Member since: Mon Mar 3, 2008, 02:08 PM
Number of posts: 33,903
Member since: Mon Mar 3, 2008, 02:08 PM
Number of posts: 33,903
Just replace the British words with their appropriate American ones and it's the same damn story.
The meat scandal shows all that is rotten about our free marketeers
This is a crisis not only for environment secretary, Owen Paterson, but for the whole Conservative party
Owen Paterson, secretary of state for the environment, food and rural affairs, is living through such a nightmare and is utterly lost. All his once confident beliefs are being shredded. As the horsemeat saga unfolds, it becomes more obvious by the day that those Thatcherite verities – that the market is unalloyed magic, that business must always be unshackled from "wealth-destroying" regulation, that the state must be shrunk, that the EU is a needless collectivist project from which Britain must urgently declare independence – are wrong.
Indeed, to save his career and his party's sinking reputation, he has to reverse his position on every one. The only question is whether he is sufficiently adroit to make the change.
Paterson is one of the Tories who joyfully shared the scorched earth months of the summer of 2010 when war was declared on quangos and the bloated, as they saw it, "Brownian" state. The Food Standards Agency was a natural candidate for dismemberment. Of course an integrated agency inspecting, advising and enforcing food safety and hygiene should be broken up. As an effective regulator, it was disliked by "wealth-generating" supermarkets and food companies. Its 1,700 inspectors were agents of the state terrifying honest-to-God entrepreneurs with unannounced spot checks and enforced "gold-plated" food labelling. Regulation should be "light touch".
What the Paterson worldview has never understood is that effective regulation is a source of competitive advantage. If Britain had a tough Food Standards Agency, it would become a gold standard for food quality, labelling and hygiene. British supermarkets and food companies could become known for their quality at home and abroad, rather as "over-regulated" German car companies are, rather than first suspects when something dodgy is going on. Capitalism does not organise itself to deliver best outcomes, whatever rightwing American thinktanks might claim. There has to be careful thought, law and regulation about the obligations that accompany incorporation and ownership, how supply chains are organised and how companies are managed and financed. Otherwise disaster awaits.
Posted by Catherina | Sat Feb 16, 2013, 09:36 PM (2 replies)
Obama, the US and the Muslim World: the Animosity Deepens
Another new poll, this one of Pakistan, shows: a central promise of Obama for improving US security is an utter failure
by Glenn Greenwald
In his first inaugural address, back in 2009, Barack Obama announced: "To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect." Improving how the US was perceived among the world's 1.6 billion Muslims was not about winning an international popularity contest but was deemed as vital to US national security. Even the Pentagon has long recognized that the primary cause of anti-American Terrorism is the "negative attitude" toward the US: obviously, the reason people in that part of the world want to attack the US - as opposed to Peru or South Africa or China - is because they perceive a reason to do so.
Obama's most devoted supporters have long hailed his supposedly unique ability to improve America's standing in that part of the world. In his first of what would be many paeans to Obama, Andrew Sullivan wrote back in 2007 that among Obama's countless assets, "first and foremost is his face", which would provide "the most effective potential re-branding of the United States since Reagan". Sullivan specifically imagined a "young Pakistani Muslim" seeing Obama as "the new face of America"; instantly, proclaimed Sullivan, "America's soft power has been ratcheted up not a notch, but a logarithm". Obama would be "the crudest but most effective weapon against the demonization of America that fuels Islamist ideology" because it "proves them wrong about what America is in ways no words can". Sullivan made clear why this matters so much: "such a re-branding is not trivial - it's central to an effective war strategy."
None of that has happened. In fact, the opposite has taken place: although it seemed impossible to achieve, Obama has presided over an America that, in many respects, is now even more unpopular in the Muslim world than it was under George Bush and Dick Cheney.
That is simply a fact. Poll after poll has proven it. In July, 2011, the Washington Post reported: "The hope that the Arab world had not long ago put in the United States and President Obama has all but evaporated." Citing a poll of numerous Middle East countries that had just been released, the Post explained: "In most countries surveyed, favorable attitudes toward the United States dropped to levels lower than they were during the last year of the Bush administration."
