I think tasers are unconstitutional, authoritarian torture weapons that have no place in a civilized society. No government should have the power to electrocute citizens and cause them great pain -- even briefly -- in order to make them comply on nothing more than a policeman's whim.
(I haven't had the chance to weigh in on the bullshit new law in Arizona, but this is very likely to be the type of unintended consequence that could result in unnecessary, aggressive policing of the populace there.)
Normally I only read newspapers on vacation: when they are dropped outside my hotel door, or left lying in an airport terminal. And I always relish the opportunity.
These days, between my new digs at Mrs F's grandmother, and my new job, there are multiple papers at my disposal...New York Times, WSJ, USA Today and the Detroit paper. In fact, I'm getting more of my news and information the old-fashioned way than I am online.
There's still something satisfying about reading an actual paper. And I definitely read more stories than I do online...they're sitting right there ready to be read, not off to the side requiring some incentive to click a link.
As usual, the Sunday New York Times has the most meat on its bones...
Even the generally annoying Mustache of Wisdom had a decent column—someone I would NEVER click a link to without being directed to—particularly one with a title as opaque as “Hobby or Necessity?”
And some stories just wouldn't work onscreen as well as it does in print. Like this frightening illustration-based story hypothesizing about an Israeli attack on Iran and what might ensue in today's version of The Six-Day War.
Friedman’s column was certainly bolstered by having read the big graphic story first, and the combination reaffirmed my stance on U.S.-Israeli relations, which boils down to this: I generally fall on the side opposing whatever Israel is up to at any particular moment. I think the United States pays far too much deference to Israeli interests, and that the relationship is extremely one-sided in who benefits from it.
The ascension of hard-liners in Israeli politics has made much of this more obvious (or less thinly-veiled), and there is a lot to be added into the equation from Freidman's column about the attitudes at play, too. But even The Mustache is giving Israel too much leeway by implying that Israeli interest in Middle East peace has diminished primarily because of economics and a lack of focus. Those certainly factor in the politics of everyday citizens (in Israel and elsewhere), and I think explains how Israeli politicians that behave like a Dick Cheney fantasy team could come to dominate the government, but it leaves aside what I believe is a very deliberate process of dismantling any movement towards Arab-Israeli peace agreements.
I finished reading that timeline of an attack on Iran, and wondered “what does the Israeli regime have to lose by doing something like this?”
Then I refreshed myself on the Six Day War, the events leading to it, and the fact that so many of the same players—then young military leaders, now high government officials—are involved, and I wonder, “When will Israel go ahead with this crazy shit, and is there anything Obama can do to stop it or react differently?”
P.S. This really started as a light-hearted post on the nostalgia of reading newspapers...
Early last week I tossed a few possible D.O.W.'s out for consideration...the usual harmless political douchebaggery. On Friday, John Cole posted a video that sealed the deal for King County Sheriff's Deputy Paul Schene.
I actually skipped the embedded video at the time because I thought it might be too disturbing—I have a thing about watching what I KNOW is actual, real violence. I've viewed it since, but with the video all over the place now, you can watch it somewhere else if you like. Here's what happens:
A 6'2", 195-pound 31 year old sheriff bum rushes and beats the shit out of an in-custody 15 year old girl in a holding cell for kicking her sneaker off in his direction. Deputy Schene has pleaded not guilt to misdemeanor assault [news story here].
First off, good luck with that, motherfucker. You did it in front of a camera, and now the whole world wants your ass in a sling. But misdemeanor assault? That looks like serious fucking felony assault and battery to me. Deputy Asshole deserves a lengthy sentence in actual prison, and I hope everyone on the block knows who he is and why he's there.
Kevin Drum watched "24" last night, and comes away concerned...
...it's obvious that the show is going to deal head on with the subject of torture this season. Episode 1 opens with Jack testifying before a Senate committee about his past transgressions, which he wearily but defiantly confesses to, and then rolls through two hours of FBI agents wondering "how far he'll go" — because, you see, Jack's exploits with the dark arts are apparently the thing of legend in the hallways of the Bureau.
