Joe Blow Report

On The Brink

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Thu, 24 May 2012 10:40:34 PDT

Is America really on the brink of darkness, desolation, and despair? Or do they still trust in the voice of hope? Or are they on the brink of losing all hope of ever having any say in their lives or their future?

The following is an excerpt from Naomi Wolf's column in the Guardian: The NDAA'ssection 1021 coup d'etat foiled --
One brave judge is all that lay between us and a law that would have given the president power to detain US citizens indefinitely

“This darkness is so dangerous not least because a new Department of Homeland Security document trove, released in response to a FOIA request filed by Michael Moore and the National Lawyers' Guild, proves in exhaustive detail that the DHS and its "fusion centers" coordinated with local police (as I argued here, to initial disbelief), the violent crackdown against Occupy last fall. You have to put these pieces of evidence together: the government cannot be trusted with powers to detain indefinitely any US citizen – even though Obama promised he would not misuse these powers – because the United States government is already coordinating a surveillance and policing war against its citizens, designed to suppress their peaceful assembly and criticism of its corporate allies.”

Glenn Greenwald also wrote about this matter in his column today entitled: Federal court enjoins NDAA -- An Obama-appointed judge rules its indefinite detention provisions likely violate the 1st and 5th Amendments
I'd say it is all well beyond "the brink" right here in Humboldt County when you already see the implementation of the "surveillance and policing war" in operation.

--Joe

The Soul of Trevon Resides in Fortuna CA

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 11:30:30 PDT

The local newspaper announced to the general public on Tuesday, April 17, 2012 that Maxwell Soeth and Sgt. Charles Ellebrecht were the Fortuna police officers that shot and killed Jacob Robert Newmaker March 16, 2012. Newmaker had done nothing but try to stop them from beating him with their batons after tracking him down on a nothing accusation. In this case these guys initiated a violent arrest and then justify killing him for trying to stop them from beating him.

What's the difference between what Maxwell Soeth and Sgt. Charles Ellebrecht did and what George Zimmerman did killing Trevon Martin?

The situation is exactly the same, with a couple of minor exceptions. That being, George Zimmerman was supposedly a self-appointed security guard working to protect his neighborhood and these guys were police officers licenced by the city to protect their neighborhood. The killing of Robert Newmaker was justified because he was merely holding a police baton and Trevon Martin was killed for “standing his ground.” Neither one had done anything but ask to be left alone. So, why are they dead?

Personally, the biomorphic people of Fortuna deserve these kinds of police walking their streets protecting their children and property. In fact, I'd say the people in Garberville, or more accurately Southern Humboldt, roundly deserve their demonstrated breed of police as does Eureka and the rest of Humboldt County. When the killing of innocent people is “appropriate” for simply NOT immediately complying with some police officer's command or order I'd say a whole lot of people got their priorities skewed. Apparently, the only thing that is life-threatening are these cops legitimate right to be there in the first place. When they have the right, defacto or not, to put their right to pack a gun and a badge over the individual human lives of their fellow citizens, then I'd say the whole society is morally corrupt and deserve what they get.

--Joe

PS. Notice any local blog discussion on this issue? The District Attorney Paul Gallegos seems to believe there is NO conflict of interest in the police investigating or judging their own. Maybe Humboldt County could use another William Ferroggiaro.

Why Kym Kemp Is A Collaborator

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Thu, 12 Apr 2012 14:14:26 PDT

Kym Kemp continues to repeat and publish her primal beliefs, in this case recite the police and news media propaganda justifying the blatant murder of Aaron Bassler. Bassler was gunned down like a mongrel dog by three police officers hiding in ambush. The commenter, Nick Wilson, says that Bassler was identified by someone that knew him when he supposedly shot Jere Melo at a distance. That person's word or more factually, that person's unsubstantiated word was, the only basis used to gun down Bassler like a dog. Be sure to read Wilson's complete comment.

The Rule of Law demands, actually requires much more than someone's simple belief that another is guilty of some crime justifying summary execution. In that regard, Kym Kemp is a collaborator because she works in collaboration with the Mendocino County Sheriff and all others that justify, promote and defend the blatant murder of an accused person. This reality shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone when you consider her stand on the growing, manufacturing and selling of marijuana and the criminals that do engage in such activities.

So, if you support the Rule of Men, I guess you know what that makes you?

Why write this post? Here's why:

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds" - Samuel Adams

--Joe

Silence is Consensus

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Thu, 05 Apr 2012 15:22:06 PDT

There is an interesting phenomenon called the “Silent Treatment.” What amounts to perfunctory consensus rejection, or so most believe. It's practiced on blog commentary all the time.

The Free Dictionary defines the:

silent treatment
n. Informal
Maintenance of aloof silence toward another as an expression of one's anger or disapproval

Mostly the “silent treatment” means that you do not exist, therefore you do not need to be recognized as legitimate and accepted as a co-equal. The problem is, you DO exist and when these kinds of people give you the "silent treatment" they expose themselves as weak and illegitimate people. The circle closes when they become what they would have others be.

Silence, in this context, has another meaning too: Consensus or agreement. In the following context as laid out below in my article, Pounding Sand –Kym Kemp Style you'll notice NO comments disagreeing with any observation in that article. That means there is a “consensus agreement.” – which works for me.

Just a noted observation since changing formats and affiliations the old Readheaded Blackbelt had a certain character that is now lost. Now all you get are press releases that are mostly unanswered propaganda. Oh! well, to each his own.

The following quote came from Glenn Greenwald's latest article: State-dominated media and Iran

NOTE: The definition of "collaborator."
That led me to this observation: “this is what establishment-serving journalists in Washington mean when they boast that they, but not their critics, engage in so-called ‘real reporting’; it means: calling up Serious People in Washington and uncritically repeating what they say.”
http://www.salon.com/2012/04/05/state_dominated_media_and_iran/singleton/

[Picture Source]

--Joe

Why I Write

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 09:40:06 PDT

When my wife and I listened to Adrienne Rich, who passed away Tuesday, March 27, 2012, read her poem What Kind of Times AreThese, my wife said, “There. That is why you write; because people still listen.” That's the simple truth.

What Kind of Times Are These – a poem by Adrienne Rich

ADRIENNE RICH:

There’s a place between two stands of trees where the grass grows uphill
and the old revolutionary road breaks off into shadows
near a meeting-house abandoned by the persecuted
who disappeared into those shadows.

I’ve walked there picking mushrooms at the edge of dread, but don’t be fooled
this isn’t a Russian poem, this is not somewhere else but here,
our country moving closer to its own truth and dread,
its own ways of making people disappear.

I won’t tell you where the place is, the dark mesh of the woods
meeting the unmarked strip of light—
ghost-ridden crossroads, leafmold paradise:
I know already who wants to buy it, sell it, make it disappear.

And I won’t tell you where it is, so why do I tell you
anything? Because you still listen, because in times like these
to have you listen at all, it’s necessary
to talk about trees.

(Many thanks to Adrienne Rich and Democracy Now)
Photograph:Bettmann/Corbis.

--Joe

Pounding Sand - Kym Kemp Style

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Thu, 29 Mar 2012 17:10:33 PDT

This is the Kym Kemp of the Redheaded Blackbelt blog - a co-conspirator of and with Hank Sims of the Lost Coast Outpost blog. This post is NOT about Kym Kemp per se, some personal vendetta, blog or comment censorship as much as it is about what it means to be a responsible ADULT.

You can find the definition of what it means to "pound sand" here or as defined here the second variation: "A variant meaning is to suffer or to act in a pointless manner" – the titled meaning used for this posting.

I recently had an interesting and sort of profitable email conversation with Kym. (Probably more profitable for me than her, but what the heck?) I figured she'd be, or at least the incentive would be there for her to be more honest in our efforts to communicate. We were talking about “after-the-fact” blog censorship – arbitrary blocking and deleting comments in the public comments section based upon individual ignorance, bias and personal prejudice – a form of racism*. I thought about what she said in that conversation and about what she did NOT say. I tried to answer her concerns about talking to her like a "small child." That and while she said I usually talk over everyone's head, my comments somehow become nothing more than unacceptable "negative," "ugly taunts. Apparently, according to her, I was unable speak to her like a mature adult. There is a time to be a whinny little baby and then there is the time to grow up and become an adult. Adults understand that most children live in the moment where life's realities are defined by how everything affects and profits them. Adults, on the other hand, know that life encompasses much, much more than living an animal existence. In the process I happened to read her comments posted on her affiliate blog. Also posted below. (A place I never make comments just to avoid this kind of a double-edged trap.)

Then it occurred to me, when she had accused me of treating her like a small child, why. What she said and what she wanted me to give her the right to do, was exactly the same conversation I'd had with my own daughter when she was moving out of adolescence. She wanted to be an adult and wanted her mother and me to treat her like an adult, but without any responsibility or accountability. She naively believed that being an adult meant that she had the right to come and go, do and say whatever she felt like WITHOUT any personal accountability. Of course, we all know that the world does not work like that, even though they all believe it does. Being an adult meant that you were free from any rules or laws. Enforcement of any rules or laws amounted to nothing more than a wannabe adult making "ugly taunts." That's when our relationship got dicey – for awhile. Even so, during this time she had a protected environment to grow and become a more mature person – her stated goal. So, what does that say about Kym?