Posted by Catherina | Fri Feb 15, 2013, 11:19 AM (0 replies)
Desmond Tutu Blasts US Drones: American or Not, All Victims Are Human
Tutu: 'Does the US really want to tell those of us in the rest of the world that our lives are not of the same value as yours?'
- Lauren McCauley, staff writer
In a letter to the New York Times published Wednesday, South African Nobel Peace Prize laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu challenged the hypocrisy of the US and its citizens for accepting a killer drone program when it pertains to foreign suspects while demanding judicial review when those targets are American citizens.
I am deeply, deeply disturbed at the suggestion in “A Court to Vet Kill Lists” (news analysis, front page, Feb. 9) that possible judicial review of President Obama’s decisions to approve the targeted killing of suspected terrorists might be limited to the killings of American citizens.
Posted by Catherina | Thu Feb 14, 2013, 05:24 PM (4 replies)
What a shameful state our country's in.
In 2006, Congress quietly passed the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, a sweeping new law that classified many forms of animal rights campaigning as terrorism.
AETA, which replaced an earlier, weaker law called the Animal Enterprise Protection Act (AEPA), prohibits anything done "for the purpose of damaging or interfering with the operations of an animal enterprise" or that "causes the loss of any real or personal property." (The earlier version of the law only covered "physical disruption" to operations.) The law also prohibits "economic damage" to an enterprise, which includes loss of profits and pressure put on any investors or other companies that do business with the animal enterprise. Even the definition of "animal enterprise" is so broad that it could be construed as covering any institution that has a cafeteria selling meat or cheese products, argues Rachel Meeropol, an attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights, which is backing the plaintiffs in the case filed against Attorney General Eric Holder.
"Basically, the law is saying if you cause an animal enterprise to lose profits, then you've committed a terrorist act," Meeropol says. "The whole point of many protests is to cause a business to lose profits, to convince the public that a certain company doesn't deserve to be patronized."
Posted by Catherina | Tue Feb 12, 2013, 11:56 AM (2 replies)
It's interesting that he cc'd OccupyPolice. Facebook has already removed it "This content is currently unavailable"
~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ * ~ *
In its entirety, it reads exactly (typos and grammatical errors included):
“My Former LAPD Officer Joe Jones MANIFESTO…
I know most of you who personally who me are in disbelief of the partial story I will tell today. A story that has been suppressed for about 18 years, But lives strong everyday of my life.
I without hesitation would like to send my condolences to the Victims who were lost and their families during this tragic situation. I would also like to send my condolences and well wishes to the many former and current Officers, as well as Citizen’s and their families who lost the lives and souls of loved one’s to the injustices of Police Corruption, Scandal, Lies, Deception and Brutality.
Unlike Former Officer Dorner, I fear dying; But I also fear living in a society where Innocent people are dying for no reason. A society where pain so great can be afflicted to people who have to desire to live right and treat people right and then be punished for doing right.
They say we all look alike. In very few cases this of course is true. But in most cases it is not. I feel a resemblance to Dorner, (See Photos) However several people who have no resemblance to Dorner have been shot due to the fear of what is taking place. I DO NOT WANT TO BE SHOT FOR CRIMES I DID NOT COMMIT!. Neither does anyone else.
To preface my story I will say this: Just like former Officer Christopher Dorner I used to smile a lot. I loved everyone. I was voted Friendliest Senior of my Sr. Class in High School. I always believed in the system and never got into any trouble. I loved hard and gave to all I could. After Joining the LAPD in 1989 I quickly found out that the world and society had major flaws. I had flaws as well for ever believing that our system of government was obligated to do the right thing. his is what I believed as a young Officer. Without going into major detail, I need you to first assume that I would not surface 16 years later with lies about a situation that has me with PTSD to this very day. The pain forces me to speak as I have yet to shake the Ill’s of my experience as an LAPD Officer. Of course I have moved on physically. But mentally and emotionally I still live with flaws.