Is there any way for this end other than badly? After all, here in the blogosphere we opponents of torture like to argue that we don't live in the world of 24, guys. And we don't. But Jack Bauer, needless to say, does live in the world of 24. And in that world, there are well-heeled terrorists around every corner, ticking time bombs aplenty, and torture routinely saves thousands of lives. What are the odds that it won't do so again this season — except this time after lots of talk about the rule of law blah blah liberals blah blah it's your call blah blah?
It's clear the FOX has decided to have a fictional "debate" about torture in a widely viewed arena here—though I suspect only a fraction of the show's original season viewers have stuck with it. Bauer will be unashamedly portrayed as a hero subjected to second-guessing by a chamber of desk jockey pussies in D.C. You can be sure that any Congressman (or likely a faux-Pelosi Congresswoman) who questions Bauer in a hearing will be portrayed in the weakest pansy-ass liberal light possible. I can pretty much see this scenario working out with Jack getting to channel Col. Jessup, "You NEED ME on that wall!"—except without the plot twist that nails Jessup in the film.
My position has always been this: Torture needs to be illegal. Period. No allowances for "ticking time bombs" and "24-scenarios." And penalties need to be extremely harsh—the same as a kidnapper who tortured or killed a victim-harsh. If it is left in the toolbox for interrogators under ANY circumstance it will be reached for all the time. There needs to be the utmost deterrence for anyone involved in a potential decision.
Conjure up your worst Jack Bauer scenario...a nuclear bomb about to destroy L.A., and Jack needs to get those codes. Assuming torture works (which it doesn't), any Agent Bauer would need to gamble his own potential jail time versus saving millions of lives. If someone in that scenario actually believed they and everyone in a 20-mile radius would die, and there was no other course available, they'd sacrifice themselves for the cause, so to speak—"I'll spend the rest of my life in jail for this, but otherwise ten million people are dead in five minutes—I can live with that." But short of that, the knowledge they will rot in a cell would bring them (or an authorizing superior) up short.
If in retrospect, it somehow demonstrably worked, its likely they would be pardoned before any jury had a chance to (not) convict them.
Even that involves hypotheticals that have never occurred and likely never will, and no one in there right mind would think otherwise. Oh, wait...
"Scalia responded with a defense of Agent Bauer, arguing that law enforcement officials deserve latitude in times of great crisis. “Jack Bauer saved Los Angeles . . . . He saved hundreds of thousands of lives,” Judge Scalia reportedly said. “Are you going to convict Jack Bauer?” He then posed a series of questions to his fellow judges: “Say that criminal law is against him? ‘You have the right to a jury trial?’ Is any jury going to convict Jack Bauer?”
“I don’t think so,” Scalia reportedly answered himself. “So the question is really whether we believe in these absolutes. And ought we believe in these absolutes.” Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia
Asshat. Even "Jack Bauer" himself doesn't believe it...
“You torture someone and they’ll basically tell you exactly what you want to hear, whether it’s true or not, if you put someone in enough pain,” Sutherland said last year.
There's much more to say about the new low Hillary established today, and I'll be coming back to unload, but for now I'll let KO handle things...
UPDATE: I don't see how anyone in the real world (which excludes Taylor Marsh, Jeralyn and the irrational faction* of Shakesville—no link because this never happened over there...) can possibly stand by her any more. Not after this.
Not because it was malicious. Or that she actually is staying in the race because Obama might get shot. But because this was an unnecessary gaffe of epic proportions.
I actually understand the context she was invoking—that campaigns have extended into June—but why she felt the need to use RFK as her example instead of, say, Hart/Mondale, but then to compound her unforced error by not just alluding to, but actually using the word "assassinated" in reference to the soon-to-be first black nominee for PResident in a country with a bloody legacy is simply incomprehensible to me. Sure, what she said is "historically true", but it was completely gratuitous and unnecessary, not to mention unbelievably insensitive, even cold-blooded. Screw it—sociopathic.
