.
Former Stockton Councilman Ralph White, who attended Mothers Against Violence's Nov. 22 afternoon rally, said the arrest does not diminish the women's intention to reduce gang violence in the city.
"Their effort to stop violence is real; I don't care who it is, I support those who want to stop the killing," he said.
White added that complaints against people offering to help modify home loans or avoid foreclosure are common throughout the country.
An official who investigated Legacy Home Loans and Real Estate said the trio preyed on people in need.
"This operation was nothing more than a scam," Christy Romero, Deputy Special Inspector General for the Office of the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, said in a prepared statement. "Salas, Mireles, and Garcia lined their pockets with up-front fees while making false promises to homeowners of lowering their mortgage payments."
Garcia, Mireles and Salas took upfront fees of $5,000 from dozens of homeowners in the area for loan modification services that were never performed, according to the Attorney General's Office.
The allegations stem from incidents from November, 2009, to August, in which the company issued fliers in English and Spanish promising to save homes and lower mortgage payments, authorities said.
All three are being held in the San Joaquin County Jail on $100,00 bonds.
AN EXAMPLE OF WHY OUR SCHOOLS ARE FAILING
Busted for burping? Had he farted instead, they probably would have called in the FBI and had the kid charged with committing an act of terrorism.
When we have teachers who react to a student’s burp like this one did, then our schools are up the creek without a paddle.
STUDENT ARRESTED FOR BURPING DURING CLASS
abc NEWS
December 2, 2011
A 13-year-old student in Albuquerque, N.M., was allegedly arrested for burping during class.
According to his lawsuit, after he “burped audibly” his teacher called the school resource officer, who in turn called the authorities to have him arrested for “interfering with public education.”
“They are using petty misdemeanor charges to arrest children in New Mexico,” said Shannon Kennedy, the boy’s attorney.
A seventh-grader at Cleveland Middle school, he names his teacher, principal and a police officer in his civil rights lawsuit.
The lawsuit also claims that school authorities transported the boy from the school to the detention facility without notifying his parents.
Additionally, it describes an incident that took place in early November in which the same boy was allegedly strip searched on suspicion of selling marijuana. He was never charged.
According to Kennedy, after a minor is booked at the juvenile detention center for a nonviolent offense, a referral is sent to the Juvenile Justice Department for a counseling appointment. She says the arrest was unnecessary because the referral to the Justice Department could have been faxed directly from the school resource officer. The student did not need to be subjected to the traumatizing booking process.
The same day this lawsuit was filed, a similar suit was filed on behalf of a 7-year-old autistic boy alleging he was hand cuffed to a chair for acting out.
Last year Kennedy said she settled a class action against the City of Albuquerque Police Department for arresting children for nonviolent crimes.
“This suit was started by a girl who was arrested for not wanting to sit next to the stinky boy in class. We settled the damages claims for a confidential amount that is sealed,” said Kennedy.
A spokesman for Albuquerque Public Schools said they would not comment on pending litigation.
When we have teachers who react to a student’s burp like this one did, then our schools are up the creek without a paddle.
STUDENT ARRESTED FOR BURPING DURING CLASS
abc NEWS
December 2, 2011
A 13-year-old student in Albuquerque, N.M., was allegedly arrested for burping during class.
According to his lawsuit, after he “burped audibly” his teacher called the school resource officer, who in turn called the authorities to have him arrested for “interfering with public education.”
“They are using petty misdemeanor charges to arrest children in New Mexico,” said Shannon Kennedy, the boy’s attorney.
A seventh-grader at Cleveland Middle school, he names his teacher, principal and a police officer in his civil rights lawsuit.
The lawsuit also claims that school authorities transported the boy from the school to the detention facility without notifying his parents.
Additionally, it describes an incident that took place in early November in which the same boy was allegedly strip searched on suspicion of selling marijuana. He was never charged.
According to Kennedy, after a minor is booked at the juvenile detention center for a nonviolent offense, a referral is sent to the Juvenile Justice Department for a counseling appointment. She says the arrest was unnecessary because the referral to the Justice Department could have been faxed directly from the school resource officer. The student did not need to be subjected to the traumatizing booking process.
The same day this lawsuit was filed, a similar suit was filed on behalf of a 7-year-old autistic boy alleging he was hand cuffed to a chair for acting out.
Last year Kennedy said she settled a class action against the City of Albuquerque Police Department for arresting children for nonviolent crimes.
“This suit was started by a girl who was arrested for not wanting to sit next to the stinky boy in class. We settled the damages claims for a confidential amount that is sealed,” said Kennedy.
A spokesman for Albuquerque Public Schools said they would not comment on pending litigation.
Z-40: 'NOT THE ARMY, NOT THE MARINES NOR THE SECURITY AND ANTI-DRUG AGENCIES OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CAN RESIST US'
From Borderland Beat:
ZETAS ISSUE OPEN CHALLENGE TO U.S. AND MEXICO GOVERNMENTS
By Andrew O'Reilly
Fox News Latino
December 2, 2011
Mexico's ultra-violent Zetas drug cartel released a communique challenging Mexico and the United States.
"Message to the nation, the government, and all of Mexico and to public opinion: The special forces of Los Zetas challenges the government of Mexico and its federal forces," said the communique, which was signed by Zetas leader Miguel Angel Treviño Morales, also known as Z-40.
The Zetas were formed in 1999 Heriberto Lazcano Lazcano, known as "El Lazca," who along with three other soldiers deserted an elite special operations unit within the Mexican army to become the armed wing of the Gulf drug cartel.
The Zetas are now one of the most violent and powerful cartels operating in Mexico. The former paramilitary group is considered to be one of two dominant cartels in Mexico, along with JoaquÃn "El Chapo" Guzmán's Sinaloa cartel.
The group is believed to be responsible for the attack on a casino in Monterrey earlier this year that left 52 people dead.
"Not the Army, not the Marines nor the security and anti-drug agencies of the United States government can resist us. Mexico lives and will continue under the regime of Los Zetas," the communique went on to state.
While most of the violence related to the Zetas has remained in Mexico, the group has made headway into the U.S. with recent attacks and the capture of cartel members highlighting this infiltration. Last month, a botched drug bust outside of Houston left a U.S. secret operative dead and a sheriff's deputy injured after Zetas gunmen surprised the operation.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents also deported last week Donis Ruiz a suspected Zetas member wanted for kidnappings in Mexico.
"Let it be clear that we are in control here and although the federal government controls other cartels, they cannot take our plazas. You want proof?" the communique asked. "Look at what happened in Sinaloa and Guadalajara. If we can get all the way into their kitchen we are not going to lose control of our territory."
The Zetas are considered the second most powerful cartel in Mexico behind Guzmán's Sinaloa cartel, with one or the other group present in almost every Mexican state.As they battle for lucrative smuggling routes, the two cartels have recently ramped up attacks on one another.
Back in September in the Gulf coast city of Veracruz, Mexican authorities discovered the bound and tortured bodies of 35 alleged Zetas members dumped by the Sinaloa cartel onto a main thoroughfare in the city. In May, over two dozen people, most of them Zetas, were killed as they attempted to infiltrate the Sinaloa cartel's territory in the state of Nayarit.
Since President Felipe Calderón declared war on the country's drug cartels shortly after taking office in 2006, an estimated 35,000 to 40,000 people have been killed in Mexico's ensuring violence.
ZETAS ISSUE OPEN CHALLENGE TO U.S. AND MEXICO GOVERNMENTS
By Andrew O'Reilly
Fox News Latino
December 2, 2011
Mexico's ultra-violent Zetas drug cartel released a communique challenging Mexico and the United States.
"Message to the nation, the government, and all of Mexico and to public opinion: The special forces of Los Zetas challenges the government of Mexico and its federal forces," said the communique, which was signed by Zetas leader Miguel Angel Treviño Morales, also known as Z-40.
The Zetas were formed in 1999 Heriberto Lazcano Lazcano, known as "El Lazca," who along with three other soldiers deserted an elite special operations unit within the Mexican army to become the armed wing of the Gulf drug cartel.
The Zetas are now one of the most violent and powerful cartels operating in Mexico. The former paramilitary group is considered to be one of two dominant cartels in Mexico, along with JoaquÃn "El Chapo" Guzmán's Sinaloa cartel.
The group is believed to be responsible for the attack on a casino in Monterrey earlier this year that left 52 people dead.
"Not the Army, not the Marines nor the security and anti-drug agencies of the United States government can resist us. Mexico lives and will continue under the regime of Los Zetas," the communique went on to state.
While most of the violence related to the Zetas has remained in Mexico, the group has made headway into the U.S. with recent attacks and the capture of cartel members highlighting this infiltration. Last month, a botched drug bust outside of Houston left a U.S. secret operative dead and a sheriff's deputy injured after Zetas gunmen surprised the operation.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents also deported last week Donis Ruiz a suspected Zetas member wanted for kidnappings in Mexico.
