America's Police State . . .

THE AMERICAN REPUBLIC has mutated into something ugly and carnivorous, not just in its policies with the rest of the world, but in the way it has turned on its poor. It's become a ghastly distortion according to Charles Stross*, who commented on his blog that American police have abandoned Sir Robert Peel's Principles of Policing. As you may know, the London Metropolitan Police was the first professional police force, created in 1829.

These principles are in stark contrast to what we have seen from Ferguson:

1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military force and severity of legal punishment.
2. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour, and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.
   
3. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in the task of securing observance of laws.
4. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.
   
5. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour, and by ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
6. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular occasion for achieving a police objective.
   
7. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.
8. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging guilt and punishing the guilty.
   
9. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with them.

If this is not re-introduced to American police, Charles sees danger: "even if you’re not a member of one of the cultures on the receiving end of the jackboot today, the fact that the jackboot exists means that it may be used against you in future. Beware of complacency and apathy; even if you think you are protected by privilege, nobody is immune. See also Martin Niemoller."

Martin Niemoller's famous warning:

• First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Socialist.
• Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
• Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew.
  
• Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

*Charlie is one of my favorite SF writers; I recommend his oeuvre "The Atrocity Archives", the first in his delightful "Laundry" series. Set in a parallel universe, an Earth identical to ours, with one difference: in the early 30's, Alan Turing discovers that certain mathematical processes produce "magic". Problem is, this "magic" is brain-eating dangerous.

If you haven't seen it . . .

GO GET A COPY of “Iron Sky”. It's about a Nazi Flying Saucer invasion from the dark side of the Moon. At least, that's what the trailers show.

Set in 2018, it is actually a sizzling satire on the GOP and US presidential politics. Ya gotta see it, I don't want to tell you any more, because the MacGuffin arrives in the first 5 minutes.

Marvelous. The flick even takes a parody on the “Hitler tantrum” scene that you have probably seen parodied on YouTube, like this one, which has some delightful copywriting:

He's just . . .

WHITE AMERICAN MEN over forty are the core of Rmoney's support. So, Chris Rock offers this piece of reassurance:

RIP, Trayvon Martin . . .

OMG . . .

Cherokees expel slaves’ descendants from tribe, cutting medical care, housing, other services.

According to the Washington Post —

The tribe never owned black slaves, but some individual members did. They were freed after the Civil War, in which the tribe allied with the Confederacy. An 1866 treaty between the tribe and the federal government gave the freedmen and their descendants “all the rights of native Cherokees.”

But more than 76 percent of Cherokee voters approved the amendment stripping the descendants of their citizenship. Tribal leaders who backed the amendment, including then-Principal Chief Chad Smith, said the vote was about the fundamental right of every government to determine its citizens, not about racial exclusion.

The freedmen’s descendants disagree.

Arizona one step closer to creating a "bag limit"

on "illegal aliens".

Now Arizona, seized of its egregious immigration law (requiring people to immediately produce "papers" on the demand of a police officer) has a new Republican bill under consideration. (Emphasis mine)

A new law under consideration in Arizona would deny birth certificates for children born in the US to illegal immigrants.

In a statement that would make an old Apartheid Afrikaner blush, one of the original sponsors of the current immigration law made the following noises:

State Representative John Kavanagh (R) argued that the law does not conflict with the Constitution, since the original drafters never intended the right of citizenship to be granted to children of illegal immigrants. "If you go back to the original intent of the drafters ... it was never intended to bestow citizenship upon (illegal) aliens," Kavanagh said. In addition to supporting the proposed law, Kavanagh also supported the controversial law that gave Arizona greater authority to find and deport illegal immigrants.

Hmmm. I guess one would have to read the pertinent part of the US Constitution to determine that. Let's see what a Canadian can make of it.

Let's see... read Preamble, Article 1, Article 2, Article 3, Article 4... something interesting there, we'll get back to that*, Article 5, Article 6, Article 7. Nope! OK, down through the amendments... Ah! 14th Amendment.

1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Oh. That was ratified in 1868 and some people might call it "quaint". Prior to that, nothing was written nor even suggested as to who was legally a citizen. Perhaps this was because the drafters of the original US Constitution were actually, until 1784, British subjects, rebellious though they might have been at the time.

Kavanagh, somehow able to divine from the grave the "actual" intent of the drafters seems to be reading something which isn't and never has been there.

Give them time. Before long anyone who doesn't pass the Kavanagh "smell test" will be declared non-human and Arizona Republicans will be demanding to issue hunting licenses for them.