And she has gone to this well before. More than once. This was just the first time there was a video. Like Tuzla, the fact that there is a pattern negates any claim of "off the cuff slip." There is no reason for her use RFK as her example or to tread anywhere near the assassination of a rival.
As I am sure she is well aware Barack Obama was granted Secret Service protection earlier than any candidate since, well, RFK—who was running just after the assassination of that LBJ coattail-rider Martin Luther King.
She just gave the superdelegates all the cover they need to pull the plug on her, and simultaneously torpedoed any shot at VP. A silver lining I suppose.
Her campaign's strategy of hanging around until some scandal or mega-gaffe decided the nomination was a success—but like everything else, just not the way they planned.
[TPM has the original statement and the non-apology apology clips here.] * Update and clarification: I read regularly at Shakesville, and I'm not really sure why, but I do. It is an enjoyable place for me, I suppose, because there's actually a debate as opposed to agreement. But it can be frustrating and annoying...There are contributors and commenters over there that are as in the tank for Hillary as the die-hard moron Bush-supporters, and that's who I was referring to. Melissa has a thread up on the RFK debacle today, and she has a pretty reasonable reaction, though I think she downplays it a bit.
Hard to blame the kid here, he probably thought it was a pizza delivery guy stopping to yell at him. Skater Eric's lucky Officer Penis didn't tase him. As is the kid with the bals to hold a camera on this maniac.
Coach Bob Knight abruptly retired from coaching last night. Always classy, Knight bailed on his Texas Tech team in midseason right at a crucial stretch heading towards the tournament.
The winningest coach in history, Knight is credited with developing the motion offense and is acknowledged as one of the great coaches of all time. Oh, and he was a hall of fame asshole as well.
Watch out for flying chairs, clubs and obcenities if you're on the golf course in Indiana...
The judge was none to happy too hear that Vick been less than candid in his testimony, and felt Vick had failed to accept responsibilty for his actions. Vick's plea called for 12-18 months. The judge said, "Fuck that. Try your comeback in 2010!" and gave him 23 months—the harshest term of all the defendants. He cannot appeal.
Vick also gets three years probation and must serve at least 85% of his sentence—19-1/2 months.
I hope the guards toss his cell with a hungry German Shepherd on a daily basis. Fucking punk.
* Dog years
UPDATE: This little escapade has cost Vick an estimated $142 million. You know what I say to that...
UPDATE: I want to point out that I discuss this particular video because it is the one that is being widely circulated and debated at the moment. It is NOT the worst example of excessive force, nor does the suspect exhibit model behavior, but it is a good example of what I believe is the misuse of what I believe is still a dangerous weapon. Also it should be noted that I perhaps identify most closely to the suspect as a white, 30-something with a young family...
This video has been all over the internet, so you may have seen it already. It's ten minutes long, but worth watching to really understand exactly what a fucking fear-based, authoritarian country we have become. If for some reason you can't watch it or want to cut to the (non-)chase, I put a transcript of the key moments in the comments. Check it out:
Holy. Shit. Pulled over for (possibly) speeding and you end up getting 50,000 volts, cracking your head on the highway, and under arrest—all in front of your hysterical pregnant wife and child—because you questioned the cop.
There's an excellent thread on this incident at John Cole's place, and a reader named Kirk does a really valiant job trying to explain the cop's POV and possible motives/fears (here, here, and here). He makes some really good points, but it all boils down to a confused, if somewhat belligerent, motorist getting assaulted for no good reason by a taser-happy asshole cop who loses control of a situation he handles poorly from the outset.
I want to point out that I have limited experience with this type of situation, I think I've gotten two traffic tickets in my life, and they were both a long-ass time ago. The circumstances were pretty cut and dry, and I was completely deferential to the officer in each case. I would expect to behave the same way if it were to occur again. As such, I don't particularly relate to the way this motorist behaves in terms of challenging the cop, but he IS within his rights. Personally? I would take my ticket and fight it in court (or pay it), but things get confusing here in a hurry, thanks to the cop (hopefully, you've watched the video or read the transcript)...