Kym's problem, the one she refuses to accept, is that she is exactly what she still is, an adolescent. I say that, because just like my daughter, she refuses to accept responsibility for her stipulated lifestyle beliefs. She believes that 50 years of an ingrained criminal culture involving large amounts of tax-free easy money, lying, stealing, money laundering, corruption and murder has or had NO morally detrimental or harmful effects on the social structure or the integrity of the individual, family and community, including the business community. Not only does Kym believe this nonsense, but she's constantly trying to justify and legitimize why the individual has the moral, ethical and legal right to trash social and societal rules, norms and laws at will - at the individuals sole discretion. (I posted the above referenced relevant comments below.) Notice her comment: “Just because people are willing to break stupid laws doesn't mean they are willing to be immoral.” This judgmental statement, in and of itself, "stupid laws," defines the morality, or rather, amorality of the speaker. It is that judgement repudiating the majority right to define and enforce rules of the road; LAW, that is "immoral." Here the mantra is the defacto enforcement of the Rule of Men replacing the Rule of Law. I believe, therefore I am truth, right and justice – LAW.

To me, her statement is morally repugnant and highly offensive. Why? Because of the untold numbers of the murdered dead, rotting in those hills who scream out something altogether different. These people, so-called innocent "plant growers" – pot growers et al. and business community alike, whether they intended to become or ever wanted to become, are all part and party to the deaths of these “innocent plant growers.” Growing that “plant” and “breaking stupid laws,” as she so naively puts it, is not only immoral, but is the self-centered, self-righteous arrogance of the “corrupt to the gut” amoral.

a·mor·al [http://www.thefreedictionary.com/amoral ]

1. Not admitting of moral distinctions or judgments; neither moral nor immoral.
2. Lacking moral sensibility; not caring about right and wrong.

There is an easy way to illustrate and bring home what and how these people, not only the growers, but all the local businesses and untold numbers of non-grower "growers" that have exploited this corrupt, immoral and depraved criminal enterprise, enforce their personal, opinion based beliefs and judgments on a day to day basis. Notice that on her blog and that of Hank Sims you will NOT find any rules or guidelines for making comments on their blog. Here is an example of what I mean along with MY Comment Guidelines, located first paragraph top left. Again, reinforced under Pages: Comment Etiquette below. They simply expect you to divine or submit like a little puppy to their unspoken demands and personal prejudices. Since I'm not a mind reader that created a bit of problem when being judged by bigotry, bias and racist prejudices – not to mention childish ignorance and bullying stupidity. They, and others, divine the right to judge everyone as you go. They post NO rules of the road so that everyone knows without doubt what is and is not expected. They not only want to be judge, jury and executioner, they expect everyone commenting on their blog to give them that right. How this corrupt way bleeds over into society was graphically demonstrated when the Fortuna police asserted this right by killing Jacob Newmaker March 16, 2012. I've written fairly extensively how this police killing is the result of enforcing the Rule of Men. See below Self Defense Is a Bitch and Resist AND Die - Why?

Then there is the OTHER SIDE – The Dark Side. Where the totally innocent person or family that wants absolutely nothing to do with the corruption and it's handmaidens, the criminal elite that get drawn into a serious life and death struggle to survive. Two good examples of this are the Saturday, March 24, 2012 Times-Standard account of "Victim recounts harrowing home invasion, torture" and the Arcata Police home invasion by deception of a 64 year old Barbara Sage by "about a dozen officers with guns drawn." You can read about that in today's Times-Standard here: Arcata woman sues city, police over potless pot search; suit alleges unlawful search, rough treatment hastened husband's death.

Synonymous to the Rule of Men is its root cause: CORRUPTION. What does one rotten apple have in common with a barrel of good apples? A whole barrel full of rotten apples, that's what. Kym's moralizing and devaluing law is symptomatic of much more than an adolescent attitude and understanding. It is the sand pounding of her constant justification that, in view of the corrupt and depraved consequences, where rot is the norm, that is reprehensible and intolerable. It is the dead in these hills that do the judging. No matter how much sand pounding Kym does in support of this corruption and these criminals, the dead are still dead. You can't censor them.

--Joe

Racism:
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

Comments on Lost Coast Outpost :: Starting with "Noone's comment" :: Beach Scum Perpetrate Peninsula Car Burglary Spree

Noone,
Personally I wonder how much of the theft problem is related to the wink, wink, nudge, nudge, drug culture that permeates Humboldt. It's not that far a stretch to say if you're willing to overlook one law (or set of laws) relating to production of cannabis, then other laws are overlookable (to coin a term). Especially when most of the media sources contain advertising that is directly targeted towards production of cannabis

Kym Kemp, Freelance writer, photographer, blogger. Associated with Lost Coast Radio
I'm sure there are marijuana growers that are thieves BUT it is a big stretch to go from growing a plant to stealing a camera. Just because people are willing to break stupid laws doesn't mean they are willing to be immoral.

Noone,
Kym, I was actually talking more about the culture in which law-breaking is tolerated with a wink and a nudge rather than saying growers are thieves. For instance, how much did Prohibition drive the development of organized crime that promoted many other illegal activities but used bootlegging as the ground floor, so to speak? How much of the current violence in Mexican drug cartels is based on the idea that since they're willing to make money on illegal cannabis (and meth, cocaine, etc..) shipments then everything else, including murder, is okay too?

And if you're willing to say some are laws are stupid and okay to break, who's to say someone else doesn't think some other laws are also stupid and okay to break. The point is that when we as a culture tolerate illegal behavior of one kind, we're probably going to tolerate more illegal behavior of every kind. How much of the current property crime exists because no one bothers to prosecute it because it's just a little crime, not a big one just like modest MJ grows are a little crime, so let's just ignore it.

At least that's what I'm wondering if it holds true because why else do we have a crime rate that's considerably higher than other comparably sized rural communities in the country.

I'm aware that you're supportive of growers as people just trying to make a living, but when it's based on an ostensibly illegal activity when does it inculcate a culture of illegality?

Kym Kemp,
Noone, I appreciate your thoughtful response. It is a reality that Humboldt culture tolerates (to some extent) marijuana growing. We love all that green green money that supports our businesses and their workers. Who knows how much tolerating lawbreaking leads to other lawbreaking? But I have to say most growers lean heavily to the "break one law at a time rule." In other words, if you are growing pot, you better not give law enforcement a reason to look at you. If you read the news, you see people getting caught growing because they got caught doing something else or upsetting the neighbors so most growers avoid other crimes.

--Joe

Resist AND Die – Why?

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Fri, 30 Mar 2012 16:38:49 PDT

[UPDATE II :: March 30, 2012 :: Stand Your Ground and DIE – WHY?]

[UPDATE below - Court ruling offers new details on EPD excessive force case or so says Thadeus Greenson about the murder of Martin Cotton]

Violent exchange culminates in death of a felon – Thadeus Greenson's take on the police shooting of a 26 year old man for doing nothing, but being a felon.

[This is an UPDATE on the posting below: Self-Defense Is a Bitch]

A good explanation for WHY is contained in today's Wednesday, March 21, 2012, Times-Standard: Fortuna shooting investigation continues – Details surface in police deadly force incident, written by Thadeus Greenson.

[A “deadly force incident” means someone got shot and killed by the Fortuna police, okay?]

What kind of an “incident” occurred in Fortuna? According to Greenson, Fortuna Police Chief William Dobberstein said officers were dispatched to a woman's report of a “crazed person banging on the door and yelling and screaming in her front yard.” A scary situation, to be sure, BUT nothing life threatening happening. The question I ask is, did this guy actually commit a crime here? Anything to justify his death? When the police get there the “suspect” is gone. Nothing more than a little door banging and some hollering from the front yard. But, then notice what happens. The police identify the guy and find out he's “had numerous prior contacts with” the Fortuna police. So now they know who the guy doing all the “door banging and hollering is, (their favorite trashy troublemaking scumbag) Jacob Newmaker.

What happens next? He's spotted by the police “about three-quarters of a mile from the residence where the 911 call originated. No serious threat to anyone there – he's running away. The police chase him on his bicycle, “right behind him with his lights and sirens going.” In the melee he crashes his bicycle and the “officer confront[s] him.” Notice what happens next. Clearly the officer knows he's got a scared and agitated guy trying to stay away. What followed? “An altercation.” What does the officer do to control the situation, where at this point nothing's been done that is life threatening or even a crime? This guy was clearly “confronted” by the police officer. The police officer caused whatever “altercation” that occurred. He used his Taser to “shock” and already agitated individual that "hurts like hell." This is exactly what this agitated person REALLY needed right then, “a pain compliance technique” that "hurts like hell" used on a clearly agitated, or even“highly motivated” suspect.