* Kavanagh, just so we're clear here, is sitting in Arizona yapping it up only by virtue of Article IV of the US Constitution. He is not a native of Arizona. He is a retired New York Port Authority cop from Queen's, New York.

Hooray for Prescott, Az!

It is heartening to see a community respond to racism in this way, and especially to see the school board and principal realize and publicly admit they made a mistake in bowing to racist bullies in the first place. Good for them!

And I hope Steve "racist douche bag" Blair gets the old-fashioned Amish-style shunning by the community that he deserves. If ever anyone deserved the liberal, secular equivalent of a cross burning (would that be an involuntary subscription to Mother Jones and The Nation?), it would be him.
Hat tip to Driftglass for the catching the epilogue after we left the theatre during the credits

Is there something in the water supply in Arizona?

Or are people there just being taught to be racist dingbats?
Apparently an elementary school in Prescott, Az., allowed the students to vote on what kind of mural they would like to decorate the school with and the kids chose a painting of themselves. Professional artists were called in and worked with the kids to create a mural on the exterior of the school that portrayed the students attending the institution. The problem, apparently, is that some of the students have the temerity to not be white! And so local knuckledraggers, encouraged by (surprise, surprise, surprise!) a local radio talk show host and city councilman, took to driving by and shouting racist epithets at the school and the kids working on the mural.
So in response the principal organized groups of kids to shower the cars of the racist fuckknuckles with bricks and molotov cocktails as they drove by ordered the skin tones of the African American and Latino kids in the mural to be lightened. Nice example to set, Captain Courageous.

On the plus side, now that this story has hit the national press, the radio host, city councilman Steve Blair, has been fired from the radio station. However, he is still a member of the city council and a giant racist douche bag.

Just listen to him in this brief interview in which he is given every chance to backpeddle or reconsider being a racist douche bag and yet, still insists on there is nothing wrong with his actions and that his encouraging people to terrorize a bunch of third graders is all about "freedom."




Big tip of the hat to Cliff at Rusty Idols

crossposted from the Woodshed

Tea Party Troubles . . .

CARL PALADINO IS THE TEA PARTY CANDIDATE FOR NY STATE GOVERNOR. According to Zachary Roth, of Talking Points Memo's TPMmuckraker, ol' Carl's got a nasty taste in e-mails. In an article "Tea Party NY Gov Candidate's E-Mails Exposed: Racism, Porn, Bestiality", 

An online news outlet in New York state has obtained dozens of emails, many of them racist and sexually graphic, which it reports were sent by Carl Paladino, the Tea-Party-backed Republican candidate for governor of New York, to a long list of political and business associates. One email shows a video of an African tribal dance, entitled "Obama Inauguration Rehearsal," while another depicts hardcore bestiality.

Paladino's campaign manager, Michael Caputo, would not comment on specific emails, but acknowledged to TPMmuckraker that Paladino had sent emails that were "off-color" and "politically incorrect," saying that few such emails represented the candidate's own opinion. Caputo accused Democrats of wanting to change the subject from substantive issues to "having sex with horses."

The news outlet that obtained the emails, WNYmedia.net, a western New York media company, says it confirmed that at least some of the emails were authentic by contacting several people who had received them. 

Obviously, the couple who complained are the real racists

If you are a clergyman, you can pick and chose the people for whom you are willing to perform wedding ceremonies. If a couple comes to you and you don't think they should get married you are well within your right to refuse to perform the service or give the couple the blessing of your church, temple, mosque, shrine, coven or soltice circle. Catholics are under no obligation to allow gays or non-Catholics to marry in their church. Orthodox Rabbis can refuse to marry goyim. Druids can decline invitations to sanctify the handfasting of one of their congregation to a Republican. Churches are private organizations and can do what ever they want as long as it doesn't involve human sacrifice or annoying me in my home.
Government officials do not have that luxury. If someone meets the legal criteria for marrying - that is to say, they are of legal age and not obviously insane or under duress or siblings - you have to give them the licence, no matter what your personal feelings are.
So this dimwitted clown doesn't have a leg to stand on when he tries to defend his refusal to grant marriage licences to interracial couples. He should not be allowed to resign, he should be removed from office, yesterday. Naturally though, he claims not to be a racist, he's just thinking of the children:

However, [Justice of the Peace for Tangipahoa Parish’s 8th Ward Keith] Bardwell told the Hammond’s Daily Star that he was concerned for the children who may be born of the relationship and that, in his experience, most interracial marriages don’t last.
“I’m not a racist,” Bardwell told the newspaper. “I do ceremonies for black couples right here in my house. My main concern is for the children.” Bardwell, stressing he couldn’t personally endorse the marriage, referred the couple to another justice of the peace.

Yes, I'm quite sure he has nothing against black people, he even allows them into his very own home. I'm sure he has a vast collection of Fats Domino records and thinks Tiger Woods is a credit to his people, some of his best friends yadda yadda yadda...

Which, of course is all bullshit. He is refusing to comply with the law and denying people a civil right on the basis of race. Despite his protestations to the contrary, this makes Justice of the Peace Crackerpants McCracker a racist.
I'm sure 200 years ago his ancestors were singing the same song - They were not racists, but they just could not support abolition because "what would happen to the poor children of the freed slaves without a white master to look out them? why they'd probably start stealing watermelons and the next thing they'd want to learn to read and before you knew it they'd be leering a white women and then where would they be? No, slavery was the only way to ensure those poor children didn't go wrong and get uppity and get themselves in trouble."
"Its for their own good," they'd say.

Bardwell's concern for the children of interracial couples is actually very touching, since the offspring of such relationships so often go wrong.

Prom night in Klan Kuntry...

It's just not what it used to be.

It's exactly the same as it always was.

The future looms large. But for the 54 students in the class of 2009 at Montgomery County High School, so, too, does the past. On May 1 — a balmy Friday evening — the white students held their senior prom. And the following night — a balmy Saturday — the black students had theirs.

The white students’ prom was held on May 1 at a community center in nearby Vidalia; the black students had theirs at the same place the following night.
Racially segregated proms have been held in Montgomery County — where about two-thirds of the population is white — almost every year since its schools were integrated in 1971. Such proms are, by many accounts, longstanding traditions in towns across the rural South, though in recent years a number of communities have successfully pushed for change.

There have been efforts made to change all that.

When the actor Morgan Freeman offered to pay for last year’s first-of-its-kind integrated prom at Charleston High School in Mississippi, his home state, the idea was quickly embraced by students — and rejected by a group of white parents, who held a competing “private” prom.

Ah yes... the white parents.

What's interesting, as you read through the whole article, is that the high-school kids, regardless of skin colour, don't like the arrangement. In fact, those kids will be coming of voting age shortly.

Ain't payback gonna be a bitch.

tip of the helmet to Jesus' General.

I've seen smarter cacti

Republicans - because we needed a name for people who are dumber than houseplants. I just hope someone remembers to water Betty Brown occasionally, it must get dry in Texas.

Brown suggested that Asian-Americans should find a way to make their names more accessible.

“Rather than everyone here having to learn Chinese — I understand it’s a rather difficult language — do you think that it would behoove you and your citizens to adopt a name that we could deal with more readily here?” Brown said.

Brown later told Ko: “Can’t you see that this is something that would make it a lot easier for you and the people who are poll workers if you could adopt a name just for identification purposes that’s easier for Americans to deal with?”

Yes, Betty, because Asian names like Ko, Sato, Hu and Singh are much much more difficult than say Tatigliano, Satterthwaite, Papadopolis, Rogazinski, Medvedev or Gonzales. I'll admit that some Asian names are a mouthful - Indonesian, Thai and Sri Lankan names in particular tend to be longer and more complex compared to short, blunt Anglo-Saxon monikers like Brown and Wood - but that isn't really the point here. Brown isn't suggesting that all names should be anglicized, just Asian names.

But it isn't about race.

Sure it's not. Nothing is ever about race with the Republicans and the conservatives, except when they get shoved back from the trough, then its all about discrimination against poor, persecuted middle-aged, wealthy, white men.

crossposted from the woodshed

Vancouver area cops : "We don't like brown people", allegedly

Last night's TV news coverage of the three off-duty Vancouver area cops arrested for robbery and assault of a newspaper delivery man early Wednesday morning featured the snippet that police were investigating the possibility that the three cops had perhaps been slipped some kind of drug.

Really?
What kind of drug causes three innocent police officers to allegedly rob a newsie and kick him repeatedly in the head while allegedly yelling, "We don't like brown people" ?
What kind of drug would make them allegedly threaten him with a TASER™ and other appalled bystanders with violence after allegedly commandeering a corvette for their alleged convenience?
And the police who allegedly told the victim not to talk to the media? Were they also slipped a drug?

Feel free to add as many more "allegedly's" as you think the situation requires, given that there were witnesses to the beating, including the taxi driver who witnessed the entire event and the municipal workers who attempted to stop it with shovels.

B.C.'s Attorney General Wally Oppal on Friday asked the public to "keep an open mind."
Vancouver Chief Const. Jim Chu says "the public should have confidence in the police investigation":

"For the sake of preserving the public's respect and belief in the integrity of that process, I believe it is important to reassure them on this matter."