So the cop issues a ticket, but is unclear exactly what the infraction is, and simply demands the driver sign it. After reading various accounts, it seems that in Utah, you are expected to sign a ticket as a promise to either appear in court or plead guilty and pay the fine. But this motorist has never gotten a ticket, and has no reason to know that—and neither would I. I would not want to sign it either! Hopefully I could better communicate my confusion and get an explanation from the cop, but with this douchebag, that might not have happened for me either.
According to the Utah Highway Patrol, "In the event that a motorist refuses to sign a trooper has two options. One is to write "refuses to sign" on the citation, which is then given to the driver. The second is to arrest the driver."
Once the driver refuses to sign, this cop clearly never considers the first, and more appropriate option, and takes the refusal to sign as immediate grounds for arrest—but never informs the motorist of any of this, and casually asks him to "hop out of the car." The driver thinks they are going to look at the speed limit sign, and the next thing he knows there is a screaming cop with a taser in his face, and within seconds, he's been shot without warning.
That's all it takes. Failure to comprehend what's going on and you are "resisting" and subject to a horrific bodily assault. You are not threat to yourself, the officer or the public. No attempt to flee. Nothing except perhaps failure to completely submit without question for an minor traffic infraction you believe you are innocent of. To a cop that has given no indication by his behavior or words that the situation has escalated to a level requiring arrest, never mind extreme force.
Commenters elsewhere have pointed out that the motorist is “reaching for a weapon/pocket”. That’s bullshit. He appears to be putting his wallet back in his pocket, and if that ever went through the cop’s mind, I’m pretty sure we would have seen/heard evidence of it on the tape. Either at the moment, or after the fact when the suspect asks what caused the tasing, and especially when he describes the incident to the other cop—”I thought he was going for a weapon…”
Officer Asshole decided he was going to show this guy who was boss, and arrest him. For speeding.
He either has no hesitation about using excessive force or he simply mishandles the situation so poorly that he panics and fucks up. Either way, he is wrong, and doesn't deserve to be carrying waepons and dealing with civilians. Put that dick behind a desk or better yet, fire his ass.
--
But this is part of a bigger problem. First, tasers are fucking dangerous. No, they are not deadly weapons in the same sense as a handgun, but as three separate taser-related deaths last weekend indicate, they should not be used without justification. But they clearly are—in some cases even more outrageously that the Utah speeding case:
• Here's one where an intoxicated, but hardly dangerous, Ohio woman is tased repeatedly by a cop that has a good hundred pounds on her, simply because, it appears, he doesn't feel like bending over to restrain her.
• A bicyclist tells his story of a confrontation where he ended up getting tased for trying to ride home from the airport.
• But the most blantant abuse of force appears in this video of a student in the library at UCLA. If you can get past the horrendous cell phone cinematography, this one is disturbing for what it reveals about the police and their techniques.
--
We are now in a era when people can be detained, wiretapped, surveilled, questioned, or whatever for no reason whatsoever and expected to comply without protest. No warrants issued, no charges need to be filed, no habeas corpus, the government is assuming powers they should not have, and at the same time introducing new torturous techniques to enforce compliance.
At a time when governement and police actions most deserve to be questioned and scrutinized, that will be met with hostility, excessive force and pain. Great combination.
Andrew's right. President Rudy should fucking scare the shit out of you. I suspect many of the people who think they have "nothing to fear" aren't too different than Jared Massey—they are just driving down the highway with their family, minding their own business...
UPDATE: CNN interview with the motorist, and a UHP representative.
It's hard to tell in the video but according to this story Massey is tased a second time for not rolling over fast enough.
It's probably also worth noting that Utah is one of the states that has yet to outlaw ticket quotas.
Well, only when faced with a Hillary v. Rudy election...Still, i can hardly think of a blogger who hates Hillary as much as Andrew Sullivan, so this is saying something:
Between Fear and Loathing Lying awake the other early morning, I found the twin images of Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton coming into my mind. [...] I loathe Clinton; I fear Giuliani. Which emotion surges most? Clinton could still pull it out as my least favorite, but right now, my fear of Giuliani is outweighing my loathing of Clinton...
All the things I admired about Giuliani as mayor loom as liabilities as president. The security state is understandably more pervasive and powerful than before. But the newly empowered executive branch - with powers to seize anyone anywhere without charges and torture them if necessary - makes a man with the instincts and temperament of Giuliani a real danger in the White House. [...] Maybe not immediately - but in the wake of another terror attack, I don't think anyone can feel comfortable with what he might do to the Constitution and American liberty... it's my gut sense of the kind of man Giuliani is and the kind of world he would confront as president. We can't risk him under those circumstances. So it's back to dealing with a candidate who, however loathesome, is not quite as dangerous.
I can't think of a single major Democrat that would make me switch and vote for the other side*. That tells you how putrid a prospective President Rudy makes—he's driving the sensible Republicans to the GOP's anti-Christ.
*And, no, that's not because i am a blind partisan, but because I have a fucking brain in my head and see what's happening. I could vote for a guy like Chuck Hagel over a hypothetically bad Dem nominee (ie: Sharpton)—but only in a vacuum. It's besides the point because Hagel's more likely to get the nomination as a Democrat than in today's GOP.
It's been a while since I've sat down and talked baseball. Well, that's not entirely true—I've talked plenty on the road, but the home park's overdue. Some of these are current, some have been collecting dust...
First off, when the only thing preventing you from completing a home sweep of Tampa Bay is a 1-8 starter who doesn't even have a face, it's time to take care of business. The Yankees are facing a Cy Young candidate today. Get this back to a six-game lead. Get some crooked numbers going, boys, I'm sick of this shit.
Jesus. In the time it took me to write that, Tampa's gone up 5-0. Thanks alot, Dice K. I don't want to hear any more crap about this guy being a co-ace. I'm happy he's on my staff, but "ace" means I know what to expect. And it means putting the hammer down in a game like this. This guy hands out four-run innings like candy. Luckily he seems to only do it once a start, but at home, against Tampa? He starts next week in the Bronx, and I am not exactly brimming with confidence.
GAGNE I'm not worried. Seriously. I thought it was a good move at the time, and I still do. We will see a lot more outing like last night than what we saw in Baltimore. Still should have gotten Jermaine Dye however. Getting two-hit by a faceless Devil Ray only reinforces that.
REDEMPTION Congratulations to Rick Ankiel, who finally made it back to the majors last week—in a big way. A one-time pitching phenom for the Cards, Ankiel completely lost it one post-season game walking guys and uncorking wild pitches, losing the game, and he never recovered mentally. Then he needed Tommy John surgery...
Ankiel went back to rookie ball and learned to play outfield. He's actually been tearing it up in AAA all year, but because of his previous service, the Cards had to hold off bringing him up until now. He's hitting .345 with 3 HRs and 6 ribs in less than a week. And he replaces the atrocious Scott Spezio, to boot!
THE ANTI-ANKIEL One of my all-time least-favorite Sox still refuses to call it a career. Mo Vaughn "replacement" Jose Offerman is toiling away in a league so obscure that there's not even video of his latest accomplishment. That is, being arrested during a game for assault after charging the mound with his bat and tagging the catcher and the pitcher. Luckily for those two, Awfulman can barely make contact, and when he does, it's weak...
PIGPEN SUCKS Yeah, he's a Hall of Famer, but I cannot stand Craig Biggio. Poster boy for artificial hustle and grittiness. You got your 3,000 and HBP record, now just go away. Oh, and Don Baylor earned that record by being a hulking brick wall at the plate, not being a little pussy leaning into curveballs with an XXL jersey and a garbage can strapped to his arm.
NAMES EVEN CHRIS BERMAN COULDN'T MAKE WORSE Evan Longoria, Corey Hart, Grant Balfour (he's a pitcher)
WTF? Looks like the interns running the onlince scoreboards were into Berman's stash last week. This is a real screenshot. How many things wrong can you find? Click to zoom in.
