who's your nanny?

Lookin' out for the Hometown Peeps

Can't even pretend to close an evil prison camp without turning it into a jobs program for the constituents back home.

Barack Obama Is No Peter North

It's official: War = Peace. 

Can you imagine how giddy the Nobel committee must have been in selecting Barack "Peace Man" Obama for the Nobel Peace Prize? I mean, think about it: Not only did they have a president who sanctions the wanton murder of men, women, and children in two high-profile wars (and a handful of lesser ones), but one who for good measure also refused to sign a treaty banning land mines. And you know how Democrats just looove treaties. So, obviously, O-bomb-a was a dead ringer!

But even I didn't expect to hear this during Obama's acceptance speech yesterday. I really thought he would've done a better job trying to fake his penchant for violence:

Moreover, wars between nations have increasingly given way to wars within nations. The resurgence of ethnic or sectarian conflicts; the growth of secessionist movements, insurgencies, and failed states; have increasingly trapped civilians in unending chaos. In today's wars, many more civilians are killed than soldiers; the seeds of future conflict are sewn, economies are wrecked, civil societies torn asunder, refugees amassed and children scarred.

There you have it, folks. Your American president admitting that he is a war criminal, that he knowingly executes innocent civilians as he pursues a fantastical "war on terror."

And if that's not putrid enough for you, here Obama admits just how ignorant he really is:

I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war. What I do know is that meeting these challenges will require the same vision, hard work and persistence of those men and women who acted so boldly decades ago. And it will require us to think in new ways about the notions of just war and the imperatives of a just peace.

Well, what I know is that everything following that first sentence in bold is nothing more than intellectual pap masquerading as substance of character, of which we as a country have pretty much been devoid for the better part of a couple centuries now.

In fact, Barry, there is one very simply "definitive solution" to the wars in which the U.S. is currently embattled. All you have to do is make like Peter North -- and pull the fuck out.

Jackboot Nation

Another must-read today by Will Grigg on how our esteemed "peace officers" demand impunity even as they increasingly apply excessive force to beat, torture, and kill innocent -- or at the very least nonviolent -- Americans.

Just As You Can't 'Owe' Taxes...

...you can't "trespass" on your own property. But what Jeremy Engelking found out the hard way on Wednesday is that there really is no such thing as private property here in the "land of the free."

Engelking attempted to stop a pipeline crew from working on his land, stating that he hadn't received compensation from the company in what essentially boils down to a case of eminent domain, a fancy term for government theft of property that isn't completely publicly owned.

Engelking said workers told him he was in an unsafe place and asked him to come to an equipment staging area, where he continued to argue his case.

But just as he was turning to leave, Engelking said an officer from the Douglas County Sheriff’s Department arrived on the scene and approached with a Taser drawn.

“He ordered me to 'get down on the ground now!' And he said that I was being arrested for trespassing,” Engelking said.

Of course, you can't have a police officer involved in a nonviolent dispute these days without the simultaneous threat of lethal electrocution, so Engelking had that going for him as well.

Property taxes alone are proof that we truly don't own belongings we perceive to be ours. Anyone who is forced to pay an extortion fee to an armed band of thugs in order to live peaceably in his home is most certainly not free. The state assumes direct ownership of all our property, confiscating as much as it deems "necessary" before determining how much it shall leave for the rest of its subjects.

Let's Get Rid of Opposite-Sex Marriage, Too

Inasmuch as it's regulated by the state, that is.

State senators in "liberal" New York voted down a measure yesterday that would have legalized gay marriage.

I neither support nor oppose the right of gays to marry -- or straights for that matter. In short, it is no one's business what two (or more) people wish to do peaceably with one another.

Instead of lobbying for the state's permission to recognize same-sex marriage, gays might be better served by arguing against the government's right to regulate marriage altogether.

Equality will never be achieved if we continue to believe the state is capable of upholding or preserving individual liberties; it will only be achieved once we understand it's the state itself that usurps freedom as a rule.

I'm Officially a Journalist

After years of being accused of being a shitty journalist by people who didn't know the difference between a news story and an op-ed, I can now say I've officially published my first article as a reporter, and it's a scoop. So folks -- you know who you are -- you can let me have it if you find the piece rife with opinion. But you won't.

John Edison Jr., the southern Maryland boy who was railroaded last year by police and prosecutors for allegedly raping a 12-year-old -- and who was acquitted last December after the jury deliberated for a whopping 20 minutes -- has filed a civil suit against the state of Maryland, the two girls who accused him of rape and physical assault, and two detectives -- St. Mary's County Det. William Raddatz and Maryland State Police Det. Leo Nims -- responsible for filing charges against him despite no evidence but a mere statement from the girl.

The story runs today in the County Times, a free St. Mary's County newspaper. The paper is available on news stands locally and online in PDF format, so you'll find the story on p. 12 in the "Crime & Punishment" section of the Nov. 25 issue.