Statistics released by the Office of the Police Complaints Commissioner in November showed that 106 municipal police officers were guilty of misconduct between Oct. 1, 2006, and Oct. 1, 2008. That's about, um, one per week.

Previous Vancouver Police Chief Jamie Graham was found guilty of discreditable conduct for failing to cooperate in an RCMP investigation into allegations of police brutality. He "retired" in August 2007 and came back out of retirement to become Chief of Police of Victoria on Jan 1st this year.

Cross-posted at Creekside

Racists? in the GOP?

What on earth would ever give you that idea?

the sheriff is a ...

With the world economy in freefall, I can't believe this even needs to be talked about, but after McCain's reference to "that one" in the debate, and the tenor of recent speeches by McCain and Palin and responses they have drawn -- it is pretty clear that the Republicans, desperate to distract, have once again hit the bottom of the barrel and started digging.

Don't for a second kid yourself that race no longer matters in America. Conservatives like the gang at the Corner like to claim that Barack Obama's nomination by the Democrats proves that discrimination against blacks no longer exists (reverse racism against white men, well according to them, that's another story ) Bullshit. Just have a look at what is going on in Virginia, in cyberspace, in Oregon, all over the place, everywhere.

The McCain campaign has given up on the dog whistle and dusted off the megaphone. (Thanks to Cynicor for the comprehensive list of recent sins)

From the LA Times Via Glenn Greenwald and Rising Hegemon :

Here (.pdf) is a newspaper column from Bobby May, the McCain campaign chair in Buchanan County, Virginia and correspondence secretary for the Buchanan County Republican Party, warning that "the platform of Barack Hussein Obama" includes:
Illegal Immigration: "Learn to Speak Spanish";
Terrorist Threat to America: "Learn to Speak Arabic";
Reparations to Black Community: Opposes before Election Day and supports after Election Day;
Freedom of Religion: Mandatory Black Liberation Theology courses taught in all churches;
Homosexual Marriage: Coddle sexual perverts. Give tax breaks for NAMBLA membership;
Drug Crisis: Raise taxes for free drugs for Obama's inner-city political base;
The White House: Hire rapper Ludacris to "paint it black."

It's a short step from "that one" to "you people" to "Sambo beat the bitch *" to the picking a new Grand Wizard. If only Barack had done those townhall meetings like McCain had asked him to, this wouldn't have had to happen.

And furthermore: A Maverick? I don't think so.

*sourcing discussed here

Crossposted from the Woodshed

"well, I'm not prejudiced, but..."

Reasonable people can and do disagree on whether certain comments or actions are racist or sexist, but only some kind of complete dope would deny that certain things are explicitly racist or sexist. So if you are a conservative who does not think of yourself as a racist, who is appalled by the recent hijinks of the racist shitheads at F0x News thinks, you really have to ask yourself why you are associating with the some of your fellow Republican and Conservative travellers - and these are the official functions and elected politicians the parties have some control over, let's not even get started on the bloggers and loose-cannon pundits.
Take a look at the comments on this story for an example of what I'm talking about. I'm sure many of the people here --I'm looking at you Diane72, Superpants and Peapod-- would blithely tell you that they don't have a prejudiced bone in their body, but that they know for a fact that (insert ridiculous racist claim here).

Crossposted from The Woodshed, where we have a new Spiritual Leader of the Moment

CANADIAN. The racial slur edition.

I remember a sign on the door of a hotel in a place far from Canadian shores. It said, No dogs or Canadian sailors. There was a good reason for that. We had, shall we say, abused greatly the hospitality of our hosts.

On that occasion we deserved what we got. But that is hardly normal. Canadians are generally looked upon as affable and nice, if somewhat unexciting.

So, are you wondering why the "Stars and Bars" in the corner? That's because this is an American story.

When you hear the word "Canadian," what's the first thing that comes to mind? Someone who is hockey-crazed? Someone who says "eh" at the end of every sentence? Someone who is, dare I say it, nice?

How about someone who is black?

Shocked?

It would seem that in place of the former racial slurs used to describe black Americans, the racist segment of the US has taken to using Canadian in its place.

Earlier this month, an e-mail that had been circulating since 2003, written by a Houston assistant district attorney Mike Trent, resurfaced. The e-mail was short, only about 100 words, and was sent to the entire office. It started out by praising a junior prosecutor for a job well done. Then the message continued:

He overcame a subversively good defense by Matt Hennessey that had some Canadians on the jury feeling sorry for the defendant and forced them to do the right thing."

The problem however, (and this raised concerns with Trent's superiors), is that Canadians are not permitted to serve on US juries. So Trent had to mean something else.