Was Jacob Robert Newmaker threatening anyone? NO. He was motivated to run, to try to get away from the threatening police officer causing him pain. And that's all they did was cause him MORE pain, “Dobberstein said the officers then tried to get Newmaker into handcuffs, using pepper spray and batons strikes to the legs to try to gain compliance.” “Gain compliance” is just a fancy way of saying, “do what you're told.” That's usually what rapist say to their victims too. Once the victim complies and submits to the rape, the rapist is justified and exonerated from any crime or criminal act because to victim willingly yielded or went along; complied.

And this is the real problem that caused this man his life. The police clearly using “pain compliance techniques” to effectively torture a person into submitting or yielding – doing what they are ordered to do establishes the lack of legitimate authority to enforce the law and effect a safe and sane arrest. When this country was governed by people that enforced the law, police officers simple effected the arrest and that was that. Now that they ARE the law they use torture devices to force compliance with their dictates. Resist or question their legitimacy and you most often end up dead.

The most compelling statement in this newspaper report is by Fortuna Police Lt. Matthew Eberhardt: “He was armed with a deadly weapon.” Greenson elaborates: “Newmaker was unarmed until he picked up the officer's baton, at which point he was considered armed and dangerous.” If this statement is true, then these police officers ARMED him and then used that situation to shoot him down like a dog. No different situation then what those two CHP officers did to Felix Omai in Garberville. They initiate a violent attack (what they call an arrest for some crime) then use their attack to justify why they made the attack or so-called arrest.
More importantly, look at yet another descrepency in Thadeus Greenson's reporting. Please note: “At this point, dobberstein said, the initial officer on scene attempted to use his baton to gain control of Newmaker's uncuffed hand, but the suspect was able to grab the weapon. (Note: “grab the weapon” the police officer was using on Newmaker) Quote Dobberstein: “Then, there was a tug-of-war for the baton, and he was able to wrestle it free.” Now note what Greenson says further along in the article: Newmaker was unarmed until he picked up the officer's baton, at which point he was considered armed and dangerous.” Did he wrestle the “weapon” or a “baton” from the officer or did he pick it up off the ground?

This idea that a baton is NOT a weapon in the hands of a “trained” police officer and therefore becomes something “less than a lethal weapon” does not pass the smell test. If a 9mm handgun is a lethal weapon regardless of who is holding it so is a baton. If the police are justified using deadly force against someone holding a baton then anyone legally defending themselves is justified using deadly force. This idea as expressed in Greenson's somewhat propagandized article continuing to soft-pedal another police killing that there is a difference depending upon who is holding the weapon is a classic example of how the Rule of men enforce their law to defend and protect their criminal conduct and special privilege.

Thadeus Greenson, to his credit, did produce a rather all encompassing article. Or, to his discredit slanted and biased the report in his normal fashion. Even so, the part he included from Robert Feliciano, a former training sergeant with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department who now serves as a qualified expert witness on police us of force is well worth reading and considering. I've included that excerpt at the end of this article.

What's the over reaching message in this, yet another tragedy? I'd start with the general premise issued by the Eureka Chief Murl Harpham when he said we need "tough cops." A general definition of his kind of tough cop was illustrated in the Joseph Cotten murder. Where once again the police crime of murder is passed off as a passé, non responsible act of "excessive force." Then I would go to the heart of how local police officers are trained and how that training engenders a racist, bully-type attitude that is demonstrated in their conduct. In the Robert Newmaker situation that probably starts with Fortuna Police Lt. Matthew Eberhardt. Bottom line, this guy, Jacob Newmaker was vulnerable, the police officers knew that and took full advantage, to this man's death.

[UPDATE II Link to The Joe Blow Report - Stand Your Ground and DIE – WHY?]

--Joe

Robert Feliciano said he would generally consider a baton a less-than-lethal weapon. Feliciano said officers are trained to use just enough force necessary to overcome resistance, and said he isn't sure that was the case in Fortuna on Friday.

Feliciano said the bigger question is whether officers should have wound up in a violent confrontation with the suspect to begin with.

”I mean, this thing starts over nothing really,” Feliciano said. “We have a young guy dead as a result of what? A misdemeanor?”

Because the initial call was likely for disturbing the peace, disorderly conduct or maybe trespassing -- all misdemeanors -- Feliciano said he's not sure the initial officer even had sufficient probable cause to attempt to detain Newmaker because no officer witnessed him commit the alleged offenses.

”I'm not sure you even have a right to stop him,” Feliciano said. “Before the baton situation, there's nothing but misdemeanors there.”

Even after deciding to stop Newmaker, Feliciano said, the involved officer could have taken a step back when Newmaker fled and the situation escalated -- especially considering the officer is believed to have known Newmaker.

”The right thing may have been to regroup,” Feliciano said. “They know who this guy is. They know his background. If they let him go, what's the worst that could happen? Was it even necessary to try to detain this guy? I don't know.”

Feliciano conceded he was playing “Monday-morning quarterback” without all the facts, but said that as a training officer, he always instructed rookies not to chase a suspect by themselves and to be very wary of engaging in foot pursuits.

”Things can escalate very quickly,” he said, adding that he feels for the officers involved in this situation because deadly force incidents can take a huge toll.

UPDATE: Why Everyone Should Be Scared To Death

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 09:25:05 PDT

[UPDATE to Law and Order Finally Comes to Eureka]

Back in February I posted an article about three Eureka Police Officers currently on duty AFTER doing a stint of military duty in Afghanistan and captioned the article with, “This picture should scare the hell out of everyone living in Eureka, California.” Today I would also include Fortuna, CA too.

Democracy Now has the following interview with Neil Shea on: Afghan Massacre Sheds Light on Culture of Mania and Aggression in U.S. Troops in Afghanistan – I've watched a lot of Amy Goodman's Democracy Now shows, but this one had the most impact. This situation is a time-bomb about to go off. You can listen and watch in interview or go to Democracy Now and read the transcript.

Neil Shea, has reported on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq since 2006 for Stars and Stripes and The Christian Science Monitor, among other publications. His latest article in The American Scholar is called "Afghanistan: A Gathering Menace: Traveling with U.S. Troops Gives Insights into the Recent Massacre."

Couple this situation with what recently happened in Fortuna where the police used lethal force to shoot dead an apparently mentally disturbed person for simply thinking about using a police baton to strike an officer. This idea that everyone is going to just drop to the ground in total submission like a bitch in heat when a cop walks up and for whatever unknown reasons points his finger is the kind of thinking and behavior that comes from an occupying army seeking legitimacy that's stressed to the limit.

That's what can be said about the Murl Harpham "tough cop" philosophy. When people need help the most their sicknesses and weaknesses are victimized and exploited the most.

--Joe

Self-Defense Is a Bitch

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 21:22:00 PDT

Cops don't kill anyone anymore in Humboldt County, they just leave them dead on the street.

Once again, the local newspaper, the Times-Standard soft-pedals the killing by police of another mentally disturbed person. See the front-page Saturday, March 17, 2012, story title: Officer involved shooting leaves Fortuna man dead – REALLY?

Makes it sound like there was some sort of gun battle going on with an officer, or some police officer just happened to be around somewhere when a Fortuna man was found dead. Evestigate the newspaper a little more and you will find that and unknown “26-year-old” was "shot" and “killed.” Why? We quote the newspaper: “[A]s he allegedly attempted to strike officer with a baton” he had taken away from one of the MORE than one officer. Who, apparently, had used all their little toys, to no avail, so they just shot him dead.

In truth, what we simply have here is that, a police officer shot dead a Fortuna man. The bullets that killed the man didn't come out of the blue and somehow “left” the poor guy “dead.” It came from a specific person, a Fortuna police officer. The simple fact is, that an unnamed Fortuna police officer killed that man. NOT some bogus nonsense, "Officer involved shooting leaves Fortuna man dead."

Once again, just like the newspaper's title is misleading, so is their report of the incident. The headline says the dead guy “attempted to strike officer with baton.” So does the reported police news release.

A second officer arrived and joined in the effort to subdue Newmaker in a struggle that became increasingly violent, according to the release, culminating with Mewmaker's allegedly wrestling a baton from one of the officers.
"As the suspect was in the process of attempting to strike the officer with the baton, the other officer fired his weapon at the suspect to stop the atack on his fellow officer," the release states."

Thadeus Greenson, the writer of this news report adds his slant, as tries to justify another police slaying: “Ultimately, an officer fatally shot Newmaker after he took one of the officers' batons and began striking him with it.” This Report has found this kind of biased newspaper reporting from Thadeus Greenson, in particular, to be status quo – NORMAL.

Please note here, the police news release says "As the suspect was in the process of attempting to strike ..." - this is about as remote and ambiguous a NON-THREATENING action as anyone could be involved in that certainly does not pose an eminent threat to anyone's life. "In the process of attempting"? This is total NONSENSE.