[Edison attorneys] Winkelman and McDevitt write in their court filing that during interrogation their client repeatedly denied the rape allegations, yet Raddatz told at least one fellow officer that Edison confessed to the alleged sexual assaults and sexual intercourse.

Edison's attorneys also charge that Raddatz photographed and documented a mark across Edison’s chest as a scratch that he knew, or should have known, to be an impression left by a table during his interrogation. This "scratch," they allege, was used by Raddatz and Nims to confirm the accusations of the young girls and thereby secure a search warrant on Edison’s residence.

Winkelman and McDevitt further argue in their filing that a search of Edison's house revealed no evidence of a struggle or blood; that medical records indicated no occurrence of sexual or physical assault; and that both detectives were aware that the alleged victim and witness changed their story of events at the hospital but nevertheless proceeded in their case against Edison.

Unfortunately, today's edition hasn't been published online yet but I'll link to it just as soon as it is. And if you want a good recap of the entire case written at the time of Edison's acquittal, go here.

UPDATE: Here is the online version of the paper. Scroll to p. 12 for the article.

We've Passed the Point of No Return

Arkansas police use a Taser on a 10-year-old girl.

A police officer in a small Arkansas town used a stun gun on an unruly 10-year-old girl after he said her mother gave him permission to do so. Now the town's mayor is calling for an investigation into whether the Taser use was appropriate.

According to a report by Officer Dustin Bradshaw, obtained Wednesday by The Associated Press, police were called to the Ozark home Nov. 11 because of a domestic disturbance. When he arrived, the girl was curled up on the floor, screaming, the report said.

Bradshaw's report said the girl screamed, kicked and resisted any time her mother tried to get her in the shower before bed.

Now, I'm not going to say this girl's mother doesn't have issues for calling police because her daughter has a temper tantrum. But I have much graver concerns about any "man" who feels the need to electrocute a young girl in order to physically overpower her.

This is basically all you need to know about the state of our venerable union these days:

The police chief, who has been Tasered [sic] twice himself during training sessions, said his department has never had to Taser [sic] a child or elderly person before, but that in some instances, that could be necessary to ensure safety.

"We don't want to do things like this," Noggle said. "This is something we have to do. We're required to maintain order and keep the peace."

I haven't read anything this idiotic since Dick Jauron said he was "blindsided" after being fired by the Buffalo Bills.

(Thanks to Wolf for the tip.)

Cause, Effect, and the State

As I was clicking through the channels Thursday night, I saw a local report about a 14-year-old boy in Virginia who mysteriously came down with Guillain-Barre syndrome hours after receiving a vaccination for H1N1.

I've had very little time to write lately, but Karen De Coster also noticed this story and commented on the absurdity of the CDC's insistence that the boy's ailment was mere coincidence.

Dr. Claudia J. Vellozzi, deputy director for immunization safety at the CDC, said “there’s no clear link between the new vaccine and the disease.” She states that these GBS cases are “events” that just “happen” after the vaccination. They are just coincidence. Doctors at the hospital refuse to talk about GBS in connection with the vaccines, and accordingly, they are giving the press very limited information.

I agree with Karen. Just like Tasers never cause death -- people's hearts just coincidentally "happen" to stop after they're electrocuted by police.

I'm Channeling Eazy-E

I'm not completely on board with the argument that you can't be taken seriously as a writer if you use blatant profanity, but there's nevertheless some merit to it. So with that, I'll try to hold my tongue for now -- click here if you don't know what I mean by the title.

As for what's got me so riled up, check out this personal story from my good buddy Jon Wolf.

Taser Time Utah

Utah police tased a DUI suspect after the man tried to escape from their squad car.

The man was apprehended by the Utah Highway Patrol in the Salt Lake City area. He was traveling southbound down 1-15 Friday and pulled over on suspicion of DUI. When the UHP handcuffed him and placed him in the back of the squad car, he attempted to escape while the car was in motion.

The suspect apparently slipped out of his handcuffs and tried to kick open the back door of the car. Shockingly, it appears some people don't like to be kidnapped by state agents for causing harm to no one.

According to reports, the man's "vital signs remained strong" throughout the course of his public electrocution. Ostensibly, this is reason enough to risk killing us so the Gestapo no longer have to worry about breaking finger nails as they mete out the justice!

Then They Came for the Texters

Maryland lawmakers have upped the ante on the police state once again. Beginning tomorrow, police will be granted even more authority to snoop in our private business when a law banning texting while driving takes effect.

Lawmakers and many residents are hoping that the ban will prevent motorists from engaging in this bad habit that studies prove dramatically increases a driver’s car crash risk. Maryland State Highway Administration spokesperson Lori Rakowski notes that it is impossible for a person to drive safely while texting because both activities usually require the use of both hands and eyes.

Interestingly, it's still legal in Maryland to be a woman while driving.

NJ Officers Pay for Violent Assault

I know this might come as a shock to some people, but drug dealers/users and gun owners deserve to exercise their right to self-defense when intruders decide to invade their homes.

Gunfire erupted as a police tactical squad executed a no-knock search warrant in a New Jersey suburