ANNA NICOLE SMITH. Anna Nicole, who died Feb. 8, will not be buried before tomorrow, if then. Her mother is appealing Judge Larry's decision awarding the body to the court appointed guardian of Smith's five month old daughter. Meanwhile, Anna Nicole's corpse continues to decompose.
Why is Anna Nicole's corpse decomposing while the body of soul singer James Brown, who died two months ago, is not decomposing? Brown's body, like Anna Nicole's, has been fought over in legal proceedings, thus preventing his burial. Post mortem experts believe that Brown's body is still in good shape because it was embalmed within a few hours of his death, while Anna Nicole's corpse remained refrigerated for more than a week before it was embalmed.
PRES. FELIPE CALDERON. The new president of Mexico got it right when he recently ordered 20,000 soldiers from the Mexican army to take over the fight against the narco trade in that country. Mexico's local, state and federal police have been corrupt through and through, and some drug corruption has reached into the highest levels of the federal government. Calderon raised the pay of the soldiers engaged in this fight from $319 a month to $474, retroactive to Jan. 1.
How effective will this move be and how long will the army continue to be used in the war against drugs? That remains to be seen. So far, no high level traffickers have been arrested. In Columbia, the combined use of the military and the federal police has resulted in breaking up that country's leading drug cartels. Unfortunately however, others were quick to move into the lucrative narco trade and Columbia continues to be the leading source of the cocaine found in the United States.
GOV. ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER. Yesterday, the Republican governor of California was interviewed by Bob Schieffer on CBS' Face the Nation. That interview is more proof of why Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution should be ammended so that foreign born citizens will be able to serve as president of our country. Schieffer's interview convinced me that Schwarzenegger is the most outstanding elected official in America.
The governor advocated that candidates elected to public office adopt a centrism position. He stated that public office holders were elected to represent all the people, not just those of their own political party or any wing of a party. He believes that it is the duty of the president, the governors, congressional leaders and other office holders to bring the opposing political parties together so that both can work for the good of all the people, rather than only for their own interests.
Schwarzenegger admitted that he was wrong when, early in his term, he battled the majority Democrats in the California legislature. Failing to get his proposed measures passed, he tried to bypass the legislature by placing the measures before the public in an initiative referendum. With the strong opposition of the nurses and teachers unions, the measures were soundly defeated and his approval rating dropped to 30 percent.
The governor told Schieffer that he learned from his mistakes and started to work together with both the Democrats and the Republicans. Because he strived to bring both parties together, the legislature passed some notable measures for health care, environmental protection, and other laws of benefit to all Californians. Last November, he soundly defeated his Democratic opponent while Republicans in other states were run out of office.
THE DIXIE CHICKS. During the recent Grammy Awards, the Dixie Chicks won five Grammies. Celebrity award groups tend to be of the liberal persuasion and the politically correct crowd gleefully claimed that the awards vindicated the trio for their public criticism of President Bush and the war in Iraq. The Chicks' defenders and supporters just don't get it.
Some people would have been pissed off had the Dixie Chicks made their Bush-bashing and anti-war statements on any street corner in the United States. That is their right. But the shit storm over their remarks arose from the fact that they were made in England and not in this country. The politically correct crowd be damned, but Americans have absolutely no business criticizing our country or its officials while they are overseas!
JOSEPH NICHOLS. Who in the hell is Joseph Nichols? He is a Texas death row inmate who was convicted for the 1980 murder of a clerk during a convenience store robbery. He has lingered on death row due to the many appeals filed on his behalf. He is scheduled to be executed next month if a last minute appeal does not succeed. An angry 45 year old Nichols complained about his fate during a recent interview with a newspaper reporter.
Nichols told the reporter that he was angry at being "punished twice" for the same crime. "I've already served a life sentence. Now they want to kill me. They want to punish me two times. If they were going to kill me, they should have done it a long time ago."
Say what? That's some chutzpah for Nichols to cry foul. So, why has he been serving the equivalent of a life sentence on death row? The only reason Nichols has been sitting on death row over 25 years is because he agreed to let his attorneys file numerous appeals on his behalf. Claiming that he should not be executed because he has already served a life sentence is akin to a youth throwing himself on the mercy of the court because, by murdering his parents, the poor lad had been orphaned by the tragic sudden deaths of his mother and father.
Monday, February 26, 2007
Saturday, February 24, 2007
JUDGE LARRY "SON OF ITO" SEIDLIN
Last week, television viewers were treated to a courtroom spectacle that has been derided as a three ring circus presided over by, as MSNBC's Tucker Carlson described him, "the most infamous judge in America." The judge, Larry Seidlin, held a hearing with the sole purpose of determining who would get custody of the decomposing corpse of Anna Nicole Smith who died on Feb. 8. The proceedings, which should have been concluded within half a day, dragged on for six days until its surprise ending on Feb. 22.
Seidlin is a probate judge in Broward County, Florida. He is a former Bronx cab driver who obtained his law degree by attending night school. He has been on the bench for almost 30 yeqrs and is nearing retirement, Those critical of the Anna Nicole hearing accuse him of using the televised proceedings to audition for the next Judge Judy show. Carlson called him a "self promoter" and described his conduct of the hearing as an "outrageous performance." A member of the Florida bar has initiated proceedings to bring Judge Larry up before the State's Judicial Qualifications Committee.
Some have suggested Seidlin may be mentally unstable. Indeed, Judge Larry displayed some bipolar tendencies in that he alternated joking and laughing with spells of sadness and crying. As the proceedings dragged on, his pontifications became more frequent. He asked more questions of the witnesses than did all the attorneys representing the three parties involved in the fight for the remains of Anna Nicole. On occasion, when a witness hesitated answering a question, Judge Larry would even answer it for him.
Judge Larry, playing up to the television cameras, clearly lost control of the hearing, and at times lacked self control. Shades of Judge Lance Ito. You may recall that, in 1995, Ito presided over the Los Angeles Superior Court murder trial of O. J. Simpson. The trial lasted over eight months, but it only took the mostly black jury less than four hours to acquit the former football star. Over the months, it became clear that, like Judge Seidlin, Ito was playing up to the television cameras. Ito helped turn the Simpson trial into a media circus.
In my opinion, Judge Ito, more than anyone else, was responsible for Simpson's acquittal. Inadvertently aided by Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden, the inept prosecutors, Ito allowed the defense to play the race card. A since disbarred F. Lee Bailey was allowed to ask Mark Fuhrman, a very experienced L.A. homicide detective, if he had ever used the word "nigger" in the past ten years. That question, and Darden's mistake in getting Simpson to try on the infamous glove, nullified the overwhelming evidence against Simpson in the minds of the black jurors.
Seidlin out-buffooned Ito. The hearing came to an abrupt end when instead of deciding in favor of one of the two claimants, Anna Nicole's mother or her bottom feeding lawyer-lover, a tearful Judge Larry released the decomposing corpse to the court appointed guardian of Anna Nicole's five month old daughter. His decision that the infant daughter was the next of kin with the right to take possession of her mother's body could have been rendered within a couple of hours after the start of the hearing. He took the hearing into Anna Nicole's drug use and into who the birth father of her new daughter might be, neither issue having any relevance whatsoever to the issue of who should get the body. As a result, the proceedings dragged on and on for six days at great expense to Florida taxpayers.
By his bipolar-like grandstanding, Seidlin allowed the hearing to become a theater of the absurd. Very few Americans have ever attended a court trial. Their impressions of court proceedings are formed by television dramas or by televised court proceedings involving celebrities like Simpson and Anna Nicole. The Anna Nicole hearing has garnered world-wide attention. Seidlin's buffoonery has done serious harm to the image and reputation of the American judicial system.
Seidlin is a probate judge in Broward County, Florida. He is a former Bronx cab driver who obtained his law degree by attending night school. He has been on the bench for almost 30 yeqrs and is nearing retirement, Those critical of the Anna Nicole hearing accuse him of using the televised proceedings to audition for the next Judge Judy show. Carlson called him a "self promoter" and described his conduct of the hearing as an "outrageous performance." A member of the Florida bar has initiated proceedings to bring Judge Larry up before the State's Judicial Qualifications Committee.
Some have suggested Seidlin may be mentally unstable. Indeed, Judge Larry displayed some bipolar tendencies in that he alternated joking and laughing with spells of sadness and crying. As the proceedings dragged on, his pontifications became more frequent. He asked more questions of the witnesses than did all the attorneys representing the three parties involved in the fight for the remains of Anna Nicole. On occasion, when a witness hesitated answering a question, Judge Larry would even answer it for him.
Judge Larry, playing up to the television cameras, clearly lost control of the hearing, and at times lacked self control. Shades of Judge Lance Ito. You may recall that, in 1995, Ito presided over the Los Angeles Superior Court murder trial of O. J. Simpson. The trial lasted over eight months, but it only took the mostly black jury less than four hours to acquit the former football star. Over the months, it became clear that, like Judge Seidlin, Ito was playing up to the television cameras. Ito helped turn the Simpson trial into a media circus.
In my opinion, Judge Ito, more than anyone else, was responsible for Simpson's acquittal. Inadvertently aided by Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden, the inept prosecutors, Ito allowed the defense to play the race card. A since disbarred F. Lee Bailey was allowed to ask Mark Fuhrman, a very experienced L.A. homicide detective, if he had ever used the word "nigger" in the past ten years. That question, and Darden's mistake in getting Simpson to try on the infamous glove, nullified the overwhelming evidence against Simpson in the minds of the black jurors.
Seidlin out-buffooned Ito. The hearing came to an abrupt end when instead of deciding in favor of one of the two claimants, Anna Nicole's mother or her bottom feeding lawyer-lover, a tearful Judge Larry released the decomposing corpse to the court appointed guardian of Anna Nicole's five month old daughter. His decision that the infant daughter was the next of kin with the right to take possession of her mother's body could have been rendered within a couple of hours after the start of the hearing. He took the hearing into Anna Nicole's drug use and into who the birth father of her new daughter might be, neither issue having any relevance whatsoever to the issue of who should get the body. As a result, the proceedings dragged on and on for six days at great expense to Florida taxpayers.
By his bipolar-like grandstanding, Seidlin allowed the hearing to become a theater of the absurd. Very few Americans have ever attended a court trial. Their impressions of court proceedings are formed by television dramas or by televised court proceedings involving celebrities like Simpson and Anna Nicole. The Anna Nicole hearing has garnered world-wide attention. Seidlin's buffoonery has done serious harm to the image and reputation of the American judicial system.
Friday, February 16, 2007
IDIOT COPS AND/OR LOONY LAW UNFORCEMENT
By now, I am sure many of you have seen the video clip where an angry father rushed in and threw his son's eleven year old wrestling opponent out of the ring. To me, what is remarkable about this incident is the police response to it.
On the evening of February 13, a Greco-Roman wrestling match was taking place in an Aurora (Illinois) gym. There were several matches going on at the same time. In one of those, Nick Nasenberry, 11, pinned his opponent to the floor. Suddenly the father of the other boy rushed in and threw Nick some six feet through the air. Then he rushed at Dan Nasenberry, Nick's father, who was video taping the incident. The assailant was restrained by security personnel before he could reach Nick's father.
Ray Hoffman, the eleven year old's assailant, later told a television reporter that he regrets his behavior and feels embarrassed. Hoffman happens to be a part-time wrestling coach. At the same time he rushed into the ring, the referee was already blowing his whistle, indicating that the match was over. Wrestling coaches noted that Nick pinned Hoffman's son with a legal move. Hoffman's punishment? He will no longer be allowed to coach wrestling.
When the Nasenberry family appeared on this morning's NBC Today show, Mrs. Nasenberry was asked whether or not any criminal charges were pending against Hoffman. She said that the police had informed them that Hoffman had no malicious intent when he assaulted Nick. The police added that without such intent, no charges couold be filed against Hoffman, as no crime had been committed.
Whoa! If Aurora, a Chicago suburb, is in the United States of America, that city has some idiot cops and/or some loony law UNforcement. The law does not require specific proof of intent in every case. Intent is proven by the action of the perpetrator. For example, you don't have to prove that a burglar intended to steal when he broke into a home. The breaking and entering proves intent.
Furthermore, intent is not always an issue. If I accidentally kill someone when my gun discharges as I am cleaning it, I can be charged with manslaughter or negligent homicide. even though I had no intention of killing anyone. Why? Because it is incumbent of me to exercise the care necessary to avoid doing harm to others.
Hoffman should be charged with assault, as well as with child endangerment. Nick received an injury to his shoulder, but he could have been hurt much more seriously. The fact that Hoffman may not have intended to hurt the boy is immaterial. It is a gross miscarriage of justice if Hoffman's only punishment is his being banned from coaching wrestling. Aurora should be emabarrassed by its idiot cops and/or its seemingly loony law UNforcement.
On the evening of February 13, a Greco-Roman wrestling match was taking place in an Aurora (Illinois) gym. There were several matches going on at the same time. In one of those, Nick Nasenberry, 11, pinned his opponent to the floor. Suddenly the father of the other boy rushed in and threw Nick some six feet through the air. Then he rushed at Dan Nasenberry, Nick's father, who was video taping the incident. The assailant was restrained by security personnel before he could reach Nick's father.
Ray Hoffman, the eleven year old's assailant, later told a television reporter that he regrets his behavior and feels embarrassed. Hoffman happens to be a part-time wrestling coach. At the same time he rushed into the ring, the referee was already blowing his whistle, indicating that the match was over. Wrestling coaches noted that Nick pinned Hoffman's son with a legal move. Hoffman's punishment? He will no longer be allowed to coach wrestling.
When the Nasenberry family appeared on this morning's NBC Today show, Mrs. Nasenberry was asked whether or not any criminal charges were pending against Hoffman. She said that the police had informed them that Hoffman had no malicious intent when he assaulted Nick. The police added that without such intent, no charges couold be filed against Hoffman, as no crime had been committed.
Whoa! If Aurora, a Chicago suburb, is in the United States of America, that city has some idiot cops and/or some loony law UNforcement. The law does not require specific proof of intent in every case. Intent is proven by the action of the perpetrator. For example, you don't have to prove that a burglar intended to steal when he broke into a home. The breaking and entering proves intent.
Furthermore, intent is not always an issue. If I accidentally kill someone when my gun discharges as I am cleaning it, I can be charged with manslaughter or negligent homicide. even though I had no intention of killing anyone. Why? Because it is incumbent of me to exercise the care necessary to avoid doing harm to others.
Hoffman should be charged with assault, as well as with child endangerment. Nick received an injury to his shoulder, but he could have been hurt much more seriously. The fact that Hoffman may not have intended to hurt the boy is immaterial. It is a gross miscarriage of justice if Hoffman's only punishment is his being banned from coaching wrestling. Aurora should be emabarrassed by its idiot cops and/or its seemingly loony law UNforcement.
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
ONE SMART COP, ONE TRUE HERO
Last Monday evening, five shoppers were killed and four were seriously wounded by gunfire at the Trolley Square shopping mall in Salt Lake City. The shooter was a young man armed with a shotgun and handgun, wearing a backpack and bandoleer full of ammunition. The toll of dead and wounded would have been much higher were it not for the smartness and heroic action of an off-duty police officer.
Ken Hammond and his pregnant wife, Sarita, were sitting on a mall bench outside the restaurant where they had just finished dining. Hammond is an officer with the City of Ogden, which is north of Salt Lake City. Being off-duty, he was in civilian clothes, without body armor, and carrying a pistol with no extra ammo clips in his possession. When he heard gunfire and spotted the shooter, he sprang into action.
He instructed his wife to go back into the restaurant and tell the manager to lock the doors. He also told his wife to call "911" and give the operator a detailed description of what he looked like and what he was wearing while in pursuit of the shooter, so that he would not be mistaken for the perpetrator by any responding Salt Lake City officers.
He followed the shooter, identified himself, and ordered the man to drop his weapon. They exchanged several shots at a distance of 20 - 30 yards, He cornered the shooter and continued to keep him in sight so he could point him out to any responding officers. By his action, he placed himself in an extremely dangerous situation. He had only a few rounds of ammunition and he was not wearing any body armor. He could have been shot by the perpetrator, or worse, he could have been shot by Salt Lake City officers seeing a man with a gun in civilian clothes and believing him to be the killer.
Fortunately for Hammond, the first officer to arrive at the scene did not shoot him. To his credit, that officer kept his wits about him when he spotted Hammond with a gun and heard him shout that he was an off-duty officer. In the heat of the moment, a hyped-up officer could easily have shot Hammond. Shortly thereafter, the shooter was killed by officers, thus ending the carnage.
The Salt Lake City police chief announced that there was no doubt Hammond's action resulted in preventing any additional deaths and injuries. Hammond was very smart in telling his wife to give the "911" operator his detailed description. That probably helped to prevent him from being mistaken for the shooter. Many officers would not have thought to get their own description called in.
Hammond is a very brave officer. Instead of hiding in the restaurant with his pregnant wife, he went after the heavily armed perpetrator, thereby riskimg his life to save the lives of others. He could have readily been killed by the shooter or by "friendly fire." Officer Hammond had to know that, by going after the killer, he might not live to see his family again. That is what being a true hero is all about.
Ken Hammond and his pregnant wife, Sarita, were sitting on a mall bench outside the restaurant where they had just finished dining. Hammond is an officer with the City of Ogden, which is north of Salt Lake City. Being off-duty, he was in civilian clothes, without body armor, and carrying a pistol with no extra ammo clips in his possession. When he heard gunfire and spotted the shooter, he sprang into action.
He instructed his wife to go back into the restaurant and tell the manager to lock the doors. He also told his wife to call "911" and give the operator a detailed description of what he looked like and what he was wearing while in pursuit of the shooter, so that he would not be mistaken for the perpetrator by any responding Salt Lake City officers.
He followed the shooter, identified himself, and ordered the man to drop his weapon. They exchanged several shots at a distance of 20 - 30 yards, He cornered the shooter and continued to keep him in sight so he could point him out to any responding officers. By his action, he placed himself in an extremely dangerous situation. He had only a few rounds of ammunition and he was not wearing any body armor. He could have been shot by the perpetrator, or worse, he could have been shot by Salt Lake City officers seeing a man with a gun in civilian clothes and believing him to be the killer.
Fortunately for Hammond, the first officer to arrive at the scene did not shoot him. To his credit, that officer kept his wits about him when he spotted Hammond with a gun and heard him shout that he was an off-duty officer. In the heat of the moment, a hyped-up officer could easily have shot Hammond. Shortly thereafter, the shooter was killed by officers, thus ending the carnage.
The Salt Lake City police chief announced that there was no doubt Hammond's action resulted in preventing any additional deaths and injuries. Hammond was very smart in telling his wife to give the "911" operator his detailed description. That probably helped to prevent him from being mistaken for the shooter. Many officers would not have thought to get their own description called in.
Hammond is a very brave officer. Instead of hiding in the restaurant with his pregnant wife, he went after the heavily armed perpetrator, thereby riskimg his life to save the lives of others. He could have readily been killed by the shooter or by "friendly fire." Officer Hammond had to know that, by going after the killer, he might not live to see his family again. That is what being a true hero is all about.
Monday, February 12, 2007
AEROSPACERS GONE WILD
Television viewers are now being treated to a new soap opera of the JOHN'S OTHER WIFE genre. The new soap, AEROSPACERS GONE WILD, has gotten off to a very strong start. For all you soap opera lovers, here is a review of the new show.
THE CHARACTERS: Lisa Nowak, 43, a NASA astronaut who flew on the Discovey last July. Lisa is a U.S. Navy captain, a rank equivalent to a "full chicken" colonel in the U.S. Army. Lisa, a 1985 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, is the recipient of bachelor and master's degrees in aerospace engineering. She joined NASA in 1996. Lisa, who is separated from her husband, is the mother of three children.
William Oefelein. 41, a NASA astronaut who flew on the Discovery last December. A stud, known to his friends as Billy-O, he is a commander in the U.S. Navy. He has a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering and a master's degree in aviation systems. He joined NASA in 1998. Billy-O is the divorced father of two children.
Colleen Shipman, 30, a U.S. Air Force captain who is an engineer with a launch support unit for the air force's national security launches at Kennedy Space Center, the same site where NASA's space shuttles are launched. Colleen was in the ROTC at Penn State and holds degrees in chemical engineering and in German. In 2002, she was commissioned a lieutenant in the air force. Colleen does not work with the space agency's programs. Colleen is single.
Donald Lykkebak, a Florida lawyer, who specializes in keeping a poker face while telling bald-faced lies. Orlando police detective William Becton. Additional characters include other astronauts and NASA administrators, friends and family of Lisa, Billy-O and Colleen, and other Florida law enforcement officials.
THE PLOT: AEROSPACERS GONE WILD is the story of a passionate love triangle between two middle aged astronauts and a younger woman. Astronaut Billy-O is divorced by his wife of 17 years. He devlops a close relationship with fellow astronaut Lisa as they train together for flight in space. Lisa falls deeply in love with Billy-O and theirs becomes an intimate relationship. Lisa separates from her husband of 19 years.
While at the Kennedy Space Center, Billy-O meets the younger Colleen. Billy-O and Colleen become lovers. Lisa is devastated when she learns of their relationship. Lisa finds out that Colleen is staying with Billy-O in Houston over the weekend. A dumped Lisa is determined to end the affair of her former lover with Colleen. Lisa plots an elaborate scheme designed to doom the romance between her rival and Billy-O.
LAST WEEK'S EPISODE: Using her contacts at NASA, Lisa finds out the airline flight schedule for Colleen's return to Florida. Lisa withdraws a large amount of cash with which she purchases a black wig, a hooded trenchcoat, a pellet handgun, a four inch folding knife, pepper spray, a steel mallet, four feet of plastic tubing, six black latex gloves, and some garbage bags, making sure not to pay for anything with her credit card.
Her cheating heart broken, Lisa hops in her car and drives 969 miles from Houston to Orlando. To get to the airport ahead of Colleen, she wears an adult diaper so she would not have to stop to pee. She stops only for gas and pays for the fuel in cash. She checks into a hotel near the Orlando airport, wearing the wig, registering under a false name with a false address, and paying for the room in cash. Lisa, still wearing the diaper and wig, puts on the trench coat and drives to and parks at the airport to await the arrival of Colleen.
Colleen arrives in Orlando, but discovers that her baggage was not on her flight. She waited in the airport for two hours until her baggage arrived. As she heads to her car, an alarmed Colleen notices a dark haired woman following her. She hurries to her car, gets in, and immediately locks all the doors. The dark haired woman starts pounding on the driver's side window screaming that she needed help. Colleen cracks the window slightly and Lisa spritzes her with the pepper spray.
Colleen manages to drive as far as the parking lot toll booth where she reports the assault. The police arrive in time to see Lisa trying to discard a garbage bag containing the purchased goodies, which they retrieve from a trash container. Colleen identifies Lisa who is then arrested and charged with attempted kidnapping, among other charges. After spending the night in jail she appeared in court and was granted release on $15,000 bail. While she was in a bail bond office, Lisa was rearrested on a newly filed charge of attempted first degree murder.
Detective Becton prepared the affidavit for the murder charge. "The facts that Mrs. Nowak drove approximately 900 miles, urinated in diapers so that she did not need to stop, stayed at a hotel where she paid in cash and used a false name and address to register, stealthily followed the victim, while in disguise, and possessed multiple deadly weapons at the time she confronted the victim, as well as spraying the victim with a substance meant to disable a person, create a well-founded fear and give this investigator probable cause to believe that Mrs. Nowak intended to murder Ms. Shipman."
At the following court hearing Donald Lykkebak, Lisa's lawyer, told the judge that this case was not what it appeared to be. Maintaining a poker face, he told the court, "What we have here is a desperate woman wanting to talk to the other woman." This time Lisa was released on $25,000 bail, fitted with a GPS ankle bracelet, and escorted back to Houston on a commercial flight by another astronaut, one of two who had flown to Orlando to be at her side. Uon her return, NASA placed Lisa on 30 days leave. Meanwhile, Billy-O flies to Florida to be at Colleen's side.
COMING EPISODES: Will a spaced out Lisa be thrown out of the space program? Will Colleen testify against Lisa or will she decide not to cooperate with the prosecution? Will that murder charge hold up? Will Lykkebak's argument of Lisa only wanting to talk to Colleen fly? Will she get probation, go to prison, or will a jury find that this astronaut merely flew over the cuckoo's nest? Will the Navy courtmartial Lisa for the unbecoming conduct of adultery? Will Billy-O marry Colleen, or will he dump her for a still younger babe? Soap lovers, stay tuned to AEROSPACERS GONE WILD with new adult diaper commercials claiming that "You can depend on Depend to keep you dry for at least 900 miles."
THE CHARACTERS: Lisa Nowak, 43, a NASA astronaut who flew on the Discovey last July. Lisa is a U.S. Navy captain, a rank equivalent to a "full chicken" colonel in the U.S. Army. Lisa, a 1985 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, is the recipient of bachelor and master's degrees in aerospace engineering. She joined NASA in 1996. Lisa, who is separated from her husband, is the mother of three children.
William Oefelein. 41, a NASA astronaut who flew on the Discovery last December. A stud, known to his friends as Billy-O, he is a commander in the U.S. Navy. He has a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering and a master's degree in aviation systems. He joined NASA in 1998. Billy-O is the divorced father of two children.
Colleen Shipman, 30, a U.S. Air Force captain who is an engineer with a launch support unit for the air force's national security launches at Kennedy Space Center, the same site where NASA's space shuttles are launched. Colleen was in the ROTC at Penn State and holds degrees in chemical engineering and in German. In 2002, she was commissioned a lieutenant in the air force. Colleen does not work with the space agency's programs. Colleen is single.
Donald Lykkebak, a Florida lawyer, who specializes in keeping a poker face while telling bald-faced lies. Orlando police detective William Becton. Additional characters include other astronauts and NASA administrators, friends and family of Lisa, Billy-O and Colleen, and other Florida law enforcement officials.