The absolute question that begs an answer is, how can “attempting to strike an officer with his, [a police] baton” justify the use of deadly force? Do the police NOT strike, or threaten to strike, people all the time JUST to avoid the use of or the need for or use deadly force? Isn't that why they pack batons?

People need to take a real serious look at what the Fortuna police have done here. When peaceful demonstrators legally exercise their citizen rights and are regularly set upon by the baton-wielding police beating them into submission they are threatening the very lives of these legal, and peaceful demonstrators. Clearly, if the police are justified in this killing under these conditions and stipulated circumstances, then people guilty of NO crime when their lives are threatened by a baton possess the legal right to defend themselves and with lethal force if necessary against any and all criminal assaults. The police in this country and in particular Humboldt County that take great delight brutalizing people, in particular the Occupy Movement people might want to pay close attention to what they are establishing.

--Joe

Personhood and the Police

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Fri, 16 Mar 2012 16:35:11 PDT

[UPDATE Below - Recognizing Personhood from little gods - What it means to be an American Elite]

Law enforcement officials frustrated with Occupy signs

This is today's Times-Standard frontpage headline for Friday, March 9, 2012. "Law enforcement" being Humboldt County Sheriff Mike Downey and the so-call "Interim Eureka Police Chief Murl Harpham.

This title actually misrepresents "law enforcement's" real frustration. Their issue is really with the District Attorney and the fact they don't have carte blanche or the full discretionary power and unconditional authority to eradicate the Occupy people from Eureka's streets at will. Be assured they are diligently working on a so-called legal solution to rectify that problem and solidify their State police power authority.

We all know their history dealing with the local Occupy Movements - Brutal, Arbitrary and Perverse in total disregard to any legitimate right to peacefully protest or demonstrate. Which, by the way, is the general public's legally provided way to "give direction" to elected representatives.

The following statement in the Times-Standard by Sheriff Mike Downey sheds some light on why.

Downey said he hopes members of the public fed up with the activities in front of the courthouse will go to the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors with their concerns.

"The public generally is no longer in support of what's going on" Downey said. "The public needs to give direction to the Board of Supervisors." [Emphasis added]

Who is this "fed up public" Sheriff Downey is speaking for or representing? Is this not what the Occupy Movement is trying to do, speak for the general, fed up public? Or is he talking only about the people that financed his election? Why does he and Murl Harpham make a distinction between the Occupy Movement who purport to represent the 99% of Americans and the so-called general "public" who obviously only make up 1%?

Herein lies the crux of the issue and goes right to the heart of what happened to Felix Omai and why. The general population that votes believes that they have some say in matters relative to their existence. In other words, they believe that their vote guarantees their recognition and general personal representation. Or, at the very least, a hearing ear and at least some consideration for their needs and wants. What the 99% don't or won't accept is that their vote, as such, is both redundant and irrelevant. The only vote that counts to all elected representatives is the dollar; the more dollars, the more personhood. They know that the one with the most dollars usually always gets voted into office. Hence the attitude of the elected representative toward their supposed constituents is disparaging, demeaning and belittling consistent to their lying acts of betrayal. They see, if at all, the general population as sub or non-human, not much better than and subject to about as much consideration as mongrel dogs. Throw them a few scraps, or lying promises and they'll rollover on command.

The problem is that the select class of ruling elites do not see nor do they hear anything from such people as make up the likes of an Occupy Movement - people that believe they actually count in this system. Did you notice that the only people mentioned by Sheriff Downey that matters are the few fed up people like him making complaints about the Occupy people? Accordingly, those of the Occupy Movement that are trying to express the wants and needs of the majority of people are considered nothing more than a gang of trouble-makers that are a blight on the community, interfering in the affairs of normal people.

What the Occupy Movement has proven is that there is no reasoning or communicating with City or County governments regardless of what they are currently doing. There's only one way to communicate with these elite, exceptional oligarchy that presides over an ever constricting police state. They, the police and their masters, must FIRST see you as an equal. For that to happen YOU must see them exactly for who and what they are and deal with them accordingly. This reality was demonstrated in superb form in the movie Avatar. I suggest all wannabe Occupy Movement people go see it or see it again and this time take a realistic lesson into what it means to become and act like a person worthy of being seen and heard.

Currently there are 106 comments on the Humboldt Herald for their Quote of the Day:

So with this I am suspending all efforts to do anything with the continued assault on the courthouse, the employees and the general public due to the immunity given to them by your [the District Attorney's] office. — Humboldt County Sheriff Mike Downey in a letter to DA Paul Gallegos regarding the ongoing Occupy Eureka protest outside the courthouse.

Check out some of the local blog-talkers if you think what they say is representative of local opinion. In particular I recommend the comment by Janell Eggar. As someone in the mix or on the firing line, she makes or proofs my article and reason for writing it. Before you can ever hope to talk to someone, let alone communicate with them, you must FIRST get their attention. Only an authentic, legitimate person can do that.

[UPDATE :: Thursday, March 15, 2012 – Link to SoHum Parlance II – Estelle Event in Fortuna]

Here is the initial statement I made and Eric's reply.

March 10, 2012 at 3:56 pm

Joe Blow

Still promoting the auction, I see…

March 10, 2012 at 5:28 pm

Eric Kirk

Voted in every election since I turned 18 Joe. It’s not even just about politics. It’s part of what it means to be American. So yes, I’m still “promoting the auction.” Always.

Currently there are over 70 comments on this thread. Many of the comments associated with the above exchange deal with the issue of "Personhood." Without the acceptance and recognition of EQUAL personhood, whether it be by individuals, communities or nations, there can be no meaningful communication and certainly NO peace. Many of the comments and their writers clearly demonstrate the war-mongering attitude of the elitist bully constantly striving to control everyone and everything. To these people, intellectual and ideological diversity and exchange is their pariah. So, be warned.

Once the difference between the common American individual (one of personhood, that of individual legitimacy and value) and the Elitist American God, so aptly demonstrated in this blog thread, I closed down further conversation on Eric Kirk's blog. The simple truth is, there is absolutely nothing you can say that these kinds of self-centered oligarchic elitist will ever hear as long as they believe they are a god. I found it quite interesting that, with just a little coaxing from me, Ernie Branscomb identified and defined this as the very issue alienating him that he thinks justifies his constant litany of degrading, racist insults.

--Joe

The Wrath of God - Solar Flares

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 11:35:31 PST

Wrath? No one seems to know how solar flares affect humans and animals. Scientists claim, as reported in "Solar Storm Shakes Magnetic Field," these magnetic storms only affect electrical systems, such as with magnetic, radio and radiation emissions. Astronomers said this storm was "pretty benign" because it was of a "northern orientation." Interestingly, a southern orientation would have caused the most damaging technological disruption and biggest auroras. It seems this is just an introduction. Scientists say:

The storm is part of the sun's normal 11-year cycle, which is supposed to reach a peak next year. Storms as large as the latest one will probably happen several more times as the cycle ramps up to that peak. *** The region of the sun that erupted can still send more blasts our way, Kunches (Joe Kunches, a scientist at the NOAA center) said. Another set of active sunspots is ready to aim at Earth.

Maybe it's time to breakout the tin foil hats.

Wrath? Looks wrathful to me. Guess we'll all find out if the whole world starts acting crazy.

--Joe

Is Silence Really Golden?

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 16:43:25 PST

[UPDATE Below - Misguided Silence]

Howdy Emerson's Letter to the Editor: “Silent no longer” in the Sunday, March 4, 2012, Times-Standard presents a valid argument to the contrary. Because of the current meeting between U.S. President Barack Obama and Israel’s Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu his concerns are relevant today. The Jerusalem Post reports that the importance of this strategic meeting is detailed in their mutual country's need to be "masters of their own fate."

Silent no longer

When I heard President Obama say, as he did on Feb. 5th regarding actions against Iran, that the U.S. will “march in lockstep with Israel,” I became extremely concerned. Lockstep is a military term, and Obama knows it. According to my dictionary, when referring to politicians it means, “in perfect or rigid, often mindless conformity or unison.” Come to think of it, rigid and mindless is an apt description of our government's blind support -- political and financial ($30 billion just in military aid in the next 10 years) -- of Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian land, unrelenting violence toward Palestinian Christians and Muslims, and now perhaps an unprovoked attack on Iran.

Israeli leaders and our media would have us believe that Israel is the innocent victim of endless attacks. The truth is the opposite -- Israel has the fourth-largest military in the world -- is the only nuclear power that has never allowed inspections -- and is far more powerful than all surrounding nations. The facts on the ground are these: endless mortar fire, military incursions and drone attacks from Israel into Gaza; daily sniper fire from the settlements towards Palestinian farmers in the West Bank; Palestinian homes regularly bulldozed in East Jerusalem to make room for Jewish only settlements; hundreds, including children, jailed without charge or trial; Palestinian land and water regularly stolen for illegal settlements. These are acts of a violent military aggressor, not a victim. Such policies and actions do not make Israel safe. Our “lockstep” support makes neither the U.S. nor Israel safe.

I have avoided speaking out on this topic for fear of the names I may be called. Such avoidance amounts to tacit agreement with the apartheid policies of Israel and the unquestioning compliance of my own government. My silence does not make Israel safe. My silence does not make the U.S. safe. I can no longer remain silent.

What he says here is well worth repeating, reading and thinking about. Many Americans believe, if the support for Republican presidential bluster is believable, that war is the ultimate panacea. Of course, this is the way of all sociopathic bullies as they enforce their "right" to dominate.

A good update to what Mr. Emerson writes is today's article from Glenn Greenwald: Obama, Iran and preventive war - Who are the real sociopathic “chickenhawks”? Those gutless wonders that speak out.

[UPDATE :: Thursday, March 8, 2012]
Mr. Emerson had it right when he said "silence" amounts to a tacit agreement. Even though the uninformed, propagandized misanthropist believers rise out of their crypts to rant and rave. Sure enough, one appeared in Wednesday, March 7, 2012, Letter to the Editor: "Letter misguided on Israel" - Notice Barbara Carnam's deliberate insult. The least she could do was spell the man's name right.

In response to Howdy Epperson [sic] (”No Longer Silent,” March 4, Times-Standard):
You certainly are no longer silent, but I wonder about the point of your letter. Are you trying to keep Israel safe from protecting itself from the shelling from the Gaza strip that Israel vacated and left to the Palestinians? Are you keeping our country safe by distancing itself from the Jewish state so as to avoid the displeasure of the neighboring Arab countries, or from the moral disdain of all of the countries of the world that cede land in hopes of peace?

I can see why you stayed silent for so long, as your appalling misinterpretation of the facts does leave you open to being called names, but probably not the ones that you imagined.
Barbara Carnam
Fieldbrook

Israel's record since inception is self-defining - The so-called State of Israel is without legitimacy. Their subjugation of the Palestinian people can not change that reality no matter how many Jew-worshiping Americans try to make it so.

--Joe

Law and Order Finally Comes to Eureka

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 12:26:46 PST

[Update below: The Occupy Movement's Real Threat]

This picture should scare the hell out of everyone living in Eureka, California.

Every law-abiding citizen, for sure.
Anyone know why?
SEE the headline: "Thank you for a job well done"!
Does anyone have a clue what kind of policing job these guys were doing in Afghanistan for the past year? Is this what we want brought back to Eureka?

This is exactly how the circle is closed. When you bring debauchery, oppression and death upon an innocent people for ten years you get back, right into the very heart of your society the very same things, but only multiplied many times over, and that for a lifetime. I wonder if in ten years or even one year from now the current City Council will be saying, "Thank you for a job well done?"

As long as Eurekans keep electing Authoritarian Cult members that empower an emboldened City Manager it's a wonder Murl Harpham doesn't stay on for another year or two. Thank god for old age and senility - natural attrition does have its benefits. The question remains, if Harpham gets his way, (Eureka begins police chief hiring process):

Harpham, 78, ... said he likely won't stay too long after that, noting he'd like to help the new hire with the transition but also wants the new chief to "have a clean slate here."

will, or for that matter, can any new police chief bring actual legal law and order policing to the people of Eureka?

[UPDATE :: February 24, 2012 - The Occupy Movement's Real Threat]
Latest Update: See comments on Ernie's blog about what happen in Court today]

To the uninitiated, the above headline, "Law and Order Finally Comes to Eureka," is sarcastic or cynical for a reason. There is a difference between mob rule by an Authoritarian Cult and their military police and actual law enforcement. Legitimate law enforcement does not require the people they are entrusted to protect and serve to be brutalized into forced servitude and subjection on a whim. A case in point is illustrated in three local blogs: Humboldt Herald's “Shocking Headlines,” Ernie Branscomb's “Omai, Felix, what have you wrought?” and Kym Kemp's “Bedsheets on aBridge: Protests Meet Police in an Occupied America" – Where Kym Kemp describes it this way: “The Occupy Movement has placed the people’s right to protest in direct juxtaposition with law enforcement’s need to protect the public and themselves.”

How does one's simple existence and their demanding of one's legally established rights threaten the public and the police? REALLY? Only in the mind of the paranoid.

If you want to know where and how such paranoid motivated conclusions originate, I invite you to read Glenn Greenwald's: Those weak losers who care about “law”.

The following article "Sick" listed below shows how bad it's been and how local communities support such sickness.

--Joe

SICK!

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Sat, 18 Feb 2012 16:53:15 PST

This is what happens when you give the police the right to brutalize peaceful protesters.

Of course, in places like Syria, in Palestine's Gaza, and West Bank, and Egypt they just shoot you dead, but this is America. They see peaceful people that dare want what is rightfully theirs in an altogther different way. They teach you lessons you'll remember and suffer with the rest of your miserable lives.

What I'd like to know is where are the REAL MEN protecting this girl? As long as the so-called men are cowing around wringing their hands, shaking in their sneakers, of course, these bullies are going to brutalize and then blame the victim. That's why they're handcuffing her before giving her help.

Only a stupid fool would buy into this game. The only good I can see that comes from something like this picture is a wakeup call. To those would-be demonstraters and protesters, take a good look and ask yourselves, is it worth it? If you are standing up for your legal rights and what you are doing is totally legal, then you have the legal right to defend yourself against the criminal agressor. In other words, you have the moral, ethical and legal responsibility to defend yourselves. Failure to do so is a defacto admission justifying the accusations and consequential actions of the police. The government and their police know this and is why and how they co-opt and justifiably brutalize anyone that would ask them for their permission or legal right to exist or be an equal citizen.

If you're not prepared to take these steps then simply stop cooperating and hold the people that support this kind of police brutality, or "tough cop" mentality accountable. In Eureka that starts with the current crop of City Coucil people and the Eurekan's that voted them in.
[Picture was taken from Facebook]

This incident took place on August 11, 2007. An update three years later, Judge orders new trial for Alexandra Svoboda, is the reason I wrote this article. The kind of support the community employs to justify using the justice system as a further weapon of assault is demonstrated here. This is the reason why accountability starts with these people who find the police are attacked when they physically atetack someone and call it an arrest. There is only one word that describes such people - SICK!

--Joe

Really?

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 12:10:53 PST

don Miguel Ruiz Jr

"The person next to you has lived an experience that you have no idea about. Our individuality is born of the agreements and experiences that we have had in our life, which makes us who we are. There is no difference between us, except our point of view."

Man! And some of those points of view are extreme, juvenile and Mickey Mouse. But, is that who we really are? The sum our point of view?

My point of view may vary with who I am. Who I am is certainly NOT defined by my point of view. Who I am is what speaks for me. My point of view or who and what I think or believe I am certainly does not. Our individuality, based upon our experiences and agreements, makes us distinct different individuals. The value of that individuality, however, is the same. Note: I did not say "individual."

--Joe

The Third Alternative – Don't Vote

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:57:22 PST

Stay home!

In his speech “Beyond Vietnam” Martin Luther King spoke about his belief that Americans had a choice to make. He offered that “choice” 45 years ago. History reveals a “choice” was made, but was it the one Martin Luther King hoped would be made?

If anyone bothered to listen to President Barack Obama's State of the Union speech last night you would know or see firm evidence that a decision was made alright, but not the one Martin Luther King hoped for. What he hoped for was: "If we will but make the right choice, we will be able to speed up the day, all over America and all over the world, when justice will roll down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream." The choice he offered then and still viable today was: “nonviolent coexistence or violent co-annihilation.”

Forty five-years is one long day, but here we are at it's end, five minutes before midnight. The choice is still available, but who to choose to lead the way? Americans are being forced to decide in a few months who will be President of the United States. Leading Republican contenders' choice is obvious – “violent co-annihilation.” Ron Paul being the exception here, but he has the “winnable perception” problem. Then there's the standing President and his record speaks for itself – he's as much of a corporatist warmonger as the Republicans. So, what do peace-loving, patriotic American voters do? Waste their vote? The question is, who or what are you voting for?

Every one of these candidates, from the lowliest dog-catcher to the President of the United States is totally corrupt-to-the-gut and that is precisely what you vote for. Everyone gets exactly what they vote for. Which makes every voter liable and accountable for everything they do, every law the deliberately violate, and every individual human the murder or cause to be murdered.

For the first time today I heard someone with some experience in this voting process answer the American Voters' dilemma – how to chose the way of peace and absolve themselves their blood guilt. Democracy Now has a pertinent interview with Ralph Nader on President Barack Obama's State of the Union speech: "He Says One Thing and Does Another": Ralph Nader Responds to Obama’s State of the Union Address. This is the link for the complete interview.

You may not agree with Amy Goodman or Ralph Nader, but there is one thing you cannot disagree with them on - Democracy works!