"Let it be clear that we are in control here and although the federal government controls other cartels, they cannot take our plazas. You want proof?" the communique asked. "Look at what happened in Sinaloa and Guadalajara. If we can get all the way into their kitchen we are not going to lose control of our territory."
The Zetas are considered the second most powerful cartel in Mexico behind Guzmán's Sinaloa cartel, with one or the other group present in almost every Mexican state.As they battle for lucrative smuggling routes, the two cartels have recently ramped up attacks on one another.
Back in September in the Gulf coast city of Veracruz, Mexican authorities discovered the bound and tortured bodies of 35 alleged Zetas members dumped by the Sinaloa cartel onto a main thoroughfare in the city. In May, over two dozen people, most of them Zetas, were killed as they attempted to infiltrate the Sinaloa cartel's territory in the state of Nayarit.
Since President Felipe Calderón declared war on the country's drug cartels shortly after taking office in 2006, an estimated 35,000 to 40,000 people have been killed in Mexico's ensuring violence.
Saturday, December 03, 2011
THE DEA SHOULD NOT RECLASSIFY MARIJUANA
In order to accommodate the medical marijuana laws enacted by 16 states, Governors Chris Gregoire of Washington and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island have called on DEA Administrator Michele M. Leonhart to reclassify Marijuana from a Schedule I drug to a Schedule II drug. I hope that Ms. Leonhart rejects their request, sticks to her guns and maintains Marijuana as a Schedule I drug.
The use of marijuana for medical purposes is controversial and even though the American Medical Association has been conned into approving it for glaucoma, cancer and AIDS patients, many physicians know better and refuse to prescribe it. I am sure that getting stoned on pot does alleviate the suffering of glaucoma, cancer and AIDS patients, but so will a good dose of Jack Daniel’s or Jim Beam.
The medical marijuana laws are a fraud perpetrated by those who expected to get rich and are getting filthy rich off the growing and distribution of ‘medical’ pot. The legalization of marijuana for medical purposes has been perverted into a de facto legalization of pot in California, Colorado and other states.
It is a sad indictment of the medical profession when almost anyone can walk into many a California doctor’s office and obtain a marijuana prescription for headaches, backaches, hair loss, erectile dysfunction, premature ejaculation, depression, ingrown toenails, constipation, diarrhea, irritable bowel, hemorrhoids, and you name it. Those doctors are also getting rich while knowing that their ‘patients’ are faking it.
In a letter last July, DEA Administrator Leonhart declared that marijuana "has a high potential for abuse," "has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States" and "lacks accepted safety for use under medical supervision." The letter and 37 pages of supporting documents were published in the Federal Register.
Marijuana should remain a Schedule I drug. It is the gateway drug to heroin, cocaine, meth and other dangerous drugs. I am sure that drivers stoned on pot are killing many innocent drivers on our nation’s roadways and highways. The use of pot can have many other debilitating effects on chronic users.
The medical marijuana laws violate the federal laws against the possession, manufacture and distribution of pot. I hope the DEA goes after the for-profit growers of ‘medical’ marijuana and the operators of pot dispensaries of which there are almost 400 in Los Angeles alone.
The use of marijuana for medical purposes is controversial and even though the American Medical Association has been conned into approving it for glaucoma, cancer and AIDS patients, many physicians know better and refuse to prescribe it. I am sure that getting stoned on pot does alleviate the suffering of glaucoma, cancer and AIDS patients, but so will a good dose of Jack Daniel’s or Jim Beam.
The medical marijuana laws are a fraud perpetrated by those who expected to get rich and are getting filthy rich off the growing and distribution of ‘medical’ pot. The legalization of marijuana for medical purposes has been perverted into a de facto legalization of pot in California, Colorado and other states.
It is a sad indictment of the medical profession when almost anyone can walk into many a California doctor’s office and obtain a marijuana prescription for headaches, backaches, hair loss, erectile dysfunction, premature ejaculation, depression, ingrown toenails, constipation, diarrhea, irritable bowel, hemorrhoids, and you name it. Those doctors are also getting rich while knowing that their ‘patients’ are faking it.
In a letter last July, DEA Administrator Leonhart declared that marijuana "has a high potential for abuse," "has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States" and "lacks accepted safety for use under medical supervision." The letter and 37 pages of supporting documents were published in the Federal Register.
Marijuana should remain a Schedule I drug. It is the gateway drug to heroin, cocaine, meth and other dangerous drugs. I am sure that drivers stoned on pot are killing many innocent drivers on our nation’s roadways and highways. The use of pot can have many other debilitating effects on chronic users.
The medical marijuana laws violate the federal laws against the possession, manufacture and distribution of pot. I hope the DEA goes after the for-profit growers of ‘medical’ marijuana and the operators of pot dispensaries of which there are almost 400 in Los Angeles alone.
COMPETITION FOR THE DRUG CARTELS
Maybe the Zetas will close the pot dispensaries if the DEA doesn’t.
372 MEDICAL MARIJUANA SHOPS FILE L.A. BUSINESS TAX PAPERWORK
LAPPL NewsWatch
December 2, 2011
Los Angeles is home to more medical marijuana shops than any other city. That much is certain. And more are still opening. But how many there are is usually a guessing game. Now, however, the city has a new number: 372. That's how many filed forms with the city's office of finance by the Oct. 31 deadline in preparation for paying the new pot tax.
372 MEDICAL MARIJUANA SHOPS FILE L.A. BUSINESS TAX PAPERWORK
LAPPL NewsWatch
December 2, 2011
Los Angeles is home to more medical marijuana shops than any other city. That much is certain. And more are still opening. But how many there are is usually a guessing game. Now, however, the city has a new number: 372. That's how many filed forms with the city's office of finance by the Oct. 31 deadline in preparation for paying the new pot tax.
PRIVATIZATION AS CRIME?
Peacemaking is an interesting blog published by Harold E. Pepinsky, PhD, Professor Emeritus (Criminology), University of Indiana. While I disagree with much of what Dr. Pepinsky says in this post, I do agree that in some cases the selling off of state assets does not serve the public well.
My state of Texas is cash-strapped like all the other states and is trying to sell off some public lands to private developers. I think that the sale of public lands for private development is a really bad idea, but other sales of some state assets may well be justified.
As for class warfare, it needs to be vilified because it is simply playing the have-nots against the haves for political purposes while doing really nothing to help the less fortunate in this country.
THE MOVEMENT TO PRIVATIZE
By Hal Pepinsky
Peacemaking
December 2, 2011
The movement to sell off state assets to for-profit corporations at bargain basement prices took hold when Margaret Thatcher became British prime minister in 1979. I ask my criminological self how to label this privatization movement, and I call it criminal in its real world effects.
From my own Anglo legal tradition, this movement constitutes organized robbery of state resources. That is, politicians force sale of public assets with threats that unless public services are sold to private investors, no one will feed and satiate the political appetite of youth who compete for jobs with their elders. And so prevailing politicians from Ms. Thatcher forward have accelerated global ripoffs of state services.
When I lived in Magomeni Makuti on the outskirts of Tanzania’s Dar es Salaam in 1990, young girls walked community streets during the day because their families could not afford the school uniforms required by the International Monetary Fund to secure IMF loans. Now in my country and in Europe in particular, financial “technocrats” are requiring Greeks and Spaniards and Italians and Portuguese and Irish to sell off state assets and workers to whatever private corporate bidder comes along to reduce this or that national debt. What a racket!
I don’t believe in personal blame or punishment. How many of us who can afford it invest in Wall Street to pay for our retirement? Privatization is steeped in innocence and “best evidence” of how to achieve “stability” in our ever-changing world. Still, privatization is a crime.
“Socialism” and “class warfare” have been politically vilified in my country since before Karl Marx started writing. During the Cold War in my country politicians pointed to the Soviet Union as a drab and intrusive alternative to “neoliberalism.” Now when in my part of the world public sector workers are singled out for privatization (as in public schooling), I seek appreciation of public ownership of social assets.
My state of Texas is cash-strapped like all the other states and is trying to sell off some public lands to private developers. I think that the sale of public lands for private development is a really bad idea, but other sales of some state assets may well be justified.
As for class warfare, it needs to be vilified because it is simply playing the have-nots against the haves for political purposes while doing really nothing to help the less fortunate in this country.
THE MOVEMENT TO PRIVATIZE
By Hal Pepinsky
Peacemaking
December 2, 2011
The movement to sell off state assets to for-profit corporations at bargain basement prices took hold when Margaret Thatcher became British prime minister in 1979. I ask my criminological self how to label this privatization movement, and I call it criminal in its real world effects.
From my own Anglo legal tradition, this movement constitutes organized robbery of state resources. That is, politicians force sale of public assets with threats that unless public services are sold to private investors, no one will feed and satiate the political appetite of youth who compete for jobs with their elders. And so prevailing politicians from Ms. Thatcher forward have accelerated global ripoffs of state services.
When I lived in Magomeni Makuti on the outskirts of Tanzania’s Dar es Salaam in 1990, young girls walked community streets during the day because their families could not afford the school uniforms required by the International Monetary Fund to secure IMF loans. Now in my country and in Europe in particular, financial “technocrats” are requiring Greeks and Spaniards and Italians and Portuguese and Irish to sell off state assets and workers to whatever private corporate bidder comes along to reduce this or that national debt. What a racket!
I don’t believe in personal blame or punishment. How many of us who can afford it invest in Wall Street to pay for our retirement? Privatization is steeped in innocence and “best evidence” of how to achieve “stability” in our ever-changing world. Still, privatization is a crime.
“Socialism” and “class warfare” have been politically vilified in my country since before Karl Marx started writing. During the Cold War in my country politicians pointed to the Soviet Union as a drab and intrusive alternative to “neoliberalism.” Now when in my part of the world public sector workers are singled out for privatization (as in public schooling), I seek appreciation of public ownership of social assets.
EXCRETORY ETIQUETTE
Attention men: When you whip it out, don’t aim that yellow stream in the direction of Mecca!
LATRINE DIRECTIVE ANOTHER STEP ON PATH TO ISLAMIFICATION
By Diana West
Jewish World Review
December 2, 2011
Having written countless columns and blog posts arguing that the see-no-Islam counterinsurgency strategy (COIN) has led to failure in two wars in the umma (Muslim world) and the dhimmification of the U.S. military, it's almost funny to see the debate more or less officially joined over my recent column on what appears to be simply the gross-out, PG-13 movie topic of peeing toward Mecca. Or, rather, not peeing toward Mecca.
The latter is the lesson that an Afghan Muslim contractor has been teaching Marines before they deploy to Afghanistan, in accordance with an Islamic canonical hadith called "The Prohibition of Facing the Qiblah When Relieving Oneself." But maybe the debate had to take this excretory turn with the Pentagon awash in the phony fundamentals of Greg Mortenson's discredited "Three Cups of Tea."
Scatological or not, what we are talking about here is an untenable invasion of privacy of American citizens in uniform via religious dictate as taught by the U.S. Marine Corps.
The Nov. 28 print edition of Marine Corps Times carries both an article and a lead editorial on what the paper is politely calling "excretory etiquette" regarding Marines and Mecca -- which, incidentally, is about 2,000 miles from Afghanistan. But this isn't just about etiquette. Given its Islamic religious derivation, the Marines' excretory instruction strikes me as a violation of religious freedom. Who is the U.S. Marine Corps to instruct American citizens to bring their personal hygiene practices into accord with Islamic law? The Corps in this case is acting as a vehicle of Islamic law, which comprehensively rules on all manner of personal habits, as well as on civil and legal affairs.
Needless to say, the Marine Corps doesn't see it that way. Its spokesmen have contended narrowly that this lesson taught by a contractor (hired by the Corps) isn't "formal Marine Corps doctrine," as the Marine Corps Times editorial puts it. Formal or not, the editors also don't think this Marine Shariah (Islamic law) is a bad idea. Headlined "Respect differences," the editorial states: "Thing is, there's value to this sort of insight." Perhaps in the name of respecting "differences"?
Heavens, no. This is all about respecting Islam, not "differences." After all, if it were about "differences," the respect in question would extend to the non-Islamic belief that not all bodily functions taking place on planet Earth must key off the location of a town in Saudi Arabia. To each his own.
That's not the editorial's subject. The value, it says, comes "in light of the tense conditions under which both groups must coexist."
Tense conditions -- as in border firefights? Roadside bombs? No, again. The editorial refers to tensions between Muslims and infidels inside the wire. "Consider that in the last four years," the editorial continues, "nearly 60 coalition troops have been killed by their Afghan counterparts."
So "respecting differences" here means pee straight or die. That's the lesson the military wants to teach young Americans heading into the war zone -- again, inside the wire. The only way it knows to increase their safety while on their own bases or when "partnering" with Afghans is to school them in the practice of Islamic law. In effect, then, collaboration with the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan requires the United States of America to Islamify its infidel forces, just a little, just to keep those religious crazies in the Afghan ranks from popping off.
More guidelines for U.S. forces: "If you must pass a man praying, pass at a respectful distance. Do not walk between a man praying and Mecca -- always walk behind him. ... Do not touch Qurans or prayer rugs." To be fair to the Marines, those rules come from the Center for Army Lessons Learned. But it's all of a Pentagon piece. And guess where such "safety" education -- the dhimmi rules of Shariah -- will be taught next?
I bet it would surprise the brass at the Pentagon to learn that Islam means "submission," and that the age-old choice Islam has offered infidels is to submit or die. Still, they seem to have learned, as the editorial puts it, that "certain behavior that wouldn't get a second look stateside could lead to problems at a patrol base in Helmand province."
"Problems." What a way to invoke shootings of our people by Afghan forces -- the spurting, flaring jihad none dares name. "Counseling Marines to aim east ultimately may head off trouble," the editorial concludes. Submission always does.
LATRINE DIRECTIVE ANOTHER STEP ON PATH TO ISLAMIFICATION
By Diana West
Jewish World Review
December 2, 2011
Having written countless columns and blog posts arguing that the see-no-Islam counterinsurgency strategy (COIN) has led to failure in two wars in the umma (Muslim world) and the dhimmification of the U.S. military, it's almost funny to see the debate more or less officially joined over my recent column on what appears to be simply the gross-out, PG-13 movie topic of peeing toward Mecca. Or, rather, not peeing toward Mecca.
The latter is the lesson that an Afghan Muslim contractor has been teaching Marines before they deploy to Afghanistan, in accordance with an Islamic canonical hadith called "The Prohibition of Facing the Qiblah When Relieving Oneself." But maybe the debate had to take this excretory turn with the Pentagon awash in the phony fundamentals of Greg Mortenson's discredited "Three Cups of Tea."
Scatological or not, what we are talking about here is an untenable invasion of privacy of American citizens in uniform via religious dictate as taught by the U.S. Marine Corps.
The Nov. 28 print edition of Marine Corps Times carries both an article and a lead editorial on what the paper is politely calling "excretory etiquette" regarding Marines and Mecca -- which, incidentally, is about 2,000 miles from Afghanistan. But this isn't just about etiquette. Given its Islamic religious derivation, the Marines' excretory instruction strikes me as a violation of religious freedom. Who is the U.S. Marine Corps to instruct American citizens to bring their personal hygiene practices into accord with Islamic law? The Corps in this case is acting as a vehicle of Islamic law, which comprehensively rules on all manner of personal habits, as well as on civil and legal affairs.
Needless to say, the Marine Corps doesn't see it that way. Its spokesmen have contended narrowly that this lesson taught by a contractor (hired by the Corps) isn't "formal Marine Corps doctrine," as the Marine Corps Times editorial puts it. Formal or not, the editors also don't think this Marine Shariah (Islamic law) is a bad idea. Headlined "Respect differences," the editorial states: "Thing is, there's value to this sort of insight." Perhaps in the name of respecting "differences"?
Heavens, no. This is all about respecting Islam, not "differences." After all, if it were about "differences," the respect in question would extend to the non-Islamic belief that not all bodily functions taking place on planet Earth must key off the location of a town in Saudi Arabia. To each his own.
That's not the editorial's subject. The value, it says, comes "in light of the tense conditions under which both groups must coexist."
Tense conditions -- as in border firefights? Roadside bombs? No, again. The editorial refers to tensions between Muslims and infidels inside the wire. "Consider that in the last four years," the editorial continues, "nearly 60 coalition troops have been killed by their Afghan counterparts."
So "respecting differences" here means pee straight or die. That's the lesson the military wants to teach young Americans heading into the war zone -- again, inside the wire. The only way it knows to increase their safety while on their own bases or when "partnering" with Afghans is to school them in the practice of Islamic law. In effect, then, collaboration with the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan requires the United States of America to Islamify its infidel forces, just a little, just to keep those religious crazies in the Afghan ranks from popping off.
More guidelines for U.S. forces: "If you must pass a man praying, pass at a respectful distance. Do not walk between a man praying and Mecca -- always walk behind him. ... Do not touch Qurans or prayer rugs." To be fair to the Marines, those rules come from the Center for Army Lessons Learned. But it's all of a Pentagon piece. And guess where such "safety" education -- the dhimmi rules of Shariah -- will be taught next?
I bet it would surprise the brass at the Pentagon to learn that Islam means "submission," and that the age-old choice Islam has offered infidels is to submit or die. Still, they seem to have learned, as the editorial puts it, that "certain behavior that wouldn't get a second look stateside could lead to problems at a patrol base in Helmand province."
"Problems." What a way to invoke shootings of our people by Afghan forces -- the spurting, flaring jihad none dares name. "Counseling Marines to aim east ultimately may head off trouble," the editorial concludes. Submission always does.
VISITING BABES GET TOPLESS AND TOUCHED AT CLUB FED
This must be part of the prison reform that criminologists and prisoner-rights groups keep advocating.
REPORT: FAKE PARALEGALS STRIP FOR MIAMI INMATES
Wealthy drug lords are reportedly hiring lawyers who smuggle women inside Miami’s Federal Detention Center
PoliceOne.com
December 1, 2011
MIAMI — Pole dancers posing as legal assistants regularly strip for inmates at the maximum-security Federal Detention Center in Miami, according to reports.
Attorneys originally quoted by The Miami New Times say that wealthy drug lords inside the prison bring the women inside by hiring lawyers who falsely identify them as paralegals.
"Any lawyer can sign a form and designate a legal assistant. There is no way of verifying it," veteran defense attorney Hugo Rodriguez said. Rodriguez added that once inside, the women "take off their tops and let the guys touch them."
Officials at the center did not comment on the accusations and declined to provide paperwork about any specific incidents, according to USA Today, but several officials quoted insist the practice has become routine.
"Everyone knows about it," an unnamed private investigator said. "They are making a mockery out of the prison system here."
REPORT: FAKE PARALEGALS STRIP FOR MIAMI INMATES
Wealthy drug lords are reportedly hiring lawyers who smuggle women inside Miami’s Federal Detention Center
PoliceOne.com
December 1, 2011
MIAMI — Pole dancers posing as legal assistants regularly strip for inmates at the maximum-security Federal Detention Center in Miami, according to reports.
Attorneys originally quoted by The Miami New Times say that wealthy drug lords inside the prison bring the women inside by hiring lawyers who falsely identify them as paralegals.
"Any lawyer can sign a form and designate a legal assistant. There is no way of verifying it," veteran defense attorney Hugo Rodriguez said. Rodriguez added that once inside, the women "take off their tops and let the guys touch them."
Officials at the center did not comment on the accusations and declined to provide paperwork about any specific incidents, according to USA Today, but several officials quoted insist the practice has become routine.
"Everyone knows about it," an unnamed private investigator said. "They are making a mockery out of the prison system here."
Friday, December 02, 2011
NYPD: MANIPULATION OF CRIME STATISTICS 'UNDERMINE ANY EFFORTS TO CREATE A CULTURE OF INTEGRITY'
Criminologists Eli Silverman, of John Jay College, and John Eterno, of Molloy College, offer one of their periodic opinion pieces about the NYPD. This one is about the intersection between the recent police corruption scandals and what they call the "distorted use of and lack of transparency of Compstat."
__Graham Rayman, The Village Voice
NYPD’S CRIME STAT MANIPULATION A FACTOR IN RECENT CORRUPTION SCANDALS
by Eli B. Silverman, Ph.D. and John A. Eterno, Ph.D.
The Village Voice
November 29 2011
Recent NYPD corruption, ticket fixing, and other scandals have cast doubt on the ability of the department to police itself. This has re-kindled numerous governmental, political, and media calls for external monitoring and oversight of the department's anti-corruption efforts.
Independent oversight and monitoring is necessary but by no means sufficient. It will not, by itself, solve the problem since it ignores the core of the trouble - the distorted use of and lack of transparency of Compstat-the NYPD's crime strategy performance management system and its manipulated crime statistics.
When the Mayor's Commission to Combat Police Corruption was rebuffed in its efforts to investigate crime statistics in 2005, the Police Commissioner maintained that this was outside the Commission's jurisdiction, the Mayor agreed and the panel chairman resigned shortly thereafter.
This defensive support of a warped version of Compstat has major consequences for the NYPD's ability to reform itself. One upshot is a virtually exclusive focus on crime statistics regardless of how it is achieved as revealed in recordings made by Police Officer Adrian Schoolcraft and other police officers. When crime control becomes the be all and end all, then the ends justifies the means. This entails headquarters' quotas for summonses, arrests and others enforcement activities. It also means almost 700,000 stop and frisks in predominantly minority neighborhoods in this year alone.
An ends justifies the means crime statistics outlook easily spills over into other areas. The manipulation of crime statistics can contribute to a culture of cynicism in the department. When supervisors are playing games with the crime data whether outright fraud or manipulation that falls into a gray area of legality, this can undermine any efforts to create a culture of integrity.
Is it any wonder that cops may view ticket fixing within the ethical framework of a "courtesy?" This view is consistent with our survey findings that commanders perceived lesser pressure for integrity of crime data once Compstat began.
This survey of retired NYPD Commanders, first reported in February 2010, revealed that since 1995, the first full year of Compstat's operations, commanders felt pressure to downgrade felonies to misdemeanors. Others have also attested to manipulation of crime figures.
Additionally, and equally important, when crime micromanagement dominates the daily agenda, corruption control and other non crime control police responsibilities barely enter the NYPD's radar screen. As political and police leadership only measure themselves by publicly reported crime statistics, any outside attempts to examine leadership operations are rebuffed.
As far as the NYPD is concerned, there is only one center stage; its name is Compstat and other activities are relegated to a side show requiring attention only when transgressions are revealed. Crime control is virtually exclusive; corruption control is a reclusive appendage.
As such, the NYPD is almost completely reactive in its fight against internal corruption allowing little, if any, true outside scrutiny. Yet, at the same time, it expects communities to acquiesce and be open to its patently proactive fight against crime as they forcibly stop, question, arrest, investigate, summons, poke and prod countless people under what may be questionable legal circumstances. Such double standards cannot stand.
What began in1994 as a valuable and innovative crime tracking and managerial accountability system, Compstat has morphed into a centralized top down numbers dominated system which places unrelenting pressure on commanders to produce favorable crime statistics, summonses, arrests, stop and frisks, and other activity. A recent Operations Order by the NYPD confirms these pressures which
reflect long-standing practices that we helped expose.
Therefore transparency and external oversight reforms must examine Compstat's underbelly --the centrally controlled management system that demands favorable crime statistics and leaves little room for lower levels to practice responsible democratic policing NYPD leaders need to set an example and open the Compstat doors to independent outside scrutiny. Just as they expect citizens to subject themselves to their intense scrutiny, they too need to open up and allow complete outside examination.
__________
Silverman and Eterno are the coauthors of The Crime Numbers Game: Management by Manipulation, forthcoming CRC Press, Taylor and Francis.
__Graham Rayman, The Village Voice
NYPD’S CRIME STAT MANIPULATION A FACTOR IN RECENT CORRUPTION SCANDALS
by Eli B. Silverman, Ph.D. and John A. Eterno, Ph.D.
The Village Voice
November 29 2011
Recent NYPD corruption, ticket fixing, and other scandals have cast doubt on the ability of the department to police itself. This has re-kindled numerous governmental, political, and media calls for external monitoring and oversight of the department's anti-corruption efforts.
Independent oversight and monitoring is necessary but by no means sufficient. It will not, by itself, solve the problem since it ignores the core of the trouble - the distorted use of and lack of transparency of Compstat-the NYPD's crime strategy performance management system and its manipulated crime statistics.
When the Mayor's Commission to Combat Police Corruption was rebuffed in its efforts to investigate crime statistics in 2005, the Police Commissioner maintained that this was outside the Commission's jurisdiction, the Mayor agreed and the panel chairman resigned shortly thereafter.
This defensive support of a warped version of Compstat has major consequences for the NYPD's ability to reform itself. One upshot is a virtually exclusive focus on crime statistics regardless of how it is achieved as revealed in recordings made by Police Officer Adrian Schoolcraft and other police officers. When crime control becomes the be all and end all, then the ends justifies the means. This entails headquarters' quotas for summonses, arrests and others enforcement activities. It also means almost 700,000 stop and frisks in predominantly minority neighborhoods in this year alone.
An ends justifies the means crime statistics outlook easily spills over into other areas. The manipulation of crime statistics can contribute to a culture of cynicism in the department. When supervisors are playing games with the crime data whether outright fraud or manipulation that falls into a gray area of legality, this can undermine any efforts to create a culture of integrity.
Is it any wonder that cops may view ticket fixing within the ethical framework of a "courtesy?" This view is consistent with our survey findings that commanders perceived lesser pressure for integrity of crime data once Compstat began.
This survey of retired NYPD Commanders, first reported in February 2010, revealed that since 1995, the first full year of Compstat's operations, commanders felt pressure to downgrade felonies to misdemeanors. Others have also attested to manipulation of crime figures.
Additionally, and equally important, when crime micromanagement dominates the daily agenda, corruption control and other non crime control police responsibilities barely enter the NYPD's radar screen. As political and police leadership only measure themselves by publicly reported crime statistics, any outside attempts to examine leadership operations are rebuffed.
As far as the NYPD is concerned, there is only one center stage; its name is Compstat and other activities are relegated to a side show requiring attention only when transgressions are revealed. Crime control is virtually exclusive; corruption control is a reclusive appendage.
As such, the NYPD is almost completely reactive in its fight against internal corruption allowing little, if any, true outside scrutiny. Yet, at the same time, it expects communities to acquiesce and be open to its patently proactive fight against crime as they forcibly stop, question, arrest, investigate, summons, poke and prod countless people under what may be questionable legal circumstances. Such double standards cannot stand.
What began in1994 as a valuable and innovative crime tracking and managerial accountability system, Compstat has morphed into a centralized top down numbers dominated system which places unrelenting pressure on commanders to produce favorable crime statistics, summonses, arrests, stop and frisks, and other activity. A recent Operations Order by the NYPD confirms these pressures which
reflect long-standing practices that we helped expose.
Therefore transparency and external oversight reforms must examine Compstat's underbelly --the centrally controlled management system that demands favorable crime statistics and leaves little room for lower levels to practice responsible democratic policing NYPD leaders need to set an example and open the Compstat doors to independent outside scrutiny. Just as they expect citizens to subject themselves to their intense scrutiny, they too need to open up and allow complete outside examination.
__________
Silverman and Eterno are the coauthors of The Crime Numbers Game: Management by Manipulation, forthcoming CRC Press, Taylor and Francis.
A POX ON ROBERT ALAN EUSTACE, NICHOLAS PRITZKER, REED HASTINGS AND THE ACLU
Obviously none of these wealthy contributors have ever had a loved one brutally murdered. I hope the people of California have the good sense to vote down the proposed death penalty repeal measure if it does get on the ballot.
The shopworn argument that by abolishing the death penalty, the states would save millions of dollars is not true. If you compare the cost of keeping a condemned inmate on death row for 10 years - most of that cost coming from fighting endless appeals – to the cost of keeping him locked up for life, you will find that it cost the state more money to keep him locked up for, let’s say 30 years. Oh by the way - surprise, surprise - the costs of confining inmates keep going up and up as they age.
CAMPAIGN TO REPEAL CALIFORNIA DEATH PENALTY NETS NEARLY $1.2 MILLION
by Torey Van Oot
The Sacramento Bee
November 20, 2011
A group seeking to ask California voters to repeal the death penalty has netted nearly $1.2 million in recent weeks to aid its drive to qualify for the 2012 ballot.
The contributions, made to a committee created to fund the proposed ballot measure, were reported this week in campaign finance filings posted on the secretary of state website.
Major donors listed in the report include several California branches of the American Civil Liberties Union ($41,770), Google executive Robert Alan Eustace ($125,000), Hyatt Development Corporation CEO Nicholas Pritzker ($500,000), and Netflix CEO Reed Hastings ($125,000).
Supporters of the proposed measure, which would replace the death penalty with life imprisonment without parole, must collect 504,760 valid voter signatures by March 19 to secure a spot on the November ballot. They've argued that the change, which would apply retroactively to inmates currently on death row, would free up tens of millions of dollars that could be used for law enforcement, education and other state spending needs.
The shopworn argument that by abolishing the death penalty, the states would save millions of dollars is not true. If you compare the cost of keeping a condemned inmate on death row for 10 years - most of that cost coming from fighting endless appeals – to the cost of keeping him locked up for life, you will find that it cost the state more money to keep him locked up for, let’s say 30 years. Oh by the way - surprise, surprise - the costs of confining inmates keep going up and up as they age.
CAMPAIGN TO REPEAL CALIFORNIA DEATH PENALTY NETS NEARLY $1.2 MILLION
by Torey Van Oot
The Sacramento Bee
November 20, 2011
A group seeking to ask California voters to repeal the death penalty has netted nearly $1.2 million in recent weeks to aid its drive to qualify for the 2012 ballot.
The contributions, made to a committee created to fund the proposed ballot measure, were reported this week in campaign finance filings posted on the secretary of state website.
Major donors listed in the report include several California branches of the American Civil Liberties Union ($41,770), Google executive Robert Alan Eustace ($125,000), Hyatt Development Corporation CEO Nicholas Pritzker ($500,000), and Netflix CEO Reed Hastings ($125,000).
Supporters of the proposed measure, which would replace the death penalty with life imprisonment without parole, must collect 504,760 valid voter signatures by March 19 to secure a spot on the November ballot. They've argued that the change, which would apply retroactively to inmates currently on death row, would free up tens of millions of dollars that could be used for law enforcement, education and other state spending needs.
NO HONOR AMONG THIEVES
Training to become a certified trucker? Now that’s a real funny joke Your Honor, or don’t you know that this fucker can’t get a job as a trucker, what with his criminal record.
PAROLEE TARGETED JAIL’S INMATE FUND IN CHECK SCHEME
Judge to ask the U.S. Bureau of Prisons to offer him training that would allow him to become a certified trucker upon release.
By Jamie Satterfield
Knoxnews.com
November 29, 2011
GREENEVILLE, TENN. — Rebuffed in his efforts to find legitimate work, a parolee with a quarter-century of criminal convictions decided to rip off the folks he knew best — inmates.
"I just got tired of being homeless and not being able to support myself," Eric Wayne Cureton said of his decision to mastermind an effort to bilk the Washington County Sheriff's Department's Inmate Trust Fund.
Cureton earlier this year pleaded guilty to charges he headed up a counterfeit check cashing scheme involving an account administered by Washington County authorities on behalf of inmates whose family and friends deposit money to cover purchases inside the jail there, including toiletries, paper and pens.
Prior court testimony and records show Cureton obtained a check from the fund, scanned it into a laptop rented by a cohort and used software to create counterfeit copies. Cureton then recruited others to cash the bogus checks, collecting a bounty of the proceeds for himself.
Cureton, 42, insisted at a sentencing hearing Monday that he tried to go straight after he was paroled from a Tennessee prison in September 2010. Just five months later, however, he hatched the counterfeit check scheme.
"At the time I got released, there was literally no place to go," Cureton said. "My intention was to try to find a job. Nobody would call me back."
U.S. District Judge Ronnie Greer was sympathetic — to a point.
"I certainly understand your circumstance but none of that justifies taking from somebody else," he said.
Greer noted Cureton gave up too soon in his efforts to find legitimate employment.
"You can put in more applications," Greer said. "You can knock on doors."
"Your honor, I've done that," Cureton replied.
"You've got to keep doing it," Greer said. "That's my point. Don't get involved in some counterfeit ring. Just keep knocking."
Greer sentenced Cureton to 21 months in federal prison but promised to ask the U.S. Bureau of Prisons to offer Cureton training that would allow him to become a certified trucker upon release.
"You've reached a point in life, Mr. Cureton, where you've got a decision to make, and the decision for you is whether you're going to have a chance at being a productive citizen or whether you're going to spend the rest of your life in prison."
PAROLEE TARGETED JAIL’S INMATE FUND IN CHECK SCHEME
Judge to ask the U.S. Bureau of Prisons to offer him training that would allow him to become a certified trucker upon release.
By Jamie Satterfield
Knoxnews.com
November 29, 2011
GREENEVILLE, TENN. — Rebuffed in his efforts to find legitimate work, a parolee with a quarter-century of criminal convictions decided to rip off the folks he knew best — inmates.
"I just got tired of being homeless and not being able to support myself," Eric Wayne Cureton said of his decision to mastermind an effort to bilk the Washington County Sheriff's Department's Inmate Trust Fund.
Cureton earlier this year pleaded guilty to charges he headed up a counterfeit check cashing scheme involving an account administered by Washington County authorities on behalf of inmates whose family and friends deposit money to cover purchases inside the jail there, including toiletries, paper and pens.
Prior court testimony and records show Cureton obtained a check from the fund, scanned it into a laptop rented by a cohort and used software to create counterfeit copies. Cureton then recruited others to cash the bogus checks, collecting a bounty of the proceeds for himself.
Cureton, 42, insisted at a sentencing hearing Monday that he tried to go straight after he was paroled from a Tennessee prison in September 2010. Just five months later, however, he hatched the counterfeit check scheme.
"At the time I got released, there was literally no place to go," Cureton said. "My intention was to try to find a job. Nobody would call me back."
U.S. District Judge Ronnie Greer was sympathetic — to a point.
"I certainly understand your circumstance but none of that justifies taking from somebody else," he said.
Greer noted Cureton gave up too soon in his efforts to find legitimate employment.
"You can put in more applications," Greer said. "You can knock on doors."
"Your honor, I've done that," Cureton replied.
"You've got to keep doing it," Greer said. "That's my point. Don't get involved in some counterfeit ring. Just keep knocking."
Greer sentenced Cureton to 21 months in federal prison but promised to ask the U.S. Bureau of Prisons to offer Cureton training that would allow him to become a certified trucker upon release.
"You've reached a point in life, Mr. Cureton, where you've got a decision to make, and the decision for you is whether you're going to have a chance at being a productive citizen or whether you're going to spend the rest of your life in prison."
EGYPT ON ROAD TO BECOMING A NEW IRAN
Obama and Hillary Clinton ignored the old adage: Be careful what you wish for. They supported the Arab Spring revolutions and this is what they’re getting. And now they’re praising the elections that could turn Egypt against us.
EGYPT: THE NEXT ISLAMIC REPUBLIC?
Ryan Jones
Israel Today
December 1, 2011
Preliminary results from Egypt's first democratic election since the fall of former dictator Hosni Mubarak began rolling in on Thursday, and they are not positive for those who had hoped the Arab Spring would lead to a more open and free Middle East.
While this week's vote was only the first in a three-phase election scheduled to last until early January, it did encompass most of Egypt's most populous regions, and so provides a fairly clear picture of what the next Egyptian government will look like.
According to unofficial results two days after the vote, the Muslim Brotherhood will control 40-50 percent of the parliament. That wouldn't necessarily be the end of the world if the other half was controlled by "moderate" parties. But it won't be. According to the same results, the second place party in most of the reporting districts is al-Nour, a Salafi Muslim party that is at least as radical as the Muslim Brotherhood.
The liberal Freedom Party and the secular Wafd party placed a distant third in various districts, reported Egypt's Al-Masry Al-Youm newspaper.
A leading Egyptian political analyst told the state-run newspaper Al-Ahram that by the time official results are announced in early January, she expects the Islamists to be in control of around 65 percent of the Egyptian parliament.
Earlier this week, the head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, Maj.-Gen. Qassem Soleimani, told a gathering of 50,000 soldiers that "Egypt is a new Iran, whether you (the US-led West) accept it or not." Soleimani also noted that other "Arab Spring" countries like Libya and Yemen are headed in a similar direction.
The Muslim Brotherhood has long vowed that if it ever came to power, it would work to reverse or outright nullify the Camp David Accord and end the official state of peace with Israel. The Brotherhood also advocates Sharia Law and the eventual establishment of a global Islamic caliphate - much like the rulers of Iran.
EGYPT: THE NEXT ISLAMIC REPUBLIC?
Ryan Jones
Israel Today
December 1, 2011
Preliminary results from Egypt's first democratic election since the fall of former dictator Hosni Mubarak began rolling in on Thursday, and they are not positive for those who had hoped the Arab Spring would lead to a more open and free Middle East.
While this week's vote was only the first in a three-phase election scheduled to last until early January, it did encompass most of Egypt's most populous regions, and so provides a fairly clear picture of what the next Egyptian government will look like.
According to unofficial results two days after the vote, the Muslim Brotherhood will control 40-50 percent of the parliament. That wouldn't necessarily be the end of the world if the other half was controlled by "moderate" parties. But it won't be. According to the same results, the second place party in most of the reporting districts is al-Nour, a Salafi Muslim party that is at least as radical as the Muslim Brotherhood.
The liberal Freedom Party and the secular Wafd party placed a distant third in various districts, reported Egypt's Al-Masry Al-Youm newspaper.
A leading Egyptian political analyst told the state-run newspaper Al-Ahram that by the time official results are announced in early January, she expects the Islamists to be in control of around 65 percent of the Egyptian parliament.
Earlier this week, the head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, Maj.-Gen. Qassem Soleimani, told a gathering of 50,000 soldiers that "Egypt is a new Iran, whether you (the US-led West) accept it or not." Soleimani also noted that other "Arab Spring" countries like Libya and Yemen are headed in a similar direction.
The Muslim Brotherhood has long vowed that if it ever came to power, it would work to reverse or outright nullify the Camp David Accord and end the official state of peace with Israel. The Brotherhood also advocates Sharia Law and the eventual establishment of a global Islamic caliphate - much like the rulers of Iran.
'RAVENOUS WOLF' SENTENCED TO DEATH
Another poster boy for the death penalty.
JOY FOR RELATIVES OF BASELINE KILLER’S VICTIMS AS HE IS SENTENCED TO DEATH FOR NINE MURDERS, KIDNAPPING AND RAPE
He had asked jurors for mercy that he never himself showed
By Jessica Satherley
Mail Online
December 1, 2011
A man convicted of being the Phoenix area's Baseline Killer has been sentenced to death.
Jurors in Arizona reached the verdict, about a month after finding 47-year-old Mark Goudeau guilty of the nine murders and 58 other charges, including kidnapping and rape.
Goudeau had been serving a 438-year sentence in a 2005 sexual assault case tied to the Baseline Killer attacks but only recently became eligible for the death penalty after the murder convictions.
Police named the series of killings and other crimes after Baseline Road in south Phoenix where many of the earliest attacks happened.
Prosecutors argued that the murders were especially cruel, saying that the victims suffered unimaginable terror and anguish in the moments leading up to their deaths.
Goudeau was accused of attacking his victims as they went about daily activities.
'It's a relief that it's over,' said Maria Nunez, the mother of murder victim Sofia Nunez. However, she said she didn't know if the sentence could bring her any real comfort.
'It's not going to bring Sofia back,' she said.
Goudeau didn't want to be in the courtroom when verdicts were read, but Judge Warren Granville forced him to stay. He sat quietly and didn't flinch as the verdicts were read.
Prosecutors had argued that Goudeau was a 'ravenous wolf' driven by a hunger to rape women and kill those who didn't cooperate with his demands, and that the murders were especially cruel because the victims suffered unimaginable terror and anguish in the moments leading up to their deaths.
'He enjoyed the power and dominion he exercised over these victims,' prosecutor Patricia Stevens told jurors. 'He enjoyed the threats of force, the threats of death.'
Stevens said that each of the eight female victims was forced to agonise over whether they would be raped or killed in the moments before they were shot, and that two of them were forced to watch Goudeau kill another person before he turned the gun on them, prolonging and intensifying their own terror.
The sole male victim was killed before prosecutors say Goudeau attacked his female co-worker.
Two weeks ago, Goudeau forced his lawyers to stop calling on witnesses in support of a life sentence after a psychologist implied that Goudeau struggled with impotence and insecurity.
He opted instead to address jurors himself against his lawyers' wishes, telling them to follow their hearts when they decide whether to sentence him to death or life in prison.
'I am no monster,' he told them. 'I could look in each and every one of your eyes today and tell you Mark Goudeau is no wolf in sheep's clothing ... I do pray that one day you guys learn the truth about this case.'
Stevens pointed out to jurors that Goudeau offered no apologies to any of the victims in the case or their families and that they must ask themselves whether Goudeau deserved to be shown any mercy at all.
'He and he alone decided how each of these nine would leave this world, what their last few minutes on this Earth would be like,' she said.
'He put them through unspeakable terror, and he ended each and every one of these lives by putting a gun to their head and executing them, and now he asks you for mercy. He asks you for mercy that he never himself showed.'
JOY FOR RELATIVES OF BASELINE KILLER’S VICTIMS AS HE IS SENTENCED TO DEATH FOR NINE MURDERS, KIDNAPPING AND RAPE
He had asked jurors for mercy that he never himself showed
By Jessica Satherley
Mail Online
December 1, 2011
A man convicted of being the Phoenix area's Baseline Killer has been sentenced to death.
Jurors in Arizona reached the verdict, about a month after finding 47-year-old Mark Goudeau guilty of the nine murders and 58 other charges, including kidnapping and rape.
Goudeau had been serving a 438-year sentence in a 2005 sexual assault case tied to the Baseline Killer attacks but only recently became eligible for the death penalty after the murder convictions.
Police named the series of killings and other crimes after Baseline Road in south Phoenix where many of the earliest attacks happened.
Prosecutors argued that the murders were especially cruel, saying that the victims suffered unimaginable terror and anguish in the moments leading up to their deaths.
Goudeau was accused of attacking his victims as they went about daily activities.
'It's a relief that it's over,' said Maria Nunez, the mother of murder victim Sofia Nunez. However, she said she didn't know if the sentence could bring her any real comfort.
'It's not going to bring Sofia back,' she said.
Goudeau didn't want to be in the courtroom when verdicts were read, but Judge Warren Granville forced him to stay. He sat quietly and didn't flinch as the verdicts were read.
Prosecutors had argued that Goudeau was a 'ravenous wolf' driven by a hunger to rape women and kill those who didn't cooperate with his demands, and that the murders were especially cruel because the victims suffered unimaginable terror and anguish in the moments leading up to their deaths.
'He enjoyed the power and dominion he exercised over these victims,' prosecutor Patricia Stevens told jurors. 'He enjoyed the threats of force, the threats of death.'
Stevens said that each of the eight female victims was forced to agonise over whether they would be raped or killed in the moments before they were shot, and that two of them were forced to watch Goudeau kill another person before he turned the gun on them, prolonging and intensifying their own terror.
The sole male victim was killed before prosecutors say Goudeau attacked his female co-worker.
Two weeks ago, Goudeau forced his lawyers to stop calling on witnesses in support of a life sentence after a psychologist implied that Goudeau struggled with impotence and insecurity.
He opted instead to address jurors himself against his lawyers' wishes, telling them to follow their hearts when they decide whether to sentence him to death or life in prison.
'I am no monster,' he told them. 'I could look in each and every one of your eyes today and tell you Mark Goudeau is no wolf in sheep's clothing ... I do pray that one day you guys learn the truth about this case.'
Stevens pointed out to jurors that Goudeau offered no apologies to any of the victims in the case or their families and that they must ask themselves whether Goudeau deserved to be shown any mercy at all.
'He and he alone decided how each of these nine would leave this world, what their last few minutes on this Earth would be like,' she said.
'He put them through unspeakable terror, and he ended each and every one of these lives by putting a gun to their head and executing them, and now he asks you for mercy. He asks you for mercy that he never himself showed.'
Thursday, December 01, 2011
THEY DON'T NEED BRATTON TO TELL THEM WHAT WENT WRONG
The author of The New Centurions, The Onion Field and several other best sellers at his very best with this op-ed:
JOSEPH WAMBAUGH SOLVES THE GREAT UC DAVIS PEPPER-SPRAYING INCIDENT
Forget hiring Bill Bratton. You can learn all you need to know by reading the papers.
By Joseph Wambaugh
Los Angeles Times
November 27, 2011
In light of the terrible financial crisis at our California universities, I feel the need to rescue UC Davis, whose administrators are, according to The Times, negotiating a price with the Kroll security firm in New York for none other than former LAPD Chief Bill Bratton to fly West and tell us what went wrong on the day that students were pepper sprayed. I can save the university a hefty Kroll consulting fee by suggesting that the administrators carefully peruse a few of the newspaper articles of the past week and all will be revealed to them.
They might start with Wednesday's hilarious Times photo of a student in a porkpie hat and bandanna mask mau-mauing the earnest but obviously flummoxed UC Davis chancellor, Linda Katehi, who actually seems to be recording the lad's rant. The bandanna mask suggests he's in full-on guerrilla mode and fears being seized and waterboarded by hooded men in a dank police station basement.
An assistant professor of English at UC Davis was quoted in The Times as saying that the pepper-spray incident was simply the latest example of "the systematic use of police brutality by UC chancellors" to suppress protests. Well, when I was an LAPD cop, I majored in English at Cal State L.A., and I can affirm that assistant professors of English claim all sorts of weird things after having been driven loopy by too much Elizabethan poetry. The UC Davis campus cops as serial brutes? I thought they just wrote tickets and attached wheel locks to illegally parked cars.
The Times also quoted a 23-year-old student (who probably majored in English) excitedly recounting his battlefield skirmish and proclaiming that the action of the campus cops was an example of police brutality that is even more "rampant" against "minority groups and women" in the world outside of UC Davis. I think the kid must be experiencing Revolutionary Overload. Allegations of excessive force against minorities have long been an issue with law enforcement critics, but police brutality against women? When did that start? I know quite a bit about police officers, and I can tell you that most of the male cops I've met like women. Really like them. A lot.
So, my message to UC Davis is to forgo Bratton (whose every fantasy involves his face on Mt. Rushmore) and save the suffering taxpayers a hefty tab from Kroll. Here's what I'm betting happened on the Day of the Gas: A campus cop — one of the 99% that the Occupy protesters are championing — looked at a bunch of envious kids who'd missed the great era of protests and Woodstock that their forebears experienced. All they've got at UC Davis is a pitiful little sit-in, but they're arm-locked and caterwauling and making the most of it.
After watching the scene for several hours, something like this goes through the campus cop's head: "I'm not busting my hump trying to untangle these entitled little twits and hauling their butts away for a few hours, which will only make their day and bring them back feistier tomorrow. My sciatica is killing me and I can already feel the arthritis in my hip and I don't get paid enough for this kind of truss-busting crap, so I'm gonna give them a taste of Come-to-Jesus juice. And if that doesn't make them go home, screw it." Then he casually strolled along the seated row and let them have it.
The loyal boss of the campus cops, Chief Annette Spicuzza, tried to tactically defend the indefensible with a statement about her cops feeling "surrounded," instead of doing what most chiefs routinely do (including Bratton) and issuing a pension-saving CYA statement throwing her cops under the bus. That loyalty will probably cost the chief her job. The campus cop who did the deed was placed on leave and will probably go the way of his boss.
The upside to all of this is that the kids now have a cherished memory that will be a hot topic at every rave and beer bash for the rest of their college lives and beyond:
"Where were you on the day we took poison gas?"
"I was writhing in pain, bro!"
"Like broken glass in my eyes!"
"My whole body was on fire, man!"
"Why oh why did I pick that day to go surfing?"
"You missed a blast, dude. It was awesome!"
Now that I've enlightened our UC leaders about what transpired that day, let's prevail on them to save us taxpayers some bucks and cancel Bratton's plane ticket. If they refuse, we should insist. Or, we could consider bringing the campus cop back from leave — and pepper spray them.
JOSEPH WAMBAUGH SOLVES THE GREAT UC DAVIS PEPPER-SPRAYING INCIDENT
Forget hiring Bill Bratton. You can learn all you need to know by reading the papers.
By Joseph Wambaugh
Los Angeles Times
November 27, 2011
In light of the terrible financial crisis at our California universities, I feel the need to rescue UC Davis, whose administrators are, according to The Times, negotiating a price with the Kroll security firm in New York for none other than former LAPD Chief Bill Bratton to fly West and tell us what went wrong on the day that students were pepper sprayed. I can save the university a hefty Kroll consulting fee by suggesting that the administrators carefully peruse a few of the newspaper articles of the past week and all will be revealed to them.
They might start with Wednesday's hilarious Times photo of a student in a porkpie hat and bandanna mask mau-mauing the earnest but obviously flummoxed UC Davis chancellor, Linda Katehi, who actually seems to be recording the lad's rant. The bandanna mask suggests he's in full-on guerrilla mode and fears being seized and waterboarded by hooded men in a dank police station basement.
An assistant professor of English at UC Davis was quoted in The Times as saying that the pepper-spray incident was simply the latest example of "the systematic use of police brutality by UC chancellors" to suppress protests. Well, when I was an LAPD cop, I majored in English at Cal State L.A., and I can affirm that assistant professors of English claim all sorts of weird things after having been driven loopy by too much Elizabethan poetry. The UC Davis campus cops as serial brutes? I thought they just wrote tickets and attached wheel locks to illegally parked cars.
The Times also quoted a 23-year-old student (who probably majored in English) excitedly recounting his battlefield skirmish and proclaiming that the action of the campus cops was an example of police brutality that is even more "rampant" against "minority groups and women" in the world outside of UC Davis. I think the kid must be experiencing Revolutionary Overload. Allegations of excessive force against minorities have long been an issue with law enforcement critics, but police brutality against women? When did that start? I know quite a bit about police officers, and I can tell you that most of the male cops I've met like women. Really like them. A lot.
So, my message to UC Davis is to forgo Bratton (whose every fantasy involves his face on Mt. Rushmore) and save the suffering taxpayers a hefty tab from Kroll. Here's what I'm betting happened on the Day of the Gas: A campus cop — one of the 99% that the Occupy protesters are championing — looked at a bunch of envious kids who'd missed the great era of protests and Woodstock that their forebears experienced. All they've got at UC Davis is a pitiful little sit-in, but they're arm-locked and caterwauling and making the most of it.
After watching the scene for several hours, something like this goes through the campus cop's head: "I'm not busting my hump trying to untangle these entitled little twits and hauling their butts away for a few hours, which will only make their day and bring them back feistier tomorrow. My sciatica is killing me and I can already feel the arthritis in my hip and I don't get paid enough for this kind of truss-busting crap, so I'm gonna give them a taste of Come-to-Jesus juice. And if that doesn't make them go home, screw it." Then he casually strolled along the seated row and let them have it.
The loyal boss of the campus cops, Chief Annette Spicuzza, tried to tactically defend the indefensible with a statement about her cops feeling "surrounded," instead of doing what most chiefs routinely do (including Bratton) and issuing a pension-saving CYA statement throwing her cops under the bus. That loyalty will probably cost the chief her job. The campus cop who did the deed was placed on leave and will probably go the way of his boss.
The upside to all of this is that the kids now have a cherished memory that will be a hot topic at every rave and beer bash for the rest of their college lives and beyond:
"Where were you on the day we took poison gas?"
"I was writhing in pain, bro!"
"Like broken glass in my eyes!"
"My whole body was on fire, man!"
"Why oh why did I pick that day to go surfing?"
"You missed a blast, dude. It was awesome!"
Now that I've enlightened our UC leaders about what transpired that day, let's prevail on them to save us taxpayers some bucks and cancel Bratton's plane ticket. If they refuse, we should insist. Or, we could consider bringing the campus cop back from leave — and pepper spray them.
GENDER DISCRIMINATION LAWSUIT FILED AGAINST SIN CITY PLAYBOY CLUB AND PLAYBOY MAGAZINE
By Pamela Putz
The Schalotte
December 1, 2011
LOS ANGELES – A Las Vegas man who won last year’s Mr. Europe beauty contest in Barcelona, Spain has filed suit in Federal Court against the Las Vegas Playboy Club, accusing the management of gender discrimination because they refused to hire him as a Playboy Bunny. He also filed a co-joined suit against Playboy Enterprises because the editors refused to consider him for a nude centerfold in Playboy Magazine. Hugh Hefner is named as one of the defendants.
Antonio ‘Tony’ Bastardo, 26, originally from Rome, is represented by the prestigious Los Angeles law firm of Schuster, Schuster, Schuster, Schuster and Sons.
John Schuster, IV, speaking on behalf of the law firm said he thought Bastardo had a good case. He expects to win substantial damages and open the Playboy Club to male bunnies. Schuster IV also believes that the suit will lead to nude pictures of men and the coveted center fold in Playboy Magazine.
According to the suit, Bastardo tried on four occasions to obtain employment as a Playboy Bunny in the Playboy Club at the Palms Casino Resort in Las Vegas. On each occasion he was informed that only females qualified to be Playboy Bunnies. Schuster IV says that Bastardo has been judged as a ‘very well endowed handsome hunk of a man’ and, as such, he should qualify as a Playboy Bunny.
On seven occasions, Bastardo met with Playboy Magazine editors requesting that they let him pose nude for the magazine’s photographers, that those nude photos be published in a forthcoming issue of Playboy Magazine, and that one of those pictures be used as a Playmate centerfold. The editors rejected his requests because they accepted only women’s nude photos and only women qualified as Playmates. Bastardo tried without success to convince the editors that Playboy Magazine’s women readers would love to see pictures of him in the nude.
Schuster IV says that the Playboy Club and Playboy (Magazine) Enterprises are clearly violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits ‘discrimination by covered employers on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin’ (42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2). The lawyer said that, “Since the magazine is sold nationwide and Playboy Clubs are located in several U.S. cities, their managers are clearly considered ‘covered employers’ under Title VII.
Rudy Greenberg of Greenberg and Greenberg, a prominent Las Vegas law firm that represents the Las Vegas Playboy Club, said the lawsuit is without merit, is frivolous and is a waste of the Federal Court’s time. “Does anyone really expect to see a male Playboy Bunny?,” Greenberg asked. “Come on, that’s simply ridiculous!”
Bernard Schmutz of Drech, Schmutz and Goodman, a high-powered New York law firm that represents Playboy Enterprises, echoed Greenberg. “Are you crazy?! A nude male centerfold in a men’s magazine? No judge in this country is going to rule against our client, and you can take that to the bank!”
The Schalotte cornered Hugh Hefner after he had just been served with Bastardo’s lawsuit. In response to our questions, Hefner said: “I can’t believe this! Some guy wants to be a Playboy Bunny? A Playmate centerfold? Holy shit! Unless they’re gay, men don’t want to see some guy’s loins. They want to enjoy seeing a pretty woman’s boobs and vag. Look young lady, this is a men’s magazine.”
Hefner then looked me all over and said, “By the way … Pamela, isn’t it? … how would you like to pose for Playboy Magazine? I would say that with your good looks you’d make a terrific Playmate centerfold. Here, please take this open invitation [He handed me an engraved card] to my Playboy Mansion parties.”
John Schuster, IV, said that Bastardo is considering filing a similar lawsuit against Hooters because his application as a server had been turned down by at least a dozen of the restaurants.
The Schalotte
December 1, 2011
LOS ANGELES – A Las Vegas man who won last year’s Mr. Europe beauty contest in Barcelona, Spain has filed suit in Federal Court against the Las Vegas Playboy Club, accusing the management of gender discrimination because they refused to hire him as a Playboy Bunny. He also filed a co-joined suit against Playboy Enterprises because the editors refused to consider him for a nude centerfold in Playboy Magazine. Hugh Hefner is named as one of the defendants.
Antonio ‘Tony’ Bastardo, 26, originally from Rome, is represented by the prestigious Los Angeles law firm of Schuster, Schuster, Schuster, Schuster and Sons.
John Schuster, IV, speaking on behalf of the law firm said he thought Bastardo had a good case. He expects to win substantial damages and open the Playboy Club to male bunnies. Schuster IV also believes that the suit will lead to nude pictures of men and the coveted center fold in Playboy Magazine.
According to the suit, Bastardo tried on four occasions to obtain employment as a Playboy Bunny in the Playboy Club at the Palms Casino Resort in Las Vegas. On each occasion he was informed that only females qualified to be Playboy Bunnies. Schuster IV says that Bastardo has been judged as a ‘very well endowed handsome hunk of a man’ and, as such, he should qualify as a Playboy Bunny.
On seven occasions, Bastardo met with Playboy Magazine editors requesting that they let him pose nude for the magazine’s photographers, that those nude photos be published in a forthcoming issue of Playboy Magazine, and that one of those pictures be used as a Playmate centerfold. The editors rejected his requests because they accepted only women’s nude photos and only women qualified as Playmates. Bastardo tried without success to convince the editors that Playboy Magazine’s women readers would love to see pictures of him in the nude.
Schuster IV says that the Playboy Club and Playboy (Magazine) Enterprises are clearly violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits ‘discrimination by covered employers on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin’ (42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2). The lawyer said that, “Since the magazine is sold nationwide and Playboy Clubs are located in several U.S. cities, their managers are clearly considered ‘covered employers’ under Title VII.
Rudy Greenberg of Greenberg and Greenberg, a prominent Las Vegas law firm that represents the Las Vegas Playboy Club, said the lawsuit is without merit, is frivolous and is a waste of the Federal Court’s time. “Does anyone really expect to see a male Playboy Bunny?,” Greenberg asked. “Come on, that’s simply ridiculous!”
Bernard Schmutz of Drech, Schmutz and Goodman, a high-powered New York law firm that represents Playboy Enterprises, echoed Greenberg. “Are you crazy?! A nude male centerfold in a men’s magazine? No judge in this country is going to rule against our client, and you can take that to the bank!”
The Schalotte cornered Hugh Hefner after he had just been served with Bastardo’s lawsuit. In response to our questions, Hefner said: “I can’t believe this! Some guy wants to be a Playboy Bunny? A Playmate centerfold? Holy shit! Unless they’re gay, men don’t want to see some guy’s loins. They want to enjoy seeing a pretty woman’s boobs and vag. Look young lady, this is a men’s magazine.”
Hefner then looked me all over and said, “By the way … Pamela, isn’t it? … how would you like to pose for Playboy Magazine? I would say that with your good looks you’d make a terrific Playmate centerfold. Here, please take this open invitation [He handed me an engraved card] to my Playboy Mansion parties.”
John Schuster, IV, said that Bastardo is considering filing a similar lawsuit against Hooters because his application as a server had been turned down by at least a dozen of the restaurants.
THIS IS WHAT A MAN LOOKS LIKE AFTER ..........
A man was walking down the street when he was accosted by a particularly dirty and shabby-looking homeless man who asked him for a couple of dollars for dinner.
The man took out his wallet, extracted ten dollars and asked, "If I give you this money, will you buy some beer with it instead of dinner?"
"No, I had to stop drinking years ago," the homeless man replied.
"Will you use it to go fishing instead of buying food?" the man asked.
"No, I don't waste time fishing," the homeless man said. "I need to spend all my time trying to stay alive."
"Will you spend this on greens' fees at a golf course instead of food?" the man asked.
"Are you NUTS!" replied the homeless man. "I haven't played golf in 20 years!"
"Will you spend the money on a woman in the red light district instead of food?" the man asked.
"What disease would I get for ten lousy bucks?" exclaimed the homeless man.
"Well," said the man, "I'm not going to give you the money. Instead, I'm going to take you home for a terrific dinner cooked by my wife."
The homeless man was astounded. "Won't your wife be furious with you for doing that? I know I'm dirty and I probably smell pretty disgusting."
The man replied, "That's okay. It's important for her to see what a man looks like after he has given up beer, fishing, golf and sex."
The man took out his wallet, extracted ten dollars and asked, "If I give you this money, will you buy some beer with it instead of dinner?"
"No, I had to stop drinking years ago," the homeless man replied.
"Will you use it to go fishing instead of buying food?" the man asked.
"No, I don't waste time fishing," the homeless man said. "I need to spend all my time trying to stay alive."
"Will you spend this on greens' fees at a golf course instead of food?" the man asked.
"Are you NUTS!" replied the homeless man. "I haven't played golf in 20 years!"
"Will you spend the money on a woman in the red light district instead of food?" the man asked.
"What disease would I get for ten lousy bucks?" exclaimed the homeless man.
"Well," said the man, "I'm not going to give you the money. Instead, I'm going to take you home for a terrific dinner cooked by my wife."
The homeless man was astounded. "Won't your wife be furious with you for doing that? I know I'm dirty and I probably smell pretty disgusting."
The man replied, "That's okay. It's important for her to see what a man looks like after he has given up beer, fishing, golf and sex."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)