I can’t go into re-living the emotions of what I went through so I will say this. I had my home viciously attacked by a gunman with my family and myself inside the house. No arrests were made and my family and I Received very little support. I had my Civil Rights violated on several occasions. I was falsely arrested at gunpoint by the Sheriffs as an Officer who ID’d himself and was conspired against by both LAPD and the Sheriffs when my Civil case went to Trial. I was falsely accused on more than one occasion and simply placed in a position that the trust was so compromised that I could no longer wear the Uniform. Also know there were many more episodes. All of these issues are well documented and I present them not to be a Whistle blower, However to hope that one would not assume that all of what is being said is Lies as presented by Dorner. I don’t know him, But I know me. I will say from my experience, If a person knows they were wrong it is easier to move on without anger. Seems that Dorner obviously could not move on… Could I just be content and move on with my life and not say anything? Yes…Then I would feel that I for once had my chance to speak on something that hurts me to this day and I did nothing to arouse thought or provoke reform. This is what I hope comes from this whole situation:
1. Families that lost someone to this tragedy find the peace that only God can give at this terrible time.
2. Citizens of Los Angeles be mindful of this fearful time to be an Officer and comply vigorously so that you are not the victim of an Officer on high alert.
3. Government and Politicians please be diligent in the responsibility of creating Laws that protect those who could be the victim of a conspiracy. Never allow the door to be shut on the Truth.
4. Honest and Fair LAPD & All Agencies: Keep doing what you are doing to protect citizens and be safe while you are doing so. We need you and I would hope that you do not allow the Bureaucratic drama and Stress to kill your morale as I know it can.
5. Unethical LAPD & all Agencies: Whatever is was that lead you down this path, Pray to somebody’s God to forgive you and begin to remove unethical methods to your policing style. Always think what if it were you, How would you feel?..How would you like if you were falsely accused and your life, lively-hood and career was taken from you? How would you like if someone was beating on you just because they felt they could get away with it? You are no better the criminals you took and oath to arrest when you do what you do!
6. Chistopher Dorner. The 1st thing I would say to him is, I feel your pains!…But you are going about this the wrong way. To take innocent lives could never be the answer to anything. I say this as a Man who experienced the same pain, betrayal, anger, suffering, litigation and agony that you did in many ways, Only I didn’t get Fired. I just choose to go a different route. My heart still suffered that same shock, I was still left to try and put the pieces back together. The disbelief that people could conspire and cause you to loose something you loved so dearly was still there. I lost my Career, I lost my Family, I lost my Dignity, I lost my Trust…But I am here now to hopefully one day see change…Bro, Don’t kill anymore Innocent people. Your point has been made. Clearly. They know you mean business, The whole world knows. Refrain from any further wrong doing and do what you must to salvage your Soul. Whatever that means to you. Just remember that God is a forgiving God.
In conclusion I say to people who knew none of this about me that one day I will have to reflect on when was the time to speak. When I see the potential for innocent lives to be lost…The time is Now!…JJ”
H/T: Occupy Police .
Posted by Catherina | Tue Feb 12, 2013, 10:42 AM (2 replies)
NDAA Lawsuit- Hedges v. Obama
Chris Hedges is joined in this lawsuit by Noam Chomsky, Daniel Elsberg, Birgitta Jonsdottir (Parliament, Iceland), Alex O'Brien (founder of US Day of Rage/USDOR), Tangerine Bolen (Founder of Revolution Truth), Kai Wargalia (OccupyLondon), Cornel West. Bruce Afran and Carl Mayer are their attorneys.
This press conference was filmed after the appeals hearing at US 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan on 6 February 2013.
What is the NDAA and why is the Obama Administration being sued? Attorneys for the plaintiffs, Bruce Afran and Carl Mayer, explain what is at stake in this federal lawsuit.