AMY GOODMAN: Ralph, you have written a new book called Getting Steamed to Overcome Corporatism: Build It Together to Win. People may be listening to you right now and agreeing with a lot of what you are saying, and also saying, "What is the alternative here? Mitt Romney? Newt Gingrich?" What is your response to that?

RALPH NADER: Well, this is the book, and I’m going to drop it off at the White House soon. I think he should read it, because the left is not making any demands on Obama because they’re so freaked out by the Republicans and their crazed rhetoric on their debates. Well, if that is going to continue for 2012, that means the corporations are pulling on Obama and the Democratic Party. The Republicans are pulling on Obama and Democratic Party, because they’re getting all the media, because they have a vibrant primary process, and there’s no primary challenge to Obama, so the progressive agenda is not getting any media at all, week after week.

So the alternative, Amy, is for the left, such as they are — progressive, liberal people, I like to call them "justice seekers" — to make demands on Obama, to make demands for improving the rights of labor, improving the rights of small farmers, improving the rights of small business, the environmental demands that need to be made, the crackdown on corporate crime, a whole panoply of corporate reform agenda, the kind of crackdown on these global corporations that have abandoned America and shipped jobs and industries to fascist and communist regimes who know how to keep workers in their place.But there is no pull, because they’re so freaked out by the Republicans. So, one can really say the Republicans could sit around in a smoke-filled room and say, "Let’s be even more crazed. Let’s be even more corporatist." This will create a good vacuum for the Democrats to move into, because both parties are dialing for the same corporate dollars, and it will bring the left to their knees, because they’ll say, "We’ve got nowhere to go."

Well, the reason why this speech was so failing, especially in foreign and military policy, the reason why it was so failing is because Obama doesn’t have to worry about tens of millions of people who call themselves progressives or liberals, because they have signaled to him that they got nowhere to go. Well, I think if they believe they got nowhere to go, that they don’t want to vote for a third party or Green Party, they can at least, in April, May, June, hold his feet to the fire and present him with a set of progressive demands, in order to tell him that they do have a place to go: they can stay home. And that’s what hurt the Democrats in 2010. People can just stay home.

There's your choice, folks. What it really means to practice 'non-violence' and peace. In other words: Practice what you preach or stay home. Let's see who has the guts to make the right choice.

--Joe

Martin Luther King, Jr. Speaks To You

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 12:24:16 PST

On April 4, 1967, Martin Luther King, Jr. gave his Beyond Vietnam speech. In many ways it is more appropriate today, not just because Barack Obama is President of the United States, but because his words really focused on our time today. Here is an excerpt:

We are now faced with the fact, my friends, that tomorrow is today.

We still have a choice today: nonviolent coexistence or violent co-annihilation.

In that "Beyond Vietnam" speech he gave America and Americans the "choice." Make the right "choice" then, he said, "If we will but make the right choice, we will be able to speed up the day, all over America and all over the world, when justice will roll down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream."

If you possess any doubt that Americans FAILED to make the right "choice," consider the words of leading Republican seeking to be President, Mitt Romney. His words mirror the status quo of his Republican contemporaries and Democratic cohorts lead by Barack Obama. The stark possibility that any of these Republican men, including the current President Barack Obama representing this country in the future makes me believe it is already too late. Here is an excerpt Martin Luther King, Jr.'s words for today, compliments of Democracy Now and Amy Goodman:

REV. DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.:

These are revolutionary times. All over the globe men are revolting against old systems of exploitation and oppression, and out of the wombs of a frail world new systems of justice and equality are being born. The shirtless and barefoot people of the land are rising up as never before. "The people who sat in darkness have seen a great light." We in the West must support these revolutions.

Once to every man and nation
Comes the moment to decide,
In the strife of truth and falsehood,
For the good or evil side;
Some great cause, God’s new Messiah,
Off’ring each the bloom or blight,
And the choice goes by forever
Twixt that darkness and that light.

Though the cause of evil prosper,
Yet ’tis truth alone is strong;
Though her portion be the scaffold,
And upon the throne be wrong:
Yet that scaffold sways the future,
And behind the dim unknown,
Standeth God within the shadow
Keeping watch above his own.

And if we will only make the right choice, we will be able to transform this pending cosmic elegy into a creative psalm of peace. If we will make the right choice, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our world into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. If we will but make the right choice, we will be able to speed up the day, all over America and all over the world, when justice will roll down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream.

If you would like to read the complete speech you can go to: Martin Luther King, Jr.: Beyond Vietnam — A Time to Break Silence - Picture source.

--Joe

Need An Introduction to “Above The Fold”?

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 17:58:19 PST

Somewhere along my daily perusing I came across a link that took me to “Above The Fold” – “Home Delivered Glances At Humboldt County.” I try to keep the list of local blogs on my websites current and pertinent. It seems I totally missed this blog.

Since this blog is about “Home delivered glances at Humboldt County” and this Report is certainly motivated by a long family history in Humboldt and adjacent counties one of the first things I looked for was a link. Alas, NO LINK.

Well, for whatever it's worth, I can see why I missed this blog for nearly a year. But I remedied that problem forthwith. The Humbug Network is certainly alive and well. Even better now with the latest Lost Coast Outpost blog and the addition of their “blogger dream team.”

For years now, since Google changed their search algorithms I received tons of emails asking me for reciprocating links. I guess these local bloggers' disdain for their fellow contemporaries never got the message. Either that, or they all believe, as I do, that “less is more.”

Anyway, an interesting blog. Not real sure that its “glances at Humboldt” aren't a bit skewed, though. But then, some would say the writer of this Report as a bit skewed. For sure, a good blog to put on your list.

P.S. When I was doing my Labels, the "Above The Fold Blog" label came up, making me think that I wrote about this blog before. I check my blog listing and didn't see the name. So, disregard any previous posts.

--Joe

Brutality Versus Terrorism

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 11:25:51 PST

Time for the Occupy Movement to wake up to reality.

The question, until now remained unanswered: Why did city governments and their police officers respond so violently and with so much brutality against peaceful people threatening no one, simply asking for a little consideration?

Today, at least for Eureka, California, we got a partial answer – PARANOIA.

The Times-Standard reveals in their “County emails outragemembers of Occupy Eureka” the existence of “nefarious” “emails” “that led to police action against the Occupy Eureka encampment on the Humboldt County Courthouse lawn.” Why? Read the condemnatory words of the leading police official and law enforcement officer, District Attorney Paul Gallegos:

“While I do not suspect that any of those tents contain any explosives or otherwise dangerous materials, I cannot confirm that they do or do not and I do not believe that we can allow the risk of such an occurrence to continue.” [Emphasis added]

No fact-based reality contained in anything Gallegos says, only his paranoid, fantasy-based vilifying accusations of “terrorism” that demonstrates his true attitude regarding the people of the Occupy Movement – inept, incompetent, gullible, and stupid terrorist.

Grant Scott-Goforth of the Times-Standard puts it this way: “Gallegos said he worried it was possible for people not directly associated with Occupy Eureka to guise the group as cover for illegal activity.”
The hypocrisy of Gallegos is mind-blowing, if nothing else. He says: “Candidly I support the movement. Unfortunately here it has been somewhat co-opted locally by our local protesters.”

In what way? What could these local protesters possibly want the the movement doesn't want when dealing with the dregs of society; homeless people and a “leaderless nature” that obviously couldn't know what it wants other than issue “hyperbole.” Notice how unreasonable these “Occupy People” are according to Gallegos and why he refuses to recognize and engage them: “If people want to sit down reasonably, they're going to find complete cooperation.” Then immediately contradicts that propagandist assertion by saying: “Occupy Eureka doesn't have a monopoly on concerns about the county and the community.” Why? Because in his mind they do not represent the 99% of Americans. He and his supporters do. That's why he and his police deal with them for the “terrorists” that they really are.

A good lesson on what “terrorism” and what makes “terrorist” – how the wanton accusatory use of the word automatically vilifies, condemns and justifies the extreme forms of sanctioned brutality and criminal conduct – is explained and defined by Glenn Greenwald in his Salon.com article, “Iranand the Terrorism game” - to quote from his:

UPDATE: There’s one point that should be added about why this matters so much: the fact that Terrorism has no fixed meaning does not mean it is inconsequential. The opposite is true. Terrorism is one of the most consequential words in our political lexicon. The term designates Supreme, Unmitigated Evil. Once someone is successfully branded a Terrorist, it means that anything and everything can and should be done to them without constraints.

And concludes with:

As I’ve said before, Terrorism is simultaneously the term that means nothing and justifies everything. That’s why such strong emotions are evoked when it is used in a way that deviates from mandated orthodoxies. It’s a meaningless term, but incredibly (perhaps incomparably) significant in governing how power and violence can be wielded and against whom.

So now you know why Gallegos painted the local Occupy People and their “peaceful protests” as “terrorist” - stupid people that believe they have some God-given or Constitutional right to be recognized for who and what they “think” or “believe” they are. He wants to be, as he claims here, to be the man of the people, but he's co-opted by his own attitude, actions and hypocrisy as defined and established by the Occupy Eureka people.