Check The Racial Slur Database and scroll down to "Canadian". There's your answer.

Trent claims that he was unaware of the meaning, overheard someone saying that there were Canadians on the jury, took that literally, and just repeated it in his e-mail.

Really? One would think Trent might have discovered the odd "Canadian" during the Voir Dire phase. You know, jury selection. It was, after all, a criminal case. In a place like Houston, Canadians have funny accents. And we say, "eh" a lot.

Why Canadian as a racial slur referring to blacks? From the National Post:

Last August, a blogger in Cincinnati going by the name CincyBlurg reported that a black friend from the southeastern U.S. had recently discovered that she was being called a Canadian. "She told me a story of when she was working in a shop in the South and she overheard some of her customers complaining that they were always waited on by a Canadian at that place. She didn't understand what they were talking about and assumed they must be talking about someone else," the blogger wrote.

"After this happened several times with different patrons, she mentioned it to one of her co-workers. He told her that ‘Canadian' was the new derogatory term that racist Southerners were using to describe persons they would have previously referred to [with the N-word.]"

A similar case in Kansas City was reported last year on a Listserv, or electronic mailing list, used by linguistics experts. A University of Kansas linguist said that a waitress friend reported that "fellow workers used to use a name for inner-city families that were known to not leave a tip: Canadians. ‘Hey, we have a table of Canadians.... They're all yours.' "

Stefan Dollinger, a postdoctoral fellow in linguistics at University of British Columbia and director of the university's Canadian English lab, speculated that the slur reflects a sense of Canadians as the other.

In other words, when used by a white racist, "Not one of us. Not a real American."

Disgusted?

Thought so.

Thanks to Cheryl for catching this.

Caving to the racists

Way to go Layton.

Canadians hoping to vote in the next federal election with a veil, pumpkin, sheet or anything else covering their faces will soon be out of luck as the Conservative government has secured enough support to pass a bill forcing voters to show their faces.

NDP MP Yvon Godin told Government House Leader Peter Van Loan yesterday during a committee review of the bill that his party will support the proposed law. That ensures the government has enough votes to pass the bill through the House of Commons, though it would still have to clear the Liberal-dominated Senate. The position of Liberal and Bloc Québécois MPs on the committee was unclear yesterday as both parties expressed concerns.

Mr. Van Loan said it is unfortunate that the Muslim community has been forced to debate a right that they had never asked for, but noted the controversy has inspired a wave of mischievousness that must now be addressed.

So if the same racists who incited this issue take it further do people have to wear identifying symbols on their clothing when out in public?

Hat tip POGGE

Bare-faced racism

Brought to you by Steve Harper and Tubby Van Loan.

The Harper government on Friday introduced legislation requiring all voters — including veiled Muslim women — to show their faces before being allowed to cast ballots in federal elections.

Which now means that people appearing in front of a deputy returning officer to vote will undoubtedly require some form of government issued photo ID. Otherwise, what's the purpose of making people bare their faces?

Peter Van Loan, the minister responsible for democratic reform, said he hopes the bill will settle the potentially corrosive debate over the accommodation of diverse religious beliefs.

But opposition parties and some Muslim groups suggested it will do just the opposite. They fear the bill will give a national podium to the heated debate that has provoked some ugly anti-immigrant sentiment in Quebec.

Therein lies the crux of this whole thing. There was no real issue. Harper tried to turn it into one, only to be given a clinic in regulation reading and interpretation by Chief Electoral Officer, Marc Mayrand.

Interpret this move any way you like. This is pandering to a group of islamophobes and racists.

A mass murderer is loose among us, thanks in no small part to racism.

Cathie From Canada opens up the portal on the memory hole and puts a nice layer on the bombing of Air India flight 182 and the fiasco that was called an investigation.

Over the years, many things have been blamed for the chaotic, unfocused nature of this whole investigation, from the initial failure to take the warnings seriously, to the antiquated personnel policies of RCMP and Vancouver police which limited recruitment of non-white officers, to inter-service rivalries between the RCMP and CSIS which apparently led to mishanding of evidence and the inability of prosecutors to bring anyone to justice. But underneath it all is a racist taint. The lives of the victims were devalued because they were of East Indian heritage. As a result, irrelevancies and distractions like inter-service rivalries and office politics were allowed to dominate and ultimately derail the investigation.

Exactly.

It's about time someone started to hold up the racism card and point at it. It's been there all along and it needs to be dealt with. Unless someone can offer a more coherent explanation as to why the investigation into this act of terrorism and mass murder was allowed to go sideways for reasons that would never be accepted under other circumstances.