THE PLOT: AEROSPACERS GONE WILD is the story of a passionate love triangle between two middle aged astronauts and a younger woman. Astronaut Billy-O is divorced by his wife of 17 years. He devlops a close relationship with fellow astronaut Lisa as they train together for flight in space. Lisa falls deeply in love with Billy-O and theirs becomes an intimate relationship. Lisa separates from her husband of 19 years.
While at the Kennedy Space Center, Billy-O meets the younger Colleen. Billy-O and Colleen become lovers. Lisa is devastated when she learns of their relationship. Lisa finds out that Colleen is staying with Billy-O in Houston over the weekend. A dumped Lisa is determined to end the affair of her former lover with Colleen. Lisa plots an elaborate scheme designed to doom the romance between her rival and Billy-O.
LAST WEEK'S EPISODE: Using her contacts at NASA, Lisa finds out the airline flight schedule for Colleen's return to Florida. Lisa withdraws a large amount of cash with which she purchases a black wig, a hooded trenchcoat, a pellet handgun, a four inch folding knife, pepper spray, a steel mallet, four feet of plastic tubing, six black latex gloves, and some garbage bags, making sure not to pay for anything with her credit card.
Her cheating heart broken, Lisa hops in her car and drives 969 miles from Houston to Orlando. To get to the airport ahead of Colleen, she wears an adult diaper so she would not have to stop to pee. She stops only for gas and pays for the fuel in cash. She checks into a hotel near the Orlando airport, wearing the wig, registering under a false name with a false address, and paying for the room in cash. Lisa, still wearing the diaper and wig, puts on the trench coat and drives to and parks at the airport to await the arrival of Colleen.
Colleen arrives in Orlando, but discovers that her baggage was not on her flight. She waited in the airport for two hours until her baggage arrived. As she heads to her car, an alarmed Colleen notices a dark haired woman following her. She hurries to her car, gets in, and immediately locks all the doors. The dark haired woman starts pounding on the driver's side window screaming that she needed help. Colleen cracks the window slightly and Lisa spritzes her with the pepper spray.
Colleen manages to drive as far as the parking lot toll booth where she reports the assault. The police arrive in time to see Lisa trying to discard a garbage bag containing the purchased goodies, which they retrieve from a trash container. Colleen identifies Lisa who is then arrested and charged with attempted kidnapping, among other charges. After spending the night in jail she appeared in court and was granted release on $15,000 bail. While she was in a bail bond office, Lisa was rearrested on a newly filed charge of attempted first degree murder.
Detective Becton prepared the affidavit for the murder charge. "The facts that Mrs. Nowak drove approximately 900 miles, urinated in diapers so that she did not need to stop, stayed at a hotel where she paid in cash and used a false name and address to register, stealthily followed the victim, while in disguise, and possessed multiple deadly weapons at the time she confronted the victim, as well as spraying the victim with a substance meant to disable a person, create a well-founded fear and give this investigator probable cause to believe that Mrs. Nowak intended to murder Ms. Shipman."
At the following court hearing Donald Lykkebak, Lisa's lawyer, told the judge that this case was not what it appeared to be. Maintaining a poker face, he told the court, "What we have here is a desperate woman wanting to talk to the other woman." This time Lisa was released on $25,000 bail, fitted with a GPS ankle bracelet, and escorted back to Houston on a commercial flight by another astronaut, one of two who had flown to Orlando to be at her side. Uon her return, NASA placed Lisa on 30 days leave. Meanwhile, Billy-O flies to Florida to be at Colleen's side.
COMING EPISODES: Will a spaced out Lisa be thrown out of the space program? Will Colleen testify against Lisa or will she decide not to cooperate with the prosecution? Will that murder charge hold up? Will Lykkebak's argument of Lisa only wanting to talk to Colleen fly? Will she get probation, go to prison, or will a jury find that this astronaut merely flew over the cuckoo's nest? Will the Navy courtmartial Lisa for the unbecoming conduct of adultery? Will Billy-O marry Colleen, or will he dump her for a still younger babe? Soap lovers, stay tuned to AEROSPACERS GONE WILD with new adult diaper commercials claiming that "You can depend on Depend to keep you dry for at least 900 miles."
Sunday, February 04, 2007
CYNICISM: THE WORST THING ABOUT BEING A COP
We have all heard different takes on what is the best thing about being a cop. There's the noble calling in which you risk life and limb to protect and serve society. There's the occasional excitement. There's the joy of not being tied down to a desk all day long. When you report for your shift, you never know what is in store for you. There's the thrill of driving your patrol car at 100 mph with the emergency lights and siren on. There's the satisfaction of catching a crook. And then, there are the short skirted cleavage showing groupies who are crazy about a man in uniform. Whoopee!!!
But, what is the worst thing about being a cop? The answer to that question depends on who you talk to. Criminal justice researchers say that police work consists of 95 percent utter boredom and five percent sheer terror. That is correct. And, that creates problems for some officers. To overcome the boredom, they will create their own excitement. How do they do that? Sometimes, by riling up a violator during an otherwise uneventful confrontation. The excitement comes from the inevitable knock down and drag out. Others create some escitement by driving like there's no tomorrow. Boredom also leads to carelessness, thereby placing an officers's life in greater jeopardy.
I recently heard a police officer say, "The worst thing about this job is having to listen to people lie all day long." He had a good point. Whether you are talking to a traffic violator or to someone suspected of committing a crime, you usually get nothing but a load of crap. Officers finding a stolen stereo set during the execution of a search warrant, will ask the crook, "What about that stereo?" He'll usually reply, "What stereo?" When they jerk him over to the stereo and say, "This stereo," he'll usually respond, "Oh, that stereo." The same with dope. "Where did you get this shit (heroin)?" "What shit?" "This shit, asshole!" "Oh, that shit." Even crime victims, and not just crooks, often lie to investigating officers.
Dr. Mike Roberts, a highly respected police psychologist, once asked all of the recruits, on their frirst day in the San Francisco police academy, what they thought of people in general. Their response for the most part was, "There are good people and there are assholes." He returned a year after they graduated from the academy and asked the same question. This time the answer was, "There are cops and there are assholes." When he returned three years later with that quesstion, those still on the force replied that even "some of the cops are assholes."
The cynicism - cops and assholes - which pervades the police service is one of the worst things about being a cop. It creates problems in the officer's relationship with familly members. It creates problems in his relationship with the community. This cynicism is nurtured by hostility between the police and members of the community. That hostility is a consequence of the police's duty to regulate human behavior when no one likes to have their behavior regulated.
How does a good cop deal with the assholes in the police service? Unfortunately, not very well. Will an officer turn in his partner if he used excessive force during an arrest? Not likely. Will an honest cop turn in a crooked cop? Maybe, maybe not. The problem is the unwritten law in the police service that you do not rat out a fellow officer. That is partly due to the cynicism of "everyone out there is against us, so we have to stick together." Of course, in our society a rat is a rat, whether one is a police officer or not.
Cynicism is also a great destructor of idealism. I've known a number of white police officers who joined the force to do their part in fighting racism against blacks. After a while, they get sick and tired of the hostility they meet when dealing with members of the black community, a hostility based on years of mistreatment by the police. It isn't long before many of them join their fellow officers in using the "n" word and in making disparaging remarks about minorities. The same with the idealists who want to help make ours a better society. They soon give up on that - it becomes us against the assholes.
There is little doubt that cynicism has a debilitating effect. Many officers undergo regressive personality changes during their progression through the police service. Some acquire an authoritarian Napoleonic complex.
Many develop a "people are no fucking good" attitude. Some develop a borderline paranoid ideation. Cynicism probably plays a significant role in the high rate of alcoholism and divorce among cops. Notwithstanding the cynicism, most of those who become cops will find police work to be an important, challenging, and satisfying occupation.
But, what is the worst thing about being a cop? The answer to that question depends on who you talk to. Criminal justice researchers say that police work consists of 95 percent utter boredom and five percent sheer terror. That is correct. And, that creates problems for some officers. To overcome the boredom, they will create their own excitement. How do they do that? Sometimes, by riling up a violator during an otherwise uneventful confrontation. The excitement comes from the inevitable knock down and drag out. Others create some escitement by driving like there's no tomorrow. Boredom also leads to carelessness, thereby placing an officers's life in greater jeopardy.
I recently heard a police officer say, "The worst thing about this job is having to listen to people lie all day long." He had a good point. Whether you are talking to a traffic violator or to someone suspected of committing a crime, you usually get nothing but a load of crap. Officers finding a stolen stereo set during the execution of a search warrant, will ask the crook, "What about that stereo?" He'll usually reply, "What stereo?" When they jerk him over to the stereo and say, "This stereo," he'll usually respond, "Oh, that stereo." The same with dope. "Where did you get this shit (heroin)?" "What shit?" "This shit, asshole!" "Oh, that shit." Even crime victims, and not just crooks, often lie to investigating officers.
Dr. Mike Roberts, a highly respected police psychologist, once asked all of the recruits, on their frirst day in the San Francisco police academy, what they thought of people in general. Their response for the most part was, "There are good people and there are assholes." He returned a year after they graduated from the academy and asked the same question. This time the answer was, "There are cops and there are assholes." When he returned three years later with that quesstion, those still on the force replied that even "some of the cops are assholes."
The cynicism - cops and assholes - which pervades the police service is one of the worst things about being a cop. It creates problems in the officer's relationship with familly members. It creates problems in his relationship with the community. This cynicism is nurtured by hostility between the police and members of the community. That hostility is a consequence of the police's duty to regulate human behavior when no one likes to have their behavior regulated.
How does a good cop deal with the assholes in the police service? Unfortunately, not very well. Will an officer turn in his partner if he used excessive force during an arrest? Not likely. Will an honest cop turn in a crooked cop? Maybe, maybe not. The problem is the unwritten law in the police service that you do not rat out a fellow officer. That is partly due to the cynicism of "everyone out there is against us, so we have to stick together." Of course, in our society a rat is a rat, whether one is a police officer or not.
Cynicism is also a great destructor of idealism. I've known a number of white police officers who joined the force to do their part in fighting racism against blacks. After a while, they get sick and tired of the hostility they meet when dealing with members of the black community, a hostility based on years of mistreatment by the police. It isn't long before many of them join their fellow officers in using the "n" word and in making disparaging remarks about minorities. The same with the idealists who want to help make ours a better society. They soon give up on that - it becomes us against the assholes.
There is little doubt that cynicism has a debilitating effect. Many officers undergo regressive personality changes during their progression through the police service. Some acquire an authoritarian Napoleonic complex.
Many develop a "people are no fucking good" attitude. Some develop a borderline paranoid ideation. Cynicism probably plays a significant role in the high rate of alcoholism and divorce among cops. Notwithstanding the cynicism, most of those who become cops will find police work to be an important, challenging, and satisfying occupation.
Friday, February 02, 2007
COPS HARPOONED AND ZAPPED
The use of Tasers by the police as non-lethal weapons was initially aclaimed the greatest development since sliced bread. The second guessers, usually civil libertarians, come out of the woodwork every time a cop pops someone with his gun, Tasers were thought to be a harmless way of subduing those who charge at cops with knives, clubs, hammers, axes, machetes, chainsaws, a sack full of shit or whatever, without having to resort to deadly force. God forbid that the police should ever shoot some hatchet swinging juvie punk. Heaven help the cop who shoots an unarmed hyped-up 250 pound hulk bent on beating him into a lifeless bloody pulp.
All good things must come to an end. Some scientists and many civil libertarians no longer look at tasers as the weapon of choice for a kinder, gentler, and friendlier neighborhood cop. There have been a number of people throughout the country who have died after having been tasered by the police. Many cops have been criticized for using tasers instead of sweet-talking some aggressive drug-crazed asshole into a police car. Others have been accused of resorting to tasers out of anger or to satisfy some sadistic trait.
Police taser guns fire two barbs which imbed themselves in the clothing or skin while delivering a five second long 50,000 volt electric charge, resulting in the loss of muscular control, thereby incapacitating the targeted individual. Some police agencies require that before an officer is issued a taser, he himself must be tasered. The thinking here is that an officer needs to experience the hurt he may put on others to keep him from using the taser unless it is absolutely necessary. Other police agencies do not require their officers to be tasered.
I have always felt very strongly that it is ridiculous to require that an officer be harpooned and zapped with 50,000 volts before he is allowed to carry a taser. If that is necessary to prevent the unnecssary use of that weapon, why not shoot an officer before he is allowed to carry a gun? Or, why not really whack him a few times with a baton before he is allowed to carry that weapon? You say that shooting and clubbing an officer are absurd analogies. Sure they are, but they are no more absurd than harpooning and zapping an officer.
The judicious use of tasers can best be achieved through an emphatic training program without resorting to the tasering of the trainee. As with guns and batons, their judicious use can be enforced by written taser use policies, the violation of which would result in serious disciplinary consequences. Whether or not police agencies will continue to use tasers is besides the point. There will always be an occasion when a cop will have to shoot someone in order to save himself or the life of another citizen.
All good things must come to an end. Some scientists and many civil libertarians no longer look at tasers as the weapon of choice for a kinder, gentler, and friendlier neighborhood cop. There have been a number of people throughout the country who have died after having been tasered by the police. Many cops have been criticized for using tasers instead of sweet-talking some aggressive drug-crazed asshole into a police car. Others have been accused of resorting to tasers out of anger or to satisfy some sadistic trait.
Police taser guns fire two barbs which imbed themselves in the clothing or skin while delivering a five second long 50,000 volt electric charge, resulting in the loss of muscular control, thereby incapacitating the targeted individual. Some police agencies require that before an officer is issued a taser, he himself must be tasered. The thinking here is that an officer needs to experience the hurt he may put on others to keep him from using the taser unless it is absolutely necessary. Other police agencies do not require their officers to be tasered.
I have always felt very strongly that it is ridiculous to require that an officer be harpooned and zapped with 50,000 volts before he is allowed to carry a taser. If that is necessary to prevent the unnecssary use of that weapon, why not shoot an officer before he is allowed to carry a gun? Or, why not really whack him a few times with a baton before he is allowed to carry that weapon? You say that shooting and clubbing an officer are absurd analogies. Sure they are, but they are no more absurd than harpooning and zapping an officer.
The judicious use of tasers can best be achieved through an emphatic training program without resorting to the tasering of the trainee. As with guns and batons, their judicious use can be enforced by written taser use policies, the violation of which would result in serious disciplinary consequences. Whether or not police agencies will continue to use tasers is besides the point. There will always be an occasion when a cop will have to shoot someone in order to save himself or the life of another citizen.
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
ARMED AND INFAMOUS - REST IN PEACE
Great news!!! CBS has axed its reality show ARMED AND FAMOUS after airing only four episodes. The show, which featured some half-ass celebrities playing "real" cops in Muncie. Indiana, had so few viewers that CBS was forced to pull the plug on this farce. Thank God!!!
Now Erik Estrada can go back to watching himself on videos of his 70's cop show ChiPs. LaToya Jackson can go back to exposing her breast or whatever else she does best. Of course, she could play cop to brother Michael and keep him from molesting any more young boys now that he is back in this country. Jason "Wee Man" Acuna can stop making a jackass of himself as a dwarf cop and go back full-time to his day job on the MTV show Jackass.
Muncie Police Chief Joe Winkle can now stop worrying about Estrada's temper and obscene language. He can be thankful that he is no longer involved in a denigration of law enforcement. Now that he doesn't have to waste anymore time with this show, Winkle should sit down and figure out how he can best apologize to the law enforcement community for helping to belittle police officers.
I hope that CBS lost a ton of money for its insulting embarrassment of the police service. It looks like America's television viewing audience is not quite as stupid as I thought. By omission, they've killed and buried this show. May it rest in peace. Hallelujah!!!
Now Erik Estrada can go back to watching himself on videos of his 70's cop show ChiPs. LaToya Jackson can go back to exposing her breast or whatever else she does best. Of course, she could play cop to brother Michael and keep him from molesting any more young boys now that he is back in this country. Jason "Wee Man" Acuna can stop making a jackass of himself as a dwarf cop and go back full-time to his day job on the MTV show Jackass.
Muncie Police Chief Joe Winkle can now stop worrying about Estrada's temper and obscene language. He can be thankful that he is no longer involved in a denigration of law enforcement. Now that he doesn't have to waste anymore time with this show, Winkle should sit down and figure out how he can best apologize to the law enforcement community for helping to belittle police officers.
I hope that CBS lost a ton of money for its insulting embarrassment of the police service. It looks like America's television viewing audience is not quite as stupid as I thought. By omission, they've killed and buried this show. May it rest in peace. Hallelujah!!!
Sunday, January 28, 2007
DEMOCRATS AND MEDIA PERSONALITIES SUCK UP TO A CHARLATAN
Hillary Clinton and other Democrat presidential hopefuls have been sucking up to the Reverend Al Sharpton. So have a number of media personalities. And, of course, so has Hollywood. The suck-ups brush aside Sharpton's role in the Tawana Brawley hoax, in the Crown Heights riot, and in the Freddie's Fashion Mart massacre, three dark chapters in American race relations.
On a Thanksgiving weekend in 1987, Tawana Brawley, a 15 year old black girl, was found curled up inside a garbage bag in a small Hudson Valley town. She was smeared with feces and the words "nigger," "KKK" and "bitch" were scrawled on her body. She claimed to have been abducted, beaten, and sexuallly assaulted for four days by six white law enforcement racists.
Needless to say, this case drew immediate world-wide media attention. Understandably, the black community throughout the United States was outraged. Sharpton and two black attorneys, Alton Maddox and Vernon Mason, assumed the mantle as Bawley's advisors. Sharpton orchrestated the whole sordid affair, thereby fanning the flames of black anger. Sharpton's role in this case made him an instant leader among black activists.
One cop and a prosecutor were identified as having participated in the abduction and sexual assault. So much abuse was heaped on the accused that it ruined the prosecutor's career and led the police officer to commit suicide. However, a lengthy grand jury investigation found all of the allegations to be a hoax. Subsequently, an in-depth investigation by six New York Times reporters also determined that the allegations were a hoax committed by Brawley to hide the fact from her mother that she had run off with a boyfriend.
The falsely accused prosecutor sued Sharpton, Maddox and Mason, winning a monetary judgement against all three. Maddox and Mason were eventually disbarred for unethical conduct. Sharpton has never apologized for his responsibility in the officer's suicide and in the porsecutor's ruined career. In fact, to this day Sharpton continues to insist that the Brawley scandal was not a hoax.
In 1991, Sharpton also helped fan the flames of black anger against Jews in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn. A Jewish driver in a police escorted procession, which was returning from a cemetary, collided with another vehicle at an intersection. His car veered onto the sidewalk where it struck two seven year old black children, one of whom died. Some bystanders charged that the driver was speeding and ran a red light. A private Jewish ambulance, which had arrived at the scene, was ordered by the police to take the Jewish driver away. The ambulance attendants were also ordered not to attend to the two injured black children because a city ambulance had already been summoned.
Blacks were outraged, feeling that a Jew had been afforded favorable treatment at the expense of the injured children. There had long been tensions between Jews and blacks in the Crown Heights neighborhood. Sharpton's rantings and ravings over the incident were instrumental in causing a riot which lasted for four days. The rallying cry of blacks was "Get the Jews" and a Jewish seminary student was stabbed to death. Because the rioting was mishandled by the police, Lee Brown, New York's black police commissioner, lost his job and David Dinkins, the city's first black mayor, was defeated by Rudy Giuliani in his bid for another term in office.
In 1995, a landlord in Harlem tried to evict one of his tenants, a black music store owner, in order to expand his adjoining business. Sharpton organized a demonstration against the landlord, denouncing him as a "white interloper." Sharpton's inflammatory race-baiting rhetoric provoked one of his followers to take a gun into Freddie's Fashion Mart and slaughter seven customers before committing suicide.
Sharpton and Jesse Jackson both feed off the culture of victimology which pervades the black community. It is sad that blacks look to these two charlatans for leadership when there are so many other prominent blacks without a checkered past. Democrats used to court Jackson, but his star has been fading. Now they slobber all over Sharpton. Media personalities, like Chris Matthews and Tucker Carlson, suck up to Sharpton almost daily. Hollywood, not to be outdone, invites him to attend the Academy Awards. Sharpton is a frequent guest on the Leno and Letterman shows and has hosted Saturday Night Live.
I've always liked Tucker Carlson and it sickens me that he seems to worship Sharpton. Hillary Clinton already has a lock on the black vote, yet she, nevertheless, sucks up to Sharpton. We are a nation of forgiving people, but should we brush aside Sharpton's sordid history and forgive him for his part in the Tawana Brawley hoax, in the Crown Hights riot, and in the Freddie's Fashion Mart massacre? Shame on Clinton and her fellow presidential hopefuls. Shame on Matthews, Carlson, and the other media personalities who suck up to Sharpton. Shame on Hollywood for giving Sharpton star power. Above all, shame on us for letting those candidates, those media personalities, and Hollywood get away with it.
On a Thanksgiving weekend in 1987, Tawana Brawley, a 15 year old black girl, was found curled up inside a garbage bag in a small Hudson Valley town. She was smeared with feces and the words "nigger," "KKK" and "bitch" were scrawled on her body. She claimed to have been abducted, beaten, and sexuallly assaulted for four days by six white law enforcement racists.
Needless to say, this case drew immediate world-wide media attention. Understandably, the black community throughout the United States was outraged. Sharpton and two black attorneys, Alton Maddox and Vernon Mason, assumed the mantle as Bawley's advisors. Sharpton orchrestated the whole sordid affair, thereby fanning the flames of black anger. Sharpton's role in this case made him an instant leader among black activists.
One cop and a prosecutor were identified as having participated in the abduction and sexual assault. So much abuse was heaped on the accused that it ruined the prosecutor's career and led the police officer to commit suicide. However, a lengthy grand jury investigation found all of the allegations to be a hoax. Subsequently, an in-depth investigation by six New York Times reporters also determined that the allegations were a hoax committed by Brawley to hide the fact from her mother that she had run off with a boyfriend.
The falsely accused prosecutor sued Sharpton, Maddox and Mason, winning a monetary judgement against all three. Maddox and Mason were eventually disbarred for unethical conduct. Sharpton has never apologized for his responsibility in the officer's suicide and in the porsecutor's ruined career. In fact, to this day Sharpton continues to insist that the Brawley scandal was not a hoax.
In 1991, Sharpton also helped fan the flames of black anger against Jews in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn. A Jewish driver in a police escorted procession, which was returning from a cemetary, collided with another vehicle at an intersection. His car veered onto the sidewalk where it struck two seven year old black children, one of whom died. Some bystanders charged that the driver was speeding and ran a red light. A private Jewish ambulance, which had arrived at the scene, was ordered by the police to take the Jewish driver away. The ambulance attendants were also ordered not to attend to the two injured black children because a city ambulance had already been summoned.
Blacks were outraged, feeling that a Jew had been afforded favorable treatment at the expense of the injured children. There had long been tensions between Jews and blacks in the Crown Heights neighborhood. Sharpton's rantings and ravings over the incident were instrumental in causing a riot which lasted for four days. The rallying cry of blacks was "Get the Jews" and a Jewish seminary student was stabbed to death. Because the rioting was mishandled by the police, Lee Brown, New York's black police commissioner, lost his job and David Dinkins, the city's first black mayor, was defeated by Rudy Giuliani in his bid for another term in office.
In 1995, a landlord in Harlem tried to evict one of his tenants, a black music store owner, in order to expand his adjoining business. Sharpton organized a demonstration against the landlord, denouncing him as a "white interloper." Sharpton's inflammatory race-baiting rhetoric provoked one of his followers to take a gun into Freddie's Fashion Mart and slaughter seven customers before committing suicide.
Sharpton and Jesse Jackson both feed off the culture of victimology which pervades the black community. It is sad that blacks look to these two charlatans for leadership when there are so many other prominent blacks without a checkered past. Democrats used to court Jackson, but his star has been fading. Now they slobber all over Sharpton. Media personalities, like Chris Matthews and Tucker Carlson, suck up to Sharpton almost daily. Hollywood, not to be outdone, invites him to attend the Academy Awards. Sharpton is a frequent guest on the Leno and Letterman shows and has hosted Saturday Night Live.
I've always liked Tucker Carlson and it sickens me that he seems to worship Sharpton. Hillary Clinton already has a lock on the black vote, yet she, nevertheless, sucks up to Sharpton. We are a nation of forgiving people, but should we brush aside Sharpton's sordid history and forgive him for his part in the Tawana Brawley hoax, in the Crown Hights riot, and in the Freddie's Fashion Mart massacre? Shame on Clinton and her fellow presidential hopefuls. Shame on Matthews, Carlson, and the other media personalities who suck up to Sharpton. Shame on Hollywood for giving Sharpton star power. Above all, shame on us for letting those candidates, those media personalities, and Hollywood get away with it.
Friday, January 26, 2007
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING THE BLACK PANTHERS AND THE DUKE RAPE CASE
Recently I published blogs entitled THE BLACK PANTHER LEGACY (December 1, 2006) and OFFICIAL OPRESSION: THE DUKE UNIVERSITY RAPE CASE (January 15, 2007). This week, there have been some new developments concerning the Panthers and the Duke rape case.
In the Black Panther blog I stated that "Panthers also committed a number of deadly attacks against unsuspecting police officers." I am sure that those who consider the Panthers to be folk heroes do not believe that statement nor do they believe what I said about the free breakfast program coloring book. Hey - Wake up and smell the roses!
This week, eight black men were arrested for the 1971 slaying of a San Francisco police sergeant. A ninth former Panther is also charged in this case and is still being sought. Seven of those arressted were former members of the Black Liberation Army, a branch of the Black Panther Party for Self Defense. According to the authorities, the slaying of Sgt. John V. Young was part of the BLA's "five-year campaign to kill law enforcemnt officers in San Francisco and New York."
The Panther BLA attacks against the police were carried out between 1968 and 1973, and included the slaying of two New York City police officers and the bombing of a San Francisco police funeral. Why did it take 35 years for these thugs to be arrested? According to the San Francisco Police Department, the investigation of these attacks was reopened in 1999 after "advances in forensic science led to the discovery of new evidence."
All of those charged are in their 50s and 60s. Stuart Hanlon, a lawyer for one of the arrestees, claims "There's a law enforcement attitude that they hate these people, the Panthers. Now they're going after old men." Damn right, we hate the Panthers and for good reason. And good for SFPD in bringing about the arrest of these cold blooded cop killers.
In the Duke rape blog I wrote that "The State Bar is also investigating his withholding of exculpatory DNA evidence." This week the North Carolina State Bar filed charges against District Attorney Mike Nifong for withholding favorable DNA evidence from defendants in the Duke lacrosse case and for repeatedly lying about it to judges and the State Bar. These charges are far more serious than the previous charges of making inflammatory public statements to reporters and misrepresenting the facts in the case.
Nifong's case against three Duke lacrosse players started to fall apart from its very beginning. The North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation could not find semen, blood or saliva on the accuser's underwear or on swabs taken from her vagina. Nifong then received the court's permission to go to a private DNA lab for more sophisticated testing. DNA Security of Burlington found DNA from AT LEAST four unidentified men. Not a single cell was found from any of the lacrosse players, all of whom had submitted DNA samples.
Despite repeated requests by the defense, Nifong hid the DNA test results and lied to the court about their availability on five occasiions from May to September. Nifong told the State Bar that he withheld the test results because he was concerned about violating the privacy rights of the lacrosse players. The State Bar recognized this crock of shit for what it was - "knowingly false."
Here is what Joseph Kennedy, a law professor at the University of North Carolina, had to say about the charges against Nifong. "Lying is really at the top of the list in terms of things lawyers just can't do. And then lying about something as important as evidence suggesting innocence in a serious case, it just doesn't get any worse than that."
For personal gain, Nifong pursued this case with reckless abandonment on the word of a slut, despite evidence to the contrary. His phony claim of withholding DNA evidence to protect the privacy rights of the lacrosse players just doesn't hold any water. All of the players would have been tickled pink had there been a public disclosure that the DNA testing did not find a single cell from any of the team members. If Nifong is not disbarred, then there is no justice in this world.
In the Black Panther blog I stated that "Panthers also committed a number of deadly attacks against unsuspecting police officers." I am sure that those who consider the Panthers to be folk heroes do not believe that statement nor do they believe what I said about the free breakfast program coloring book. Hey - Wake up and smell the roses!
This week, eight black men were arrested for the 1971 slaying of a San Francisco police sergeant. A ninth former Panther is also charged in this case and is still being sought. Seven of those arressted were former members of the Black Liberation Army, a branch of the Black Panther Party for Self Defense. According to the authorities, the slaying of Sgt. John V. Young was part of the BLA's "five-year campaign to kill law enforcemnt officers in San Francisco and New York."
The Panther BLA attacks against the police were carried out between 1968 and 1973, and included the slaying of two New York City police officers and the bombing of a San Francisco police funeral. Why did it take 35 years for these thugs to be arrested? According to the San Francisco Police Department, the investigation of these attacks was reopened in 1999 after "advances in forensic science led to the discovery of new evidence."
All of those charged are in their 50s and 60s. Stuart Hanlon, a lawyer for one of the arrestees, claims "There's a law enforcement attitude that they hate these people, the Panthers. Now they're going after old men." Damn right, we hate the Panthers and for good reason. And good for SFPD in bringing about the arrest of these cold blooded cop killers.
In the Duke rape blog I wrote that "The State Bar is also investigating his withholding of exculpatory DNA evidence." This week the North Carolina State Bar filed charges against District Attorney Mike Nifong for withholding favorable DNA evidence from defendants in the Duke lacrosse case and for repeatedly lying about it to judges and the State Bar. These charges are far more serious than the previous charges of making inflammatory public statements to reporters and misrepresenting the facts in the case.
Nifong's case against three Duke lacrosse players started to fall apart from its very beginning. The North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation could not find semen, blood or saliva on the accuser's underwear or on swabs taken from her vagina. Nifong then received the court's permission to go to a private DNA lab for more sophisticated testing. DNA Security of Burlington found DNA from AT LEAST four unidentified men. Not a single cell was found from any of the lacrosse players, all of whom had submitted DNA samples.
Despite repeated requests by the defense, Nifong hid the DNA test results and lied to the court about their availability on five occasiions from May to September. Nifong told the State Bar that he withheld the test results because he was concerned about violating the privacy rights of the lacrosse players. The State Bar recognized this crock of shit for what it was - "knowingly false."
Here is what Joseph Kennedy, a law professor at the University of North Carolina, had to say about the charges against Nifong. "Lying is really at the top of the list in terms of things lawyers just can't do. And then lying about something as important as evidence suggesting innocence in a serious case, it just doesn't get any worse than that."
For personal gain, Nifong pursued this case with reckless abandonment on the word of a slut, despite evidence to the contrary. His phony claim of withholding DNA evidence to protect the privacy rights of the lacrosse players just doesn't hold any water. All of the players would have been tickled pink had there been a public disclosure that the DNA testing did not find a single cell from any of the team members. If Nifong is not disbarred, then there is no justice in this world.
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
SPANK YOUR CHILD AND GO TO JAIL
Sally Lieber, a member of the California State Assembly, is introducing a bill which would outlaw the spanking of any child under the age of three. Such spanking would be a misdemeanor which, under California law, would subject an offender to a jail term of up to one year and/or a fine of up to $1,000. Needless to say, her proposed bill has already generated considerable controversy.
One one side you have the anti-corporal punishment crowd which claims that spanking teaches children that violence is an acceptable method of settling matters. The "violence begets violence" bunch is salivating over the possible passage of this law. At the same time, they are complaining that the bill does not go far enough because it does not outlaw corporal punishment altogether.
On the other side you have those who believe that corporal punishment, both at home and in the schools, is an effective means of disciplining unruly children. They are worried that this is just the first step in outlawing corporal punishment for children of all ages. Some civil libertarians object to this bill on the grounds that a law making it a crime to spank a child is an intrusion into the privacy rights of parents.
Lieber's bill will probably be passed by the California state legislature, especially since it will apply only to children under the age of three. I don't have a problem with such a bill, although I too am worried that this is just the first salvo in an attempt to outlaw corporal punishment altogether. Several states have already outlawed corporal punishment for all children.
If you read my blog, IT'S TOUGH TO BE A COP'S KID (December 23, 2006), you know that I favor the use of corporal punishment, as long as it's not administered in the heat of anger. I just can't buy into the anti-corporal punishment psycho babble put forth by childless child psychologists. When I was a cop, I came across a good number of really messed up kids who had a psychologist or a psychiatrist for a parent. The "never spank your child" bunch quite simply represents the pacifist segment of our society.
Why don't I object to Sally Lieber's bill? As a sensible psychiatrist put it, children under three are incapable of differentiating between right and wrong. They will not know why they are being spanked because they have not yet developed the language skills needed to understand why they are being punished. All that they will know is that spanking hurts. This psychiatrist advises parents to remove the child away from the object of his misbehavior or to take the object away from him. That's not psycho babble.
Anyhow, if Lieber's bill becomes law, it will be just about toothless. How can that law be enforced? Is a one or two year old child going to make a complaint with the authorities? If the spanking is not severe, will one spouse rat out the other? Hardly anyone will be jailed. What it boils down to is that this bill is a bit of feel-good legislation for those who are opposed to corporal punishment.
One one side you have the anti-corporal punishment crowd which claims that spanking teaches children that violence is an acceptable method of settling matters. The "violence begets violence" bunch is salivating over the possible passage of this law. At the same time, they are complaining that the bill does not go far enough because it does not outlaw corporal punishment altogether.
On the other side you have those who believe that corporal punishment, both at home and in the schools, is an effective means of disciplining unruly children. They are worried that this is just the first step in outlawing corporal punishment for children of all ages. Some civil libertarians object to this bill on the grounds that a law making it a crime to spank a child is an intrusion into the privacy rights of parents.
Lieber's bill will probably be passed by the California state legislature, especially since it will apply only to children under the age of three. I don't have a problem with such a bill, although I too am worried that this is just the first salvo in an attempt to outlaw corporal punishment altogether. Several states have already outlawed corporal punishment for all children.
If you read my blog, IT'S TOUGH TO BE A COP'S KID (December 23, 2006), you know that I favor the use of corporal punishment, as long as it's not administered in the heat of anger. I just can't buy into the anti-corporal punishment psycho babble put forth by childless child psychologists. When I was a cop, I came across a good number of really messed up kids who had a psychologist or a psychiatrist for a parent. The "never spank your child" bunch quite simply represents the pacifist segment of our society.
Why don't I object to Sally Lieber's bill? As a sensible psychiatrist put it, children under three are incapable of differentiating between right and wrong. They will not know why they are being spanked because they have not yet developed the language skills needed to understand why they are being punished. All that they will know is that spanking hurts. This psychiatrist advises parents to remove the child away from the object of his misbehavior or to take the object away from him. That's not psycho babble.
Anyhow, if Lieber's bill becomes law, it will be just about toothless. How can that law be enforced? Is a one or two year old child going to make a complaint with the authorities? If the spanking is not severe, will one spouse rat out the other? Hardly anyone will be jailed. What it boils down to is that this bill is a bit of feel-good legislation for those who are opposed to corporal punishment.
Sunday, January 21, 2007
CAN AMERICA ACTUALLY REVERSE GLOBAL WARMING?
Global warming is a worthy subject much discussed in recent times. Those who believe that global warning poses a serious threat to the survival of all living things say that the chief culprits are the emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping "greenhouse" gases from automobiles and industrial plants. Former Vice President Al Gore produced AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH, a film on global warming which will probably receive an Academy Award nomination on Tuesday for best documentary. Also on Tuesday, trying to turn attention away from Iraq, President Bush is expected to make global warming a cornerstone of his STATE OF THE UNION address.
How serious is global warming? Not all scientist agree. Some believe that we are merely experiencing a cyclical climate change. While most scientists agree that global warming is a serious problem, many do not believe it is as serious as Al Gore has made it out to be in his documentary. President Bush appears to be jumping on the anti-global warming bandwagon only in an attempt to reverse his sinking popularity. The Bush administration has never before been evironmentally friendly.
The Bush administration has done little to clean up industrial pollution. The administration seems to believe that forcing industry to employ more anti-pollution measures would be so costly that many plants would be shut down and rebuilt in countries which have few, if any pollution standards. Instead, the President has called on the American people to conserve energy and for the country to become less energy dependant on fossil fuels as a means of cleaning up the environment.
Many proposals have been put forth on ways to stop global warming. If all of these measures were adopted by this country, would that reduce global warming? If tomorrow this country were to become completely pollution free, would that actually reverse global warming? The answer is "no." Third world countries and emerging nations are responsible for far more pollution than that emitted by the United States. Fossil fuel emissions from Mexico drift across our borders more unimpeded than illegal aliens.
Third world countries are not concerned about pollution. These poor countries are only interested in acquiring economic wealth and are not about to require any costly anti-pollution measures which might discourage new industries from coming. The emerging nations of China and India are going to produce ever increasing amounts of pollutants. China and India are experiencing a huge demand for more and more automobiles and they are going to have to build a large number of dirty coal burning power plants to meet their energy needs.
America should do everything it can to conserve energy and to reduce, if not eliminate, its dependance on fossil fuels. But, it is a pipe dream for us to believe that if we eliminated our automobile and industrial emissions, global warming would actually be reversed.
How serious is global warming? Not all scientist agree. Some believe that we are merely experiencing a cyclical climate change. While most scientists agree that global warming is a serious problem, many do not believe it is as serious as Al Gore has made it out to be in his documentary. President Bush appears to be jumping on the anti-global warming bandwagon only in an attempt to reverse his sinking popularity. The Bush administration has never before been evironmentally friendly.
The Bush administration has done little to clean up industrial pollution. The administration seems to believe that forcing industry to employ more anti-pollution measures would be so costly that many plants would be shut down and rebuilt in countries which have few, if any pollution standards. Instead, the President has called on the American people to conserve energy and for the country to become less energy dependant on fossil fuels as a means of cleaning up the environment.
Many proposals have been put forth on ways to stop global warming. If all of these measures were adopted by this country, would that reduce global warming? If tomorrow this country were to become completely pollution free, would that actually reverse global warming? The answer is "no." Third world countries and emerging nations are responsible for far more pollution than that emitted by the United States. Fossil fuel emissions from Mexico drift across our borders more unimpeded than illegal aliens.
Third world countries are not concerned about pollution. These poor countries are only interested in acquiring economic wealth and are not about to require any costly anti-pollution measures which might discourage new industries from coming. The emerging nations of China and India are going to produce ever increasing amounts of pollutants. China and India are experiencing a huge demand for more and more automobiles and they are going to have to build a large number of dirty coal burning power plants to meet their energy needs.
America should do everything it can to conserve energy and to reduce, if not eliminate, its dependance on fossil fuels. But, it is a pipe dream for us to believe that if we eliminated our automobile and industrial emissions, global warming would actually be reversed.
Monday, January 15, 2007
OFFICIAL OPPRESSION: THE DUKE UNIVERSITY RAPE CASE
When a police officer has sex with a woman he has stopped for a traffic violation, or arrested for a misdemeanor, in return for not issuing her a citation or for not taking her to jail, he has used his police powers to commit the crime of official oppression. When a prosecutor uses his powers to indict a suspect on flimsy evidence for the purpose of political gain, is he any less guilty of official oppression?
Last March, a 28 year old single mother of three alleged that three Duke University lacrosse players gang raped her at an off-campus house where she and another woman were paid to perform as strippers during a team party. The national media jumped on this case like a tiger on its prey: A poor black woman, forced to work as a stripper to provide for her children and her tuition at North Carolina Central University, was sexually ravaged by a bunch of rich white kids from one of the nation's premier universities. Latent racial tensions quickly surfaced in Durham, Chapel Hill and Raleigh, North Carolina.
When black activists and their academic supporters demanded immediate action, a rush to judgement was set in motion. Without awaiting an investigation, 88 politically correct Duke professors took out a newspaper ad condemning the lacrosse players and demanding that they confess. Duke University fired the lacrosse coach, cancelled the rest of the lacrosse schedule, and disbanded the team, eventually expelling the accused from school. Mike Nifong, the local district attorney, who was beginning to campaign for re-election to office, took full advantage of these circumstances. What he did in this case made him the poster boy for all malicious prosecutors out to enhance their reputations at the expense of justice.
The "victim," who was intoxicated claimed that three men at the party had dragged her into a bathroom where they took turns beating, raping and sodomizing her, both with penile penetration and penetration by foreign objects. A hospital examination indicated signs of sexual intercourse, but little else to back up the allegations. The "victim" changed her account on several occasions during the initial stages of the investigation. She could not identify her alleged attackers until she was finally shown a photo lineup only of Duke lacrosse players.
The three players she eventually identified were immediately arrested. Nifong held several press conferences during which he practically tried the three suspects in public. He called them "hooligans" and declared that DNA testing would prove the three guilty. His case soon started to fall apart. The other black stripper disputed the "victim's" allegations and claimed that after they left the house, the accuser wanted to return to the party because there was more money to be made. One of the suspects was seen making a distant ATM withdrawal during the time the alleged rape took place. DNA tests revealed the "victim" had sexual intercourse with several men, none of them members of the lacrosse team.
Despite all of these inconsistencies, Nifong obtained indictments against the three suspects for rape, kidnapping and sexual assault, and he continued to hold press conferences to support his case. He was re-elected to office, receiving the overwhelming majority of an energized black vote. The case continued to fall apart following the election. It was revealed that Nifong had requested that the DNA lab withhold the test results. The accuser continued to change her story and when she said there was no penile penetration, Nifong was forced to drop the rape charges. The kidnapping and sexual assault charges, however, remained in effect.
Finally, the North Carolina State Bar had had enough. It filed ethics charges against Nifong for making prejudicial comments to the news media. The State Bar is also investigating his withholding of exculpatory DNA evidence. The North Carolina Conference of District Attorneys then called on Nifong to recuse himself from the case. Last week, Nifong withdrew from the case, claiming a conflict of interest because of the State Bar charges. The North Carolina Attorney General's office took over the case.
Although it looks like the lacrosse players may have been falsely accused, I don't have a lot of sympathy for these jerks. A bunch of white drunk athletes partying with a couple of black strippers is just asking for trouble. However, I do feel for the parents of the accused who, as victims of Nifong's personsl ambitions, have been subjected to considerable pain and enormous legal bills.
The accuser should face criminal charges if, for whatever reason, she deliberately lied about what happened at the party. As for the real rapist (of justice) in this case, Nifong ought to be tarred and feathered, and ridden out of town on a rail. I hope he will be disbarred, charged with official oppression, and sued for malicious prosecution. Then, justice will have been served.
Last March, a 28 year old single mother of three alleged that three Duke University lacrosse players gang raped her at an off-campus house where she and another woman were paid to perform as strippers during a team party. The national media jumped on this case like a tiger on its prey: A poor black woman, forced to work as a stripper to provide for her children and her tuition at North Carolina Central University, was sexually ravaged by a bunch of rich white kids from one of the nation's premier universities. Latent racial tensions quickly surfaced in Durham, Chapel Hill and Raleigh, North Carolina.
When black activists and their academic supporters demanded immediate action, a rush to judgement was set in motion. Without awaiting an investigation, 88 politically correct Duke professors took out a newspaper ad condemning the lacrosse players and demanding that they confess. Duke University fired the lacrosse coach, cancelled the rest of the lacrosse schedule, and disbanded the team, eventually expelling the accused from school. Mike Nifong, the local district attorney, who was beginning to campaign for re-election to office, took full advantage of these circumstances. What he did in this case made him the poster boy for all malicious prosecutors out to enhance their reputations at the expense of justice.
The "victim," who was intoxicated claimed that three men at the party had dragged her into a bathroom where they took turns beating, raping and sodomizing her, both with penile penetration and penetration by foreign objects. A hospital examination indicated signs of sexual intercourse, but little else to back up the allegations. The "victim" changed her account on several occasions during the initial stages of the investigation. She could not identify her alleged attackers until she was finally shown a photo lineup only of Duke lacrosse players.
The three players she eventually identified were immediately arrested. Nifong held several press conferences during which he practically tried the three suspects in public. He called them "hooligans" and declared that DNA testing would prove the three guilty. His case soon started to fall apart. The other black stripper disputed the "victim's" allegations and claimed that after they left the house, the accuser wanted to return to the party because there was more money to be made. One of the suspects was seen making a distant ATM withdrawal during the time the alleged rape took place. DNA tests revealed the "victim" had sexual intercourse with several men, none of them members of the lacrosse team.
Despite all of these inconsistencies, Nifong obtained indictments against the three suspects for rape, kidnapping and sexual assault, and he continued to hold press conferences to support his case. He was re-elected to office, receiving the overwhelming majority of an energized black vote. The case continued to fall apart following the election. It was revealed that Nifong had requested that the DNA lab withhold the test results. The accuser continued to change her story and when she said there was no penile penetration, Nifong was forced to drop the rape charges. The kidnapping and sexual assault charges, however, remained in effect.
Finally, the North Carolina State Bar had had enough. It filed ethics charges against Nifong for making prejudicial comments to the news media. The State Bar is also investigating his withholding of exculpatory DNA evidence. The North Carolina Conference of District Attorneys then called on Nifong to recuse himself from the case. Last week, Nifong withdrew from the case, claiming a conflict of interest because of the State Bar charges. The North Carolina Attorney General's office took over the case.
Although it looks like the lacrosse players may have been falsely accused, I don't have a lot of sympathy for these jerks. A bunch of white drunk athletes partying with a couple of black strippers is just asking for trouble. However, I do feel for the parents of the accused who, as victims of Nifong's personsl ambitions, have been subjected to considerable pain and enormous legal bills.
The accuser should face criminal charges if, for whatever reason, she deliberately lied about what happened at the party. As for the real rapist (of justice) in this case, Nifong ought to be tarred and feathered, and ridden out of town on a rail. I hope he will be disbarred, charged with official oppression, and sued for malicious prosecution. Then, justice will have been served.
Sunday, January 07, 2007
ARMED, INFAMOUS AND DANGEROUS
It was bound to happen sooner or later. Give someone some authority who's never had any and watch it go to his head. Erik Estrada, 57 years old and paunchy, lost his cool during the filming of a domestic disturbance arrest for CBS TV's forthcoming "reality" series, ARMED AND FAMOUS. Estrada, a star in the 70's cop show ChiPs, got into an obscenity-filled shouting match with Randall Sims, 53, of Muncie, Indiana.
Sims was arrested and cuffed after suffering a stab wound in the leg during a domestic dispute. After Sims was placed in an ambulance, Estrada was asked to enter the ambulance and remove the handcuffs. While in the amublance, Estrada took offense when Sims mistakingly called him Emilio Estevez. Estevez, who has no connection to the CBS show, is another actor and the son of actor Martin Sheen.
It seems that while both were in the ambulance, Sims made some reference to his successful attempt in getting a Muncie street renamed after Martin Luther King and, while addressing Estrada as Estevez, told him he knew nothing about Dr. King. Sims also said he did not want to be shown on television and complained that Estrada had only been in Muncie for "two days." Estrada became enraged and an obscenity-filled shouting match erupted between the two antagonists. Estrada shouted that he had been in Muncie for six weeks and that he grew up in Spanish Harlem, a Manhattan neighborhood mentioned by King in one of his speeches.
Later, Muncie Police Chief Joe Winkle counseled Estrada about his behavior. Winkle told Estrada that cops encounter antagonism all the time and that a professional officer is expected to disregard any untoward remarks directed his way.
What's next on this farcical "reality" show? If a drunk starts yapping at La Toya Jackson, is she going to whip out her breast, a la the 2005 Super Bowl, and smack him in the mouth with it? Is "Wee Man" going to get pissed off during an encounter and stand up to bite some guy in the balls? One thing is certain - CBS will never air Estrada's dangerous foul mouthed tirade on its show.
Sims was arrested and cuffed after suffering a stab wound in the leg during a domestic dispute. After Sims was placed in an ambulance, Estrada was asked to enter the ambulance and remove the handcuffs. While in the amublance, Estrada took offense when Sims mistakingly called him Emilio Estevez. Estevez, who has no connection to the CBS show, is another actor and the son of actor Martin Sheen.
It seems that while both were in the ambulance, Sims made some reference to his successful attempt in getting a Muncie street renamed after Martin Luther King and, while addressing Estrada as Estevez, told him he knew nothing about Dr. King. Sims also said he did not want to be shown on television and complained that Estrada had only been in Muncie for "two days." Estrada became enraged and an obscenity-filled shouting match erupted between the two antagonists. Estrada shouted that he had been in Muncie for six weeks and that he grew up in Spanish Harlem, a Manhattan neighborhood mentioned by King in one of his speeches.
Later, Muncie Police Chief Joe Winkle counseled Estrada about his behavior. Winkle told Estrada that cops encounter antagonism all the time and that a professional officer is expected to disregard any untoward remarks directed his way.
What's next on this farcical "reality" show? If a drunk starts yapping at La Toya Jackson, is she going to whip out her breast, a la the 2005 Super Bowl, and smack him in the mouth with it? Is "Wee Man" going to get pissed off during an encounter and stand up to bite some guy in the balls? One thing is certain - CBS will never air Estrada's dangerous foul mouthed tirade on its show.
Saturday, January 06, 2007
HIDDEN AGENDAS
Lately, a lot has been written on how many people in this country are serving time in prison for possessing small amounts of drugs and how many people have been released from death rows because serious post-trial questions arose about their conviction of capital murder. It should be noted that those putting forth these positions do so with misleading information because they have hidden agendas.
It is true that the prisons are full of inmates who were convicted for possession of illicit drugs. But, these people were not arrested for possessing three or four joints of marijuana or a couple of crack cocaine rocks. They were arrested for selling drugs or apprehended with a quantity of drugs large enough to constitute possession with intent to manufacture, distribute or sell. Because of plea bargaining, the original charges we reduced to possession.
The death penalty was reinstated 30 years ago. Since then, 123 people have been released from death rows because of prosecutorial misconduct, an inadequate defense, or DNA testing results. Of those released, 14 were cleared by DNA testing. Most of the other 109 were released because they received an inadequate defense. Are those who received an inadequate defense innocent of a capital offense? Possibly a few, but most of them killed someone in cold blood.
Unfortunately, it is a fact that most defendants without the means to hire an attorney, do not receive an adequate defense. Their court appointed attorneys, the jetsam and flotsam of the legal profession, lack the competence and/or resources of attorneys hired by those who can afford them.
Attorneys who depend on court appointments for their livelyhood are more interested in securing as many appointments as possible than in providing their clients with a proper time-consuming defense. Justice demands that the best defense possible is available to every person charged with a crime. That calls for abolishing the court appointed attorney system and replacing it with a well staffed and funded public defender's office.
What about those hidden agendas? Those who say the prisons are full of people convicted of possessing small amounts of drugs want to see the possession of drugs, especially marijuana, decriminalized. Those who want to cast doubt on the guilt of death row inmates want to see the death penalty abolished. They deliberately try to mislead us into believing that the prisons are full of simple pot smokers, and that putting an innocent person to death is not a remote possibility.
It is true that the prisons are full of inmates who were convicted for possession of illicit drugs. But, these people were not arrested for possessing three or four joints of marijuana or a couple of crack cocaine rocks. They were arrested for selling drugs or apprehended with a quantity of drugs large enough to constitute possession with intent to manufacture, distribute or sell. Because of plea bargaining, the original charges we reduced to possession.
The death penalty was reinstated 30 years ago. Since then, 123 people have been released from death rows because of prosecutorial misconduct, an inadequate defense, or DNA testing results. Of those released, 14 were cleared by DNA testing. Most of the other 109 were released because they received an inadequate defense. Are those who received an inadequate defense innocent of a capital offense? Possibly a few, but most of them killed someone in cold blood.
Unfortunately, it is a fact that most defendants without the means to hire an attorney, do not receive an adequate defense. Their court appointed attorneys, the jetsam and flotsam of the legal profession, lack the competence and/or resources of attorneys hired by those who can afford them.
Attorneys who depend on court appointments for their livelyhood are more interested in securing as many appointments as possible than in providing their clients with a proper time-consuming defense. Justice demands that the best defense possible is available to every person charged with a crime. That calls for abolishing the court appointed attorney system and replacing it with a well staffed and funded public defender's office.
What about those hidden agendas? Those who say the prisons are full of people convicted of possessing small amounts of drugs want to see the possession of drugs, especially marijuana, decriminalized. Those who want to cast doubt on the guilt of death row inmates want to see the death penalty abolished. They deliberately try to mislead us into believing that the prisons are full of simple pot smokers, and that putting an innocent person to death is not a remote possibility.
Wednesday, January 03, 2007
A MILESTONE, A MILLSTONE, WIMPY WHINERS
On December 28, 2006, another milestone was reached in the Iraq war when the number American dead reached 3,000. Around 22,000 American soldiers have been wounded in the four years that this war has been fought. I don't mean to minimize the number of casualties, but I want to put them in perspective with some of our nation's other conflicts,
During the four years of our Civil War (1861 - 1865), 140,414 Union soldiers were killed in action and 281,881 were wounded. 74,524 Confederate soldiers were killed and a large number wounded, the total number being unknown.
During the Korean War (1950 - 1953), 36,568 American soldiers were killed and 103,284 were wounded. During the Vietnam War (1964 - 1975), 58,199 American soldiers died and 153,303 were wounded.
During the 36-day (February 19 - March 26, 1045) Battle of Iwo Jima, a small Pacific island 4.5 miles long and 2.5 miles wide, 6,891 U.S. Marines were killed and 18,070 were wounded. So, during one month on Iwo Jima, more than twice as many American soldiers were killed and almost as many were wounded, as were killed and wounded during the first four years of the war in Iraq.
Every soldier's death is a devastating tragedy to the fallen one's survivors and my heart goes out to the families of soldiers killed or wounded in Iraq. But, when you compare the number of soldiers killled and wounded during four years in Iraq with the number killed and wounded in other conflicts, we are talking about a relatively small number. And when you look at the casualties just in the Battle of Iwo Jima, a month-long fight for only 11 square miles of ground, the number of dead and wounded in Iraq pale by comparison.
With the Vietnam War, Americans developed a pacifist mind set. Wars will be tolerated only if victory is swift and certain with a neglibible number of casualties. We are a nation of wimpy whiners when wars drag on and casualties mount. But, you will only find a few among the families of our fallen heroes joining in opposition to the war in Iraq. Despite their loss and grief, most of these families continue to support the war.
Those who are horrified because we have reached a new milestone of 3,000 American dead in Iraq, completely disregard the fact that our soldiers are all volunteers. Our military exists to fight anywhere anytime there is a threat against the security of the United States or its national interests. Accordingly, its members may be placed in the position of having to kill or be killed. No one forced our soldiers to join up. It is totally irrelevant that their only reason for volunteering may have been to obtain education benefits.
The war in Iraq has become a millstone hanging around the necks of the Bush administration and the Republican party. Because of the war, the Democrats now control both houses of Congress. Their chances of winning the next presidential election improve as the war drags on and the casualties mount. The Bush administration has only itself to blame. It relied on faulty intelligence to get us into the war and it did not have a plan for the occupation of Iraq once the Iraqi army had been defeated.
In trying to cast off its millstone, the administration is left with few options. If it pulls out of Iraq prematurely, the rest of the world will see this as a defeat of the mighty United States and our global influence will be severely diminished. Such a defeat will leave the Mideast in chaos and embolden our enemies. To continue the war until we achieve a stable Middle East, we will have to keep a large number of troops in Iraq for years to come. Our nation of wimpy whiners will never tolerate a seemingly never ending war.
During the four years of our Civil War (1861 - 1865), 140,414 Union soldiers were killed in action and 281,881 were wounded. 74,524 Confederate soldiers were killed and a large number wounded, the total number being unknown.
During the Korean War (1950 - 1953), 36,568 American soldiers were killed and 103,284 were wounded. During the Vietnam War (1964 - 1975), 58,199 American soldiers died and 153,303 were wounded.
During the 36-day (February 19 - March 26, 1045) Battle of Iwo Jima, a small Pacific island 4.5 miles long and 2.5 miles wide, 6,891 U.S. Marines were killed and 18,070 were wounded. So, during one month on Iwo Jima, more than twice as many American soldiers were killed and almost as many were wounded, as were killed and wounded during the first four years of the war in Iraq.
Every soldier's death is a devastating tragedy to the fallen one's survivors and my heart goes out to the families of soldiers killed or wounded in Iraq. But, when you compare the number of soldiers killled and wounded during four years in Iraq with the number killed and wounded in other conflicts, we are talking about a relatively small number. And when you look at the casualties just in the Battle of Iwo Jima, a month-long fight for only 11 square miles of ground, the number of dead and wounded in Iraq pale by comparison.
With the Vietnam War, Americans developed a pacifist mind set. Wars will be tolerated only if victory is swift and certain with a neglibible number of casualties. We are a nation of wimpy whiners when wars drag on and casualties mount. But, you will only find a few among the families of our fallen heroes joining in opposition to the war in Iraq. Despite their loss and grief, most of these families continue to support the war.
Those who are horrified because we have reached a new milestone of 3,000 American dead in Iraq, completely disregard the fact that our soldiers are all volunteers. Our military exists to fight anywhere anytime there is a threat against the security of the United States or its national interests. Accordingly, its members may be placed in the position of having to kill or be killed. No one forced our soldiers to join up. It is totally irrelevant that their only reason for volunteering may have been to obtain education benefits.
The war in Iraq has become a millstone hanging around the necks of the Bush administration and the Republican party. Because of the war, the Democrats now control both houses of Congress. Their chances of winning the next presidential election improve as the war drags on and the casualties mount. The Bush administration has only itself to blame. It relied on faulty intelligence to get us into the war and it did not have a plan for the occupation of Iraq once the Iraqi army had been defeated.
In trying to cast off its millstone, the administration is left with few options. If it pulls out of Iraq prematurely, the rest of the world will see this as a defeat of the mighty United States and our global influence will be severely diminished. Such a defeat will leave the Mideast in chaos and embolden our enemies. To continue the war until we achieve a stable Middle East, we will have to keep a large number of troops in Iraq for years to come. Our nation of wimpy whiners will never tolerate a seemingly never ending war.
Sunday, December 31, 2006
LASO DEPUTIES BEWARE: DON'T BUST YOUR SHERIFF'S FRIENDS
Last July, LASO Deputy James Mee arrested Lethal Weapon star Mel Glibson in Malibu for drunk driving. During this incident, as reported in the initial arrest report, Gibson ranted against Jews. Mee's supervisors ordered him to rewrite the report and to delete Gibson's anti-Semitic outburst. However, LASO could not cover up Gibson's conduct because TMZ.com, a well known celebrity news Web site, had received and published a copy of the initial report, thereby letting the genie out of the bottle.
Gibson is a personal friend of LA Sheriff Lee Baca and has helped Baca raise money for LASO charities. Gibson has also made a number of public service commercials for LASO and has been a strong supporter of law enforcement. So, LASO had several good reasons to protect Gibson's reputation and to keep him from receiving any bad publicity.
On Auguts 5, I made the following remarks in my blog on Gibson's arrest. "Whoever provided TMZ with copies of the initial arrest report will be up to his ears in deep shit if LASO manages to find out who did it. You can bet that the investigation of that leak will be far more intense than the investigation of the whole Gibson affair." And, that is exactly what has happened.
According to his attorney, Mee has been harassed by LASO officials ever since Gibson's arrest. He was abruptly transferred from Malibu, home to the rich and famous, and exiled to the Agoura Hills station. His attorney alleges that Mee continues to be unfairly singled out for scrutiny by LASO supervisors. Last October, Mee was interrogated at length because LASO believes he provided TMZ with Gibson's initial arrest report. Mee insists that he is not the source of the leak to TMZ.
Mee's treatment sends a strong message to LASO deputies - DON'T FUCK WITH SHERIFF BACA'S FRIENDS. Baca was notified immediately of Gibson's arrest, but no one has said that he personally wanted the intitial report changed. It may be that Mee's supervisors, knowing of Gibson's friendship with Baca, took it upon themselves to cover up the details of Mad Max's arrest. What about the continuing harassment of Mee? I do not believe Baca is personally responsible for that. Suckass supervisors are probably behind that, trying to score points with the boss.
Would there have been any reaction by LASO, had a report on the arrest of Joe Sixpack been leaked to TMZ? I seriously doubt it. Poor Deputy Mee - he is really fucked. Once you get on a law enforcement agency's shit list, your career is all but over and your supervisors will make life miserable for you from then on out. Their aim is to drive you off the force. The whole Gibson affair and Mee's harassment both stink. It does not reflect well on LASO, and it does not reflect well on all of law enforcement.
Gibson is a personal friend of LA Sheriff Lee Baca and has helped Baca raise money for LASO charities. Gibson has also made a number of public service commercials for LASO and has been a strong supporter of law enforcement. So, LASO had several good reasons to protect Gibson's reputation and to keep him from receiving any bad publicity.
On Auguts 5, I made the following remarks in my blog on Gibson's arrest. "Whoever provided TMZ with copies of the initial arrest report will be up to his ears in deep shit if LASO manages to find out who did it. You can bet that the investigation of that leak will be far more intense than the investigation of the whole Gibson affair." And, that is exactly what has happened.
According to his attorney, Mee has been harassed by LASO officials ever since Gibson's arrest. He was abruptly transferred from Malibu, home to the rich and famous, and exiled to the Agoura Hills station. His attorney alleges that Mee continues to be unfairly singled out for scrutiny by LASO supervisors. Last October, Mee was interrogated at length because LASO believes he provided TMZ with Gibson's initial arrest report. Mee insists that he is not the source of the leak to TMZ.
Mee's treatment sends a strong message to LASO deputies - DON'T FUCK WITH SHERIFF BACA'S FRIENDS. Baca was notified immediately of Gibson's arrest, but no one has said that he personally wanted the intitial report changed. It may be that Mee's supervisors, knowing of Gibson's friendship with Baca, took it upon themselves to cover up the details of Mad Max's arrest. What about the continuing harassment of Mee? I do not believe Baca is personally responsible for that. Suckass supervisors are probably behind that, trying to score points with the boss.
Would there have been any reaction by LASO, had a report on the arrest of Joe Sixpack been leaked to TMZ? I seriously doubt it. Poor Deputy Mee - he is really fucked. Once you get on a law enforcement agency's shit list, your career is all but over and your supervisors will make life miserable for you from then on out. Their aim is to drive you off the force. The whole Gibson affair and Mee's harassment both stink. It does not reflect well on LASO, and it does not reflect well on all of law enforcement.
Saturday, December 30, 2006
ARMED AND INFAMOUS
Car 54, where are you? Officers Muldoon and Toody, your new assignment is to bust the armed and infamous. Starting January 10, CBS Television will be airing ARMED AND FAMOUS, a new reality series featuring celebrities serving as police officers in Muncie, Indiana. The cast includes Erik Estrada from the '70s cop show ChiPs, La Toya Jackson, the 2005 Super Bowl bare-breast stripper, and Jason "Wee Man" Acuna from the MTV show Jackass.
Shame on the City of Muncie and the State of Indiana for participating in a television show which will result in the degradation of the police profession. This show will lead its viewers to believe that any jerk can be a cop. Sorry, but it takes a special type of person to be a good police officer and that excludes Michael Jackson's sister and "Wee Man," who is afflicted with achondroplasia, a form of dwarfism. Say what - a dwarf as a police officer? Why not Snow White? CBS advertises Armed and Famous as a reality show in which "Real Celebrities Become Real Cops" - bullshit, that's false advertisement.
Muncie must be really hard up for money. Joe Winkle, the police chief, believes the advertisement Muncie will receive every week will be invaluable. The law breakers who were handled by the celebrity cops have been paid a sum of money for their permission to be seen on television. There are already charges that the police coerced some of those law breakers into agreeing to be shown with these phony cops.
The celebrity cops were not permitted to participate in felony cases and they were always accompanied and supervised by veteran officers. The State of Indiana requires that before anyone can be vested with any police powers, they must have successfully completed a minimum of 40 hours of instruction in a pre-basic training course. Besides some firearms training, the only other training the celebrities participated in, as far as I was able to ascertain, was a phjysical fitness and agility program.
Where was the Indiana Law Enforcement Training Board when all this nonsense was going on? That state agency is charged with the responsibility of enforcing Indiana's peace officers standards and training laws. Where were the Indiana police chiefs' association and other law enforcement groups in that state? And where was the International Asociation of Chiefs of Police? Tlhese groups should have pressured the City of Muncie not to participate in this embarrassing venture.
CAR 54, WHERE ARE YOU? was a farcical cop comedy which ran on television from 1961 to 1963. It featured two stumblebum cops, Muldoon and Toody, who screwed up every assignmetnt they were given. Most cops were furious with that comedy, seeing it as a humiliation of the police. Several California law enforcement groups publicly protested their displeasure to the show's producers and to NBC television.
I thought Car 54 was funny as hell and enjoyed every moment of it. I told my fellow officers to lighten up and keep from taking themselves so seriously. I've always believed that cops would feel better about themselves and their jobs if they could laugh at themselves once in a while. I felt that Muldoon and Toody were so farcical that no one in their right mind could possibly believe cops were that dumb.
When it comes to Armed and Famous, I cannot bring myself to say anything good about that "reality" show. It will be an awful embarrassment to law enforcement. This is not a comedy. It will end up humiliating cops everywhere in this country, not just in Indiana. A more appropriate title would be ARMED AND INFAMOUS. MTV is not the only network with jackasses. Car 54, where are you?
Shame on the City of Muncie and the State of Indiana for participating in a television show which will result in the degradation of the police profession. This show will lead its viewers to believe that any jerk can be a cop. Sorry, but it takes a special type of person to be a good police officer and that excludes Michael Jackson's sister and "Wee Man," who is afflicted with achondroplasia, a form of dwarfism. Say what - a dwarf as a police officer? Why not Snow White? CBS advertises Armed and Famous as a reality show in which "Real Celebrities Become Real Cops" - bullshit, that's false advertisement.
Muncie must be really hard up for money. Joe Winkle, the police chief, believes the advertisement Muncie will receive every week will be invaluable. The law breakers who were handled by the celebrity cops have been paid a sum of money for their permission to be seen on television. There are already charges that the police coerced some of those law breakers into agreeing to be shown with these phony cops.
The celebrity cops were not permitted to participate in felony cases and they were always accompanied and supervised by veteran officers. The State of Indiana requires that before anyone can be vested with any police powers, they must have successfully completed a minimum of 40 hours of instruction in a pre-basic training course. Besides some firearms training, the only other training the celebrities participated in, as far as I was able to ascertain, was a phjysical fitness and agility program.
Where was the Indiana Law Enforcement Training Board when all this nonsense was going on? That state agency is charged with the responsibility of enforcing Indiana's peace officers standards and training laws. Where were the Indiana police chiefs' association and other law enforcement groups in that state? And where was the International Asociation of Chiefs of Police? Tlhese groups should have pressured the City of Muncie not to participate in this embarrassing venture.
CAR 54, WHERE ARE YOU? was a farcical cop comedy which ran on television from 1961 to 1963. It featured two stumblebum cops, Muldoon and Toody, who screwed up every assignmetnt they were given. Most cops were furious with that comedy, seeing it as a humiliation of the police. Several California law enforcement groups publicly protested their displeasure to the show's producers and to NBC television.
I thought Car 54 was funny as hell and enjoyed every moment of it. I told my fellow officers to lighten up and keep from taking themselves so seriously. I've always believed that cops would feel better about themselves and their jobs if they could laugh at themselves once in a while. I felt that Muldoon and Toody were so farcical that no one in their right mind could possibly believe cops were that dumb.
When it comes to Armed and Famous, I cannot bring myself to say anything good about that "reality" show. It will be an awful embarrassment to law enforcement. This is not a comedy. It will end up humiliating cops everywhere in this country, not just in Indiana. A more appropriate title would be ARMED AND INFAMOUS. MTV is not the only network with jackasses. Car 54, where are you?
Friday, December 29, 2006
MIKE TYSON - HOW FAR THE MIGHTY HAVE FALLEN
Mike Tyson, former world heavyweight boxing champion, was arrested yesterday during a traffic stop in Scotsdale, Arizona. Tyson was in possession of several bags containing a white powder which he said was cocaine. He told the arresting officer that he used cocaine whenever he could get it. Tyson was charged with felony possession of drugs and released on his own recognizance.
How far the mighty have fallen. In the eighties, Tyson was a devastating puncher who destroyed all of his opponents in short order. Now he is just a pityful shell of his former self. Tyson reminds me of Sonny Liston, another devastating heavyweight champion. Liston lost his title to a young Cassius Clay (Muhammad Ali) while under the influence of heroin.
During my years in the fight game, I was personally acquainted with several champions - Rocky Graziano, Rocky Marciano, and Carmen Basilio among others - and a number of title contenders - Billy Graham, Tony Pellone, and Buddy Garcia among others. Graziano and Garcia, and their families, were close personal friends of mine. None of these great fighters ever fell from grace.
Why did Liston and Tyson crash while Graziano and Basilio did not? In my opinion, it all came down to family support. Liston, Tyson, and Graziano grew up in poverty on the mean streets. Boxing gave them the opportunity to rise above it all. Graziano and Basilio were blessed with good marriages. Liston and Tyson had a history of troubled marriages. Absent of family support, Liston and Tyson turned to drugs.
While I never cared much for Mike Tyson, I am truly saddened by his downfall. He had it all - fame and fortune. Now his fortune is all but gone and his fame has turned into infamy. Tyson, an ex-convict, won the most prestigious championship in professional sports before going into a tailspin toward drug addiction. How far the mighty have fallen - what a sad state of affairs.
How far the mighty have fallen. In the eighties, Tyson was a devastating puncher who destroyed all of his opponents in short order. Now he is just a pityful shell of his former self. Tyson reminds me of Sonny Liston, another devastating heavyweight champion. Liston lost his title to a young Cassius Clay (Muhammad Ali) while under the influence of heroin.
During my years in the fight game, I was personally acquainted with several champions - Rocky Graziano, Rocky Marciano, and Carmen Basilio among others - and a number of title contenders - Billy Graham, Tony Pellone, and Buddy Garcia among others. Graziano and Garcia, and their families, were close personal friends of mine. None of these great fighters ever fell from grace.
Why did Liston and Tyson crash while Graziano and Basilio did not? In my opinion, it all came down to family support. Liston, Tyson, and Graziano grew up in poverty on the mean streets. Boxing gave them the opportunity to rise above it all. Graziano and Basilio were blessed with good marriages. Liston and Tyson had a history of troubled marriages. Absent of family support, Liston and Tyson turned to drugs.
While I never cared much for Mike Tyson, I am truly saddened by his downfall. He had it all - fame and fortune. Now his fortune is all but gone and his fame has turned into infamy. Tyson, an ex-convict, won the most prestigious championship in professional sports before going into a tailspin toward drug addiction. How far the mighty have fallen - what a sad state of affairs.
Monday, December 25, 2006
GATEWAY DRUG
Marijuana has always been recognized as a "gateway drug" because the users of methamphetamines, cocaine, and heroin almost always began their initial use of drugs by smoking pot. That is why marijuana is not the benign drug its advocates would have you believe. Those who use "recreational drugs" do so for their pleasure producing qualities. Sooner or later, the use of a drug, such as marijuana, becomes prosaic, thus leading its users to seek out stronger pleasure producing substances. Hence, the graduation from pot to meth, coke, heroin, or multiple drug use.
Until the 1970s, in most states, mere possession of marijuana constituted a felony. Marijuana became a major "drug of choice" during the anti-Vietnam War movement and, for political purposes, the penalties for the use, possession, or small sales of this drug evolved from felonies to misdemeanors. Politicians don't want NICE KIDS FROM GOOD FAMILIES to be sent to prison and/or to have a criminal record for smoking pot..
Advocacy groups, such as the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), have long pushed for the legalization of marijuana. NORML was originally bankrolled by Hugh Hefner of Playboy fame. Hefner, that paragon of virtue with his multiple sex partners, believed in the cultural revolution slogan of IF IT FEELS GOOD, DO IT! His counter culture mindset compelled him to advocate the legalization of recreational drugs, especially marijuana.
NORML takes credit for the decriminalization of marijuana by several states. and for the legalization of medicinal marijuana use in eleven states. NORML and other groups, like the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), debunk the "gateway" concept by using the ridiculous analogy of milk, the first ingestion by the newborn, being the true gateway substance which leads to the use of food, alcohol, tobacco, etc..The leniency shown to pot users could be coming to an end. Alaska and several other states which have decriminalized the possession of small amounts of marijuana are considering reversing their position.
Since 1975, Alaska has had the most liberal marijuana laws of all the states. Because the state's highest court ruled that the use and possession of small amounts of marijuana was a privacy right, possession of up to four ounces has been legal. However, the governor thinks that was then and this is now. Now there are much more potent types of pot and he believes that makes marijuana a truly dangerous drug. The governor has sent a bill to the Alaska legislature, which if enacted will recriminalize the possession of pot.
As for medical marijuana, is it science or science fiction? Medical authorities disagree about whether or not this drug really relieves the suffering of patients afflicted with glaucoma, cancer and AIDS. There is no scientific proof that marijuana has any medicinal value. NORML, MPP, and other pot proponents have done a good job of conning some members of the medical profession and some legislators into believing that marijuana is some kind of miracle drug. However, last April, the Food and Drug Administration declared marijuana has no medical value, thereby contradicting a 1999 review by the Institute of Medicine.
A recent study by Jon Gettman, a researcher from Virginia, claims that marijuana has become this nation's biggest cash crop, exceeding the value of corn and wheat combined. It is by far the biggest cash crop in California, and according to Gettman, it is among the top three cash crops in 30 states. Those who are calling for the legalization of marijana have jumped on this study by claiming that the federal government is losing billions of dollars anually in tax revenues by its prohibition against the cultivation and possession of pot.
When I was a California narcotics parole agent, I dealt with hundreds of heroin addicts. Despite all of the hassles and incarcerations, they continued to use heroin because they really liked the great feeling it gave them. I have yet to meet a heroin, cocaine, or meth user who did not smoke pot before graduating to the use of more dangerous drugs. That is why I am convinced that marijuana is far from benign, and that this gateway drug is actually the MOST DANGEROUS OF THE ILLICIT DRUGS.
Marijuana should not be legalized. The medicinal use of marijuana should be outlawed. The states which have decriminalized marijuana should recriminalize the use and possession of pot. Those convicted for possessing small amounts of pot should be made to serve a minimum of 30 days in a juvenile or adult detention facility. Will that fill up our jails and cost us a lot of money? Yes, but in the long run it will lead to a significant reduction in the use of pot and other drugs. A little jail therapy will go a long way to negate the pleasure producing qualities of pot.
.
Until the 1970s, in most states, mere possession of marijuana constituted a felony. Marijuana became a major "drug of choice" during the anti-Vietnam War movement and, for political purposes, the penalties for the use, possession, or small sales of this drug evolved from felonies to misdemeanors. Politicians don't want NICE KIDS FROM GOOD FAMILIES to be sent to prison and/or to have a criminal record for smoking pot..
Advocacy groups, such as the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), have long pushed for the legalization of marijuana. NORML was originally bankrolled by Hugh Hefner of Playboy fame. Hefner, that paragon of virtue with his multiple sex partners, believed in the cultural revolution slogan of IF IT FEELS GOOD, DO IT! His counter culture mindset compelled him to advocate the legalization of recreational drugs, especially marijuana.
NORML takes credit for the decriminalization of marijuana by several states. and for the legalization of medicinal marijuana use in eleven states. NORML and other groups, like the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP), debunk the "gateway" concept by using the ridiculous analogy of milk, the first ingestion by the newborn, being the true gateway substance which leads to the use of food, alcohol, tobacco, etc..The leniency shown to pot users could be coming to an end. Alaska and several other states which have decriminalized the possession of small amounts of marijuana are considering reversing their position.
Since 1975, Alaska has had the most liberal marijuana laws of all the states. Because the state's highest court ruled that the use and possession of small amounts of marijuana was a privacy right, possession of up to four ounces has been legal. However, the governor thinks that was then and this is now. Now there are much more potent types of pot and he believes that makes marijuana a truly dangerous drug. The governor has sent a bill to the Alaska legislature, which if enacted will recriminalize the possession of pot.
As for medical marijuana, is it science or science fiction? Medical authorities disagree about whether or not this drug really relieves the suffering of patients afflicted with glaucoma, cancer and AIDS. There is no scientific proof that marijuana has any medicinal value. NORML, MPP, and other pot proponents have done a good job of conning some members of the medical profession and some legislators into believing that marijuana is some kind of miracle drug. However, last April, the Food and Drug Administration declared marijuana has no medical value, thereby contradicting a 1999 review by the Institute of Medicine.
A recent study by Jon Gettman, a researcher from Virginia, claims that marijuana has become this nation's biggest cash crop, exceeding the value of corn and wheat combined. It is by far the biggest cash crop in California, and according to Gettman, it is among the top three cash crops in 30 states. Those who are calling for the legalization of marijana have jumped on this study by claiming that the federal government is losing billions of dollars anually in tax revenues by its prohibition against the cultivation and possession of pot.
When I was a California narcotics parole agent, I dealt with hundreds of heroin addicts. Despite all of the hassles and incarcerations, they continued to use heroin because they really liked the great feeling it gave them. I have yet to meet a heroin, cocaine, or meth user who did not smoke pot before graduating to the use of more dangerous drugs. That is why I am convinced that marijuana is far from benign, and that this gateway drug is actually the MOST DANGEROUS OF THE ILLICIT DRUGS.
Marijuana should not be legalized. The medicinal use of marijuana should be outlawed. The states which have decriminalized marijuana should recriminalize the use and possession of pot. Those convicted for possessing small amounts of pot should be made to serve a minimum of 30 days in a juvenile or adult detention facility. Will that fill up our jails and cost us a lot of money? Yes, but in the long run it will lead to a significant reduction in the use of pot and other drugs. A little jail therapy will go a long way to negate the pleasure producing qualities of pot.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)