Whether or not it was the newspaper Editor or their writer's intention or not, they did expose the truth about Paul Gallegos' hypocrisy. The issue, as applied to these people peacefully protesting, went far beyond simply “taking down a few tents” to branding the local people as potential terrorists and their protest actions as terrorism. It went to the very heart of why the local so-called representative government went so far to renounce and denounce the legitimacy of a courageous people willing to Occupy their rightful space on this Earth equal to all others.

The citizens of Humboldt County and particularly Eureka are quite capable of deciding for themselves what is and what is not “public safety.” Despite the arrogance of the one percent, we're not a bunch of dogs that need to be told when to “sit” and when and how to “speak.”
(Credit Times-Standard and AP-Salon.com)

--Joe

Tailgater's Remorse

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 16:54:17 PST

One efficient way of dealing with some jerk riding right on your bumper!

Of course, that's not what the Times-Standard newspaper says happened:
Safety Corridor crash leaves one dead; wrong-way driving leads to head-on collision

What caused the head-on was the guy tailgating that couldn't get out of the way. This guy, Joshua Larson, wasn't drunk out of his mind. He was obviously just reckless, admittedly driving 55 mph in a 50 mile per hour Safety Corridor right on the other car's bumper and as a consequence responsible, at least as equally responsible, for this woman's death as she was.

Now to the potential death caused by another deliberately negligent driver as reported in the Saturday, January 7, 2012, issue of the Times-Standard: Family takes road worker off life support - "Arcata man's health unchanged since accident on Myrtle Avenue".

Arcata resident Martha Johnson, Newell's sister, said the family decided to take Newell, 68, off life support three days ago, after doctors explained that the damage to his brain is extensive. Johnson said all the doctors and family can do now is make Newell as comfortable as possible.
”He most likely will pass within a few days,” Johnson said. [Emphasis added.]

The newspaper account says Eugene Palmer, 17, a Eureka resident's "windshield fogged up and he was unable to see the roadway ahead of him. CHP said he continued to drive and went over cones and into the construction site, hitting Newell."

He is responsible for Kenneth Newell's imminent death because "he continued to drive" when he obviously could not see. I've had my window fog up driving commercial rig when a heater hose broke. The moment I couldn't see, I stopped. When you're hauling 8,000 gallons of gas, you stop as fast as you can, regardless of the circumstances. The fact is you never start driving a commercial vehicle with a dirty, greasy or dusty windshield and mirrors.

Problem is, that was a cold morning and all the windows were frozen up. "He continued to drive" with a fogged up windshield, obviously, because he had been driving unable to see with a fogged up windshield all the time. That's why he didn't stop. Not even when he ran over safety cones.

What happened to Kenneth Newell was NO ACCIDENT. Eugene Palmer's actions were deliberate and purposeful making him personally responsible for Kenneth Newell's condition and eminent death.

It's time to reassess these so-called unavoidable "accidents" for exactly what they are - WRECKS.

PS. The next time you get right on someone's bumper trying to bully your way, you think about what might happen when that car suddenly moves over and there is someone coming at you 90 miles an hour.

--Joe

Happy New Year!

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 16:18:24 PST

2012 – Will it be one of those years that stands out in the annals of history? With the ever expanding and growing “Global Awakening” one could imagine so.

For me it will be the year I took another look at what is REAL important to me. Many thanks to modern medicine, a skilled doctor and hospital staff, I was granted a bit more time to grace this Earth. Life-threatening events tend to focus life's priorities. When it comes to the blogosphere, specially when it comes to making comments on gutless mundane blogs, one tends to learn what it means to NOT cast pearls before swine.
So, without insulting anyone's intelligence too much, let me offer, in the spirit of forgiveness and a prosperous New Year, something Deepak Chopra said recently that everyone can understand, take to heart and work on. To quote:

Put simply, we are all individually “total individuals.” Together, we are a force that can harness a new societal integrity, with clear aligned interests, and choices that benefit the greater good rather than select individuals.

Here is the link to the Dylan Ratigan website.

Best of 2011: Deepak Chopra on Collective Consciousness

December 27, 2011

Deepak’s 5 Rules to Save Ourselves and Save the World

1. Chaos and instability equals an opportunity for collective change. “Sometimes out of chaos and outrage comes a leap of creativity, or as we know from individuals who go into a crisis mode and reach rock bottom, they sometime suddenly recover because there’s a major shift in their being. You can’t sink any lower,” says Deepak.

2. Change begins with one person, but is more powerful in groups of like-minded individuals. “Be the shift inside you, then you can communicate the shift and hang out with the people who are kind of resonating at the same frequency. In the end, things do evolve because that’s the nature of consciousness—it struggles, it experiments, it fails, and it takes creative leaps,” says Deepak. “I think they manifest individually, one personal resolution of duality at a time. Like a popcorn popper of individuals realizing. The result over time is the advantages to those living in unified field naturally emerges,” says Dylan.

3. Working for change with others can lead to a “phase transition.” ” In actual systems, a phase transition would be say water boiling into steam, or a storm system that suddenly erupts,” explains Deepak. “If there’s a number of people behaving or transitioning into peace and love and compassion and equanimity and joy because consciousness is field, as we just said, unified field, than when it reaches a critical mass, then it affects everything.”

4. See instability and change as a chance to be creative. Deepak says to look at the chaos in the world through the lens of “what is the opportunity here for us, personally and individually, but also collectively?” He says that if our media and leaders started doing that, “there would be creative opportunities that would become very obvious.”

5. Ask yourself the right questions as you pursue opportunities for change. Ask yourself: “What is the opportunity? What are my unique skills at this moment? What do I really care about? Who are the people I can connect with and ask for help? Who are the people I can help with? How can I nurture the right relationships? Are they examples of people who have made a difference in this situation? The more we ask ourselves those questions and we start connecting with other people, then there’s a phenomenon called collective intension, collection creativity that emerges, you know, and it’s a process,” says Deepak.

- Meg Robertson is a digital producer for DylanRatigan.com. Say hi to her @MegRobertson.

Well, that's Deepak's positive way of looking forward; not something that I find many people doing. I've got an idea that the Future's way of working things out shall not be in any way many believe will happen.

--Joe

Objective “Reporting” versus Worthless Opinionated Beliefs

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 15:09:03 PST

There's been considerable dissension and acrimonious dispute, since I inaugurated the Joe Blow Report, for declaring it's sole purpose is to report fact-based observations and arbitrarily refrain from expounding upon conjecture based worthless opinions and religious based beliefs.

In fact I recently reported the following quote about legendary Miyamoto Mushashi:

The Mind should be pure, uncontaminated by self-serving distortions and preconceived ideas. The mind should be flexible, able to change shape according to the situation without resorting to rote learning.”

Today, I'm adding the following quote:

Living plants are flexible,

In death, they become dry and brittle.

Therefore, stubborn people are disciples of death,

but flexible people are disciples of life.

On Thanksgiving Day, November 24, 2011, Glenn Greenwald takes on this issue of “objective reporting in his: Bob Schieffer, Ron Paul and journalistic “objectivity” - Lessons the local Humboldt community should take to heart. Glenn observes:

Contrary to popular wisdom, there aren’t two types of journalists: those who express opinions and those who are objective. The two types are those who honestly acknowledge their opinions and those who deceitfully pretend such opinions do not influence their journalism. One reason modern establishment journalism has become so corrupted and worthless is because of the conceit that they engage in some sort of objective reporting that is free of bias and opinion, even as they are the stalwart defenders of a clear set of political opinions and interests (those wielded by the same power factions which they pretend to hold accountable). Any time someone is tempted to believe these fairy tales of objectivity, they should just re-watch this Schieffer interview.

The principals defined in that statement above are the reasons that led me to make my first observation regarding Dave Stancliff's opinionated and biased, newspaper published, article. Because the Times-Standard steadfastly continues to publish him regardless of his public conduct repudiating his credibility and theirs, a review of their published conduct reveals the pattern defined by Greenwald above:

One reason modern establishment journalism has become so corrupted and worthless is because of the conceit that they engage in some sort of objective reporting that is free of bias and opinion, even as they are the stalwart defenders of a clear set of political opinions and interests (those wielded by the same power factions which they pretend to hold accountable).”

The Joe Blow Report is replete examples of "bias and worthless conjectured opinions by the Times-Standard reporters. A rather striking and depressing indictment on this Thanksgiving Day.

--Joe

Humboldt Shame

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:27:46 PST

[UPDATE]

When I picked up my Wednesday, November 23, 2011, Times-Standard paper today and the this picture pasted on the front-page, Use of pepper spray at Davis brings back memories of '97 Palco protest; university president launches investigation and read the caption where they used the word, "allege," I was instantly enraged – AGAIN!

Allege means to "assert without proof." Then writes, "Eventually, officers swabbed pepper spray on the protesters' eyes in order to remove them." The fact is, they didn't need to "swab" anything in their eyes to "remove them." They used pepper spray just like they us the Taser to force submission and forced yielding - coercive rape at it's essence. The paper, regardless the writer, in this case Dona Tam, never gives-up on the biased propaganda justifying the crimes.