Chris Hedges, lead plaintiff, speaks out about why he is suing the Obama Administration over the indefinite detention provision of the 2012 NDAA.
Daniel Ellsberg, writer and Pentagon Papers whistleblower speaks out about why he is involved in the NDAA lawsuit against the Obama Administration.
Alexa O'Brien, journalist and founder of US Day of Rage, explains why she joined the NDAA lawsuit against the Obama Administration.
Thomas Drake, former Senior Executive of the National Security Agency (NSA), decorated United States Air Force and United States Navy veteran, and NSA whistleblower, explains why he is an ardent supporter of the NDAA lawsuit against the Obama Administration.
Supporters of the NDAA lawsuit include Jacob Applebaum, computer security researcher, and Jesselyn Radack, former Ethics Adviser to the US Department of Justice and whistleblower.
Posted by Catherina | Tue Feb 12, 2013, 10:37 AM (49 replies)
I don't have the time to go through them but for anyone interested, there they are.
Legal analyst Robin Sax dug up 21 documents related to the instances of alleged police corruption that ex-LAPD officer Chris Dorner detailed in his online manifesto. Among the documents are Internal Affairs information, Court of Appeals documents and more. You can read through the documents at the links below:
Dorner v LAPD Court Case
Petition for Writ of Mandamus (Robin says this is the document where Dorner asks the court to review LAPD's Board of Review's decision to terminate him):
Dorner v LAPD Apr2009
Dorner Board Selection Form
Dorner Application for Hearing LAPD
Dorner Power of Attorney
Dorner Board of Rights Time Waiver
Dorner Notice to Employee Representative
Dorner Substitution of Defense Counsel
Dorner Person Summary
Dorner LAPD Complaint Form
Dorner Interdepartmental Correspondence Jun2008
Dorner Interdepartmental Correspondence Oct2008
Dorner Decision of the Board of Rights and Execution of the Order
Dorner Case Summary LA Sup Court
Dorner Board of Rights Appointment
Dorner Interdepartmental Correspondence Jul2008
Dorner Discovery Request Form
Appellate Court Decision:
Dorner v LAPD Appeal Oct2011
Dorner v LAPD Attorney Change Oct2010
Dorner v LAPD Appeal Notice Aug2010
Dorner v City of Los Angeles Judgement May2010
Posted by Catherina | Mon Feb 11, 2013, 09:48 PM (0 replies)
I just came across this video and think it may interest a few people. If it doesn't interest you, just trash the thread because this has nothing to do with defending Dorner, supporting him or admiring him. And shame on anyone who tries to twist things that way.
Dorner wrote in his manifesto about the female cop who kicked a mentally ill man (Christopher Gettler) in the face. I'll remove the cop's name and replace it with Officer A just to be safe.
Officer A, you are a POS and you lied right to the BOR panel when Randy Quan asked you if you kicked Christopher Gettler. You destroyed my life and name because of your actions. Time is up. The time is now to confess to Chief Beck.
I ask that all journalist investigating this story submit request for FOIA with the LAPD to gain access to the BOR transcripts which occurred from 10/08 to 2/09. There, you will see that a video was played for the BOR members of Mr. Christopher Gettler who suffers from Schizophrenia and Dementia stating that he was kicked by a female officer. That video evidence supports my claim that Evans kicked him twice in the upper body and once in the face.
Chris Dorner's manifesto gave a specific call to action to all who read it -- investigate his claims he was unfairly terminated by the LAPD. (Chris Dorner made a report that Sgt Evans kicked a suspect during an arrest. The Board of Review deemed that a false report against an officer and Dorner was terminated).
The official LAPD Board of Review painted the termination case as the training officer's word (Sgt Evans) against Officer Dorner. They suggested it was a "he said, she said." There were civilian witnesses including the victim of the alleged kick--Christopher Gettler and his father who were called to testify. Both recount, Gettler saying he was kicked. While court documents suggest that, Gettler was too inarticulate and un-credible this video allows you to judge for yourself.