Something tells me this Dodge Nitro ad won't be hitting the U.S. airwaves anytime soon, given the current dog-murder climate.
This ad is for the European market and was filmed long before this, but I have to wonder what the hell Dodge is thinking here, Michael Vick or not. I know the whole "Dodge ain't no girlie car" schtick and everything, but did they really need to kill the dog—and then fucking burn him? A nice shock sending the dog yelping and scurrying off wouldn't be "tough" enough?
Like there was any suspense? By now, you all know why. I don't have much to add to this story except to say that I hope there is a hell, and that Mike Vick meets every dog that was ever forced to fight to the death up close and personal.
Screw that. An existential punishment ain't good enough. Vick and his ilk (like the assholes in the video on this ABC News page*) all deserve to have a pit bull rip their fucking balls off right fucking now.
* ABC gives you a warning about that video before it plays. I'm giving you another one. Brutal. I had to stop watching it, and in the short time I did, it made me wish I walked up on those trogs with a machine gun.
Thank God for Ron Paul. That guy is a breath of fresh air. It's too bad his only real purpose is going to end being for the other candidates use him as a BP machine to launch their empty soundbites, and that the Republican voters are too fucking stupid to realize that he is the only guy on the stage that even remotely represents what it means to be "conservative." The rest of these torture-loving authoritarians are like a bunch of preening tyrants auditioning for the role of facist dictator of some banana republic—not President of the United States.
Yeah, we all know about the scandals involving Catholic priests and child molestation... I grew up a Catholic, in New England, so the whole Boston archdiocese story was never too far removed from my life. But this is waaay too close to home...
This is the town I grew up in, these are churches and places I know, and my father was a firefighter in West Hartford and I spent plenty of time hanging around the station. And this fucker was at the top of his game in the mid '70s—did I mention I'm 39?—putting me smack in his wheelhouse.
This truly seems to be a case of "there but by the grace of God, go I..." *
Seems this particular fucking predator piece of shit used his stature as Fire and Police Chaplain as his angle to entice and molest young boys. Preying in particular on kids who dreamed of serving the public by becoming police- or firemen, this Foley animal always drove a specially equipped car with lights, sirens, radios, etc.
The victims all told a version of the same story - they were impressed that Foley was the state police chaplain because they could ride in his police car right up to accident and fire scenes. Along the way, Doe said, Foley plied them with Yukon Jack and Southern Comfort from a fully stocked bar he kept in the back. He even had special fire jackets made up that said "Chaplain's Assistant" on the back.
One accuser told investigators that Foley would come to his house at all hours of the night, sometimes rousing him out of bed, "under the premise of taking him to a fire scene, when in reality the reason was for some sort of sexual contact."
Others said Foley would invite them to spend the night with him at Christ the King church rectory in Bloomfield for the purpose of responding to scanner calls and but would then fondle and masturbate them.
And as you would expect, it now comes out that the church knew all about it, moved this guy around and covering the whole thing up. Eventually giving him NO parish, but allowing him to continue his duties as fire and police chaplain, and even allowing him to continue to drive his Crown Vic to this day!
There appear to be all kinds of shenanigans regarding various State Police investigations over the years of this guy, too. Obviously, they have an interest in this as well.
The fact that idealogues and people in power seem to be able to justify any action (or inaction) soley based on the cost/benefit to their interests never ceases to amaze me. There is no possible moral justification for this, yet it was a systematic problem for the church for years, and apparently remains one to this day.
I might actually have to let my fury over this story steep a little longer before I consider this post wrapped. Right now I am so angry I actually have a problem wiith my dad for still going to church.
Disgusting.
* No, the irony of using a religious quote is not lost on me.
The only thing the Archbishop has proven is that the Archbishop doesn't like being in the middle of a crapstorm. His response to a lot of bad publicity has been to do what he would have done a long time ago, if he were the hard-nosed sheriff he wants us to think he is.
[...]This is nonsense. The Archdiocese hadn't even taken Foley's Pedomobile away. So how were they controlling him?