I was out of this area when that incident took place. When people found out that I was from Humboldt County they wanted to know what kind of neanderthal barbarians Humboldt County people had on their police forces? The only conclusion anyone could accept is that these people were not only sick, but sadistically sick.

We're not talking about just the Sheriff and Police Chief and their officers, but the whole damned community. The sickness that permeates this community was quite well defined when the justification for what amounts to a form of sadistic rape legally declared acceptable. What did the people in this community do about the District Attorney, the Sheriff, the Eureka Police Chief and the officers involved? The consequences of those acts that day are clear in the pictures of how the police deal with peaceful people all over the world. No father of any worthwhile value, including one of the girl's father, Jan Lundberg, would ever tolerate their daughter's treatment recorded here for the whole world to see. When you look to the criminal for justice, and get injustice, you are as guilty of the crimes committed as they are.

Shotgun pellets or pepper spray, what's the difference?

When you read articles like this one: Torture’s Future, By ERIC LEWIS in the New York Times and this one by Glenn Greenwald: The roots of the UC-Davis pepper-spraying along with pictures like this of what the heroic police and courageous solders are doing to their neighbors it all kind of jumbles together as something that doesn't involve YOU. Problem is, when you pickup your local newspaper and see similar pictures that happened right in your own hometown and know there is a twenty year legacy of such acts of vile hatred and sadistic barbarity, you've got to face the facts – like it or not.

When Eureka Police Chief Murl Harpham tells the homeowners and business people in Eureka that he has “tough” cops at their beck and call. These are the kind of “tough” people he's talking about. Notice in the accompanying article: Police pay third visit to Occupy Eureka at courthouse – Notice this statement: [O]one woman was arrested Tuesday morning after she allegedly became aggressive with a county employee, Harpham said.” “Became aggressive” in what way justifies an arrest? Raise their voice in objection? And the county employee didn't precipitate the incident with aggressive conduct? That “county employee” kept their business to themselves, just walked quietly by and never said a word or made a filthy gesture? Eureka police officers are, when they want to be, are extremely thin-skinned. Simply asking them a question can be cause for aggressiveness in their minds. Consequently, everyone walks a tightrope when dealing with the police.

These words by Swellsman are worth repeating:

And, yeah . . . the rest of us might want to think about trying to undo some of the power and public relations imbalance that we have allowed to creep into law enforcement’s favor by our past apathy in the face of public abuses.

Despite what they’ll tell you, and what we’ve been conditioned to believe, the cops are not the law. The law resides in a system, not in a person, not even in a group of people. Cops are merely citizens – just like you and me – who have been given special dispensation to arrest people under certain circumstances and then turn them over to that system . . . and nothing more.

And it seems to me that America would be a lot better off trying to keep that basic fact in mind.

His blog is located here. Picture source is the Times-Standard and Sharif Kouddous.

[UPDATE :: HUMBOLDT HERALD has an posting on this subject: Humboldt’s history of pepper spray recalled. The comment section is worth considering. By the way, Heraldo's is uncustomarily candid of this longstanding wrong in this community and why he thinks the heavy-handed Government/Police way will ultimately fail.

--Joe

UC Davis Police Pepper Spray Use: What it Says - MacLeod Cartoon

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 11:44:45 PST

UC Davis Police Pepper Spray Use: What it Says

These are the people that protect and serve, right?

--Joe

The Root Of All Evil

noreply@blogger.com (Joe Blow) — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 11:47:18 PST

"Acting upon the lie."

Here is the top story on the Humboldt Herald blog since yesterday, November 17, 2011, where he publishes title the story for the Lost Coast Outpost blog. Please note Hank Sims' words about the police, “responses to the Occupy 'Threat'.” My question on Humboldt Herald was and is, why use the word “'Threat'” when referencing the so-called "Occupy" people? Specifically, "What makes the “Occupy” (movement) a threat?" In the 27 comments, no one answered my question.

Eureka drama kings vs. level-headed Arcata

November 17, 2011

Lost Coast Outpost: The EPD and the APD and Their Dramatically Different Responses to the Occupy ‘Threat’

27 Comments |
Posted by Heraldo

Do these people look like some sort of a threat to you? Think maybe there's a big gun in that bag that's a threat to the police?

One person, Ponder Z, did say: "Not a threat, a NUISANCE, and an embarrassment !!!!" But, didn't really address the issue of “why they actually pose a 'threat' to anyone? If you read Hank Sims' post and, no doubt why 'Heraldo' highlighted the article, is that he's really asking the same question, “What makes the Occupy Movement such a threat”?

Thadeus Greenson writes:

On Oct. 25, County Administrative Officer Phillip Smith-Hanes penned a letter to protesters explaining that they had every right to peacefully assemble and protest but asking them to voluntarily take down their tents, pointing out that camping in non-designated public spaces is prohibited under the Eureka Municipal Code, section 93.02.

"Penned a letter" when these so-called "protesters" were clearly breaking the law? WHY? Is this how law enforcement works when they see a crime? Write the offender a letter? Give them an indeterminate amount of time to voluntarily stop their criminal behavior? Why didn't the Sheriff or the Chief of Police act? Why did they blow this situation clear out of proportions and make it a "Federal Case"? After several weeks the city and county knowingly and deliberately allowed these people to "camp" in violation of clearly understood and accepted law, they lost their legitimate right to act against them. What they did, the City Council, the Board of Supervisors, Sheriff and EPD was deliberately create a pretense to brutalize and criminalize these people. Adding to that obscenity, it looks like they were setting up Councilwoman Linda Atkins as well.

You've got the Eureka Police Department castigating Councilwoman Linda Atkins like she's some sort of terrorist sympathizer that has betrayed her own people for simply talking to them about their predicament situation. Which is exactly what the relevant and responsible people should have done themselves long before Linda Atkins found the need. Hank Sims suggests:

Everyone should read Thad Greenson’s fascinating story today on the leadup to the first Eureka Police Department raid on Occupy Eureka. Particularly interesting is the Eureka Police Officers Association’s attack on Councilmember Linda Atkins for “leaking” the fact that the EPD was planning to bust up the encampment. Greenson quotes a letter from the EPOA that was circulated at Tuesday night’s Eureka City Council meeting: [Read the rest here.]

The problem with such words like “Occupy 'Threat'” is that when systematically and repeatedly used, they create and sustain a false illusion that when acted upon makes that illusion or lie become the reality or truth. Everyone accepts that truth and reinforces that fact. It should be noted that Thadeus Greenson is no stranger to that practice, and in particular when it comes to his reporting police actions. One has but only read his words in the very first paragraph in Police association blasts councilwoman:

The Eureka Police Officers' Association board of directors alleges (filthy lying accusation) Councilwoman Linda Atkins “leaked” plans to raid the Occupy Eureka encampment to protesters earlier this month, putting officers, demonstrators and the general public at increased risk.

This sounds like the paranoid rantings of a bunch weak-kneed wimps that are absolutely scared to death of their own shadows. That includes the Eureka Police Officers' Association, which are the Eureka Police Department and their masters, most of the City Council and supportive so-called Elites in this community. Hank Sims says: “Isn’t the EPD misreading its foe, here? These aren’t armed terrorists.” [Emphasis added]

Actually, I don't think they are “misreading” anyone. Certainly not the people making up the Occupy Movement or Linda Atkins and her supporters. That said, again the particular use of words used such as, “police blasts councilwoman,” “Occupy Eureka crackdown,” “foe,” “alleges,” “increased risk,” and “Occupy 'Threat'” are the real issue. These words stigmatize and brand well intentioned and essentially peaceful people trying to do what they legally believe they have a right to do. Standing for their rights sends the message that their lives count just as much as those in control using the laws arbitrarily made to suppress, subordinate and oppress - to deny legal rights. There is a real threat to these oligarch, dictatorial, corrupt politicians and their enforcers are acutely aware of. Proof of that is in their whole attitude, demeanor and their coordinated aggressive bullying campaign. The Occupy Movement strikes right at the heart of their legitimacy to exist in any form and they know it.

My father often said that what gave the G.I.s in World War II the advantage over the Germans is that the Americans could think for himself, act and take charge when necessary. Take out or kill the German officers and the fight was over. Those Elitist Oligarch's that would rule this country and the World learned that lesson well. They've had a long time to brainwash the American people into believing that the lives of the police and their political masters are more valuable than that average citizen. That the average person is incapable of thinking or living for themselves and need a strong authoritarian police force to tell the common citizen how to live. It's easy to see when you watch the police interact with the demonstrators – they, the police, believe they have the right to put their hands on anyone anyway they want, men or women. That didn't work so well in Egypt when those people decided if they were going to “count too” and they were going to maintain any sort of dignity as men, that stopped. Egyptian-style policing in Eureka will go the same way. It's only a matter of time.

--Joe