The person at the center of the brutality investigation Christopher Gettler. This video exclusively obtained through my sources shows Gettler's testimony for the Board of Review. This is Gettler's - the one Dorner says was kicked in the head -- perspective on the incident.
Questioning Gettler is Randy Quan. Quan is the appointed advocate and lawyer for Dorner. He is also the father of murder victim (daughters name) killed Sunday night in Irvine with her fiancé. Dorner is suspected in both their murders.
This is either the video or part of a longer video he's talking about. Christopher Gettler does clearly say he was kicked in the face by that female officer.
Posted by Catherina | Mon Feb 11, 2013, 09:43 PM (3 replies)
U.S. Violating Human Rights of Children, Says U.N. Committee
By Allison Frankel, ACLU Human Rights Program at 11:41am
The Obama Administration recently underwent its first U.N. treaty body review, and the resulting concluding observations made public yesterday should be a cause for alarm. The observations, issued by independent U.N. experts tasked with monitoring compliance with the international treaty on the rights of children in armed conflict (formally known as the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict or "OPAC"), paint a dark picture of the treatment of juveniles by the U.S. military in Afghanistan: one where hundreds of children have been killed in attacks and air strikes by U.S. military forces, and those responsible for the killings have not been held to account even as the number of children killed doubled from 2010 to 2011; where children under 18 languish in detention facilities without access to legal or full humanitarian assistance, or adequate resources to aid in their recovery and reintegration as required under international law. Some children were abused in U.S. detention facilities, and others are faced with the prospect of torture and ill-treatment if they are transferred to Afghan custody.
By ratifying OPAC in 2002, the U.S. committed to guaranteeing basic protections to children in armed conflict zones, and to submit periodic reports on the implementation of its treaty obligations to the U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child. We wrote about the latest U.S. report, released in November, which revealed that over 200 children have been held in U.S. custody in Afghanistan since 2008, some for lengthy periods of time. During its review of the U.S. on January 16, the Committee posed critical questions about the treatment of children by the U.S. military and issued recommendations to remedy these human rights violations.
These recommendations include taking "concrete and firm precautionary measures to prevent indiscriminate use of force" particularly against children, and ensuring all allegations of unlawful use of force are "investigated in a transparent, timely and independent manner" and that "children and families victims of attacks and air strikes do always receive redress and compensation." In regard to the detention of juveniles, the Committee urged the U.S. to ensure that all children under 18 are detained separately from adults and guaranteed access to free and independent legal assistance as well as an independent complaints mechanism. Importantly, considering the previous U.S. response to the Committee revealed that the average age of children detained by U.S. forces is only 16 years old and the average length of stay for juveniles in U.S. military custody has been approximately one year, the Committee recommended children be detained only "as measures of last resort and for the shortest possible period of time and that in all cases alternatives to detention are given priority."
The Committee also stressed that allegations of torture and other forms of mistreatment must be investigated and the perpetrators brought to justice, and that no child should be transferred to Afghan custody if "there are substantial grounds for the danger of being subject to torture and ill treatment." The Committee specifically mentioned the case of Omar Kadr, a former child soldier who was detained by U.S. forces at the age of 15 and was subjected to torture and a systematic program of harsh and highly coercive interrogations at the American prisons at Guantánamo Bay and Bagram.
Posted by Catherina | Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:24 PM (0 replies)
let him say what the government is, if it be not a tyranny, which the men of our choice have conferred on the President, and the President of our choice has assented to and accepted over the friendly strangers to whom the mild spirit of our country & it’s laws had pledged hospitality & protection: that the men of our choice have more respected the bare suspicions of the President, than the solid rights of innocence, the claims of justification, the sacred force of truth, and the forms & substance of law & justice: in questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the constitution
The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Volume 30: 1 January 1798 to 31 January 1799
Yours is an excellent post. Since I've never spoken with you before, Welcome to DU!
Posted by Catherina | Mon Feb 11, 2013, 05:02 PM (0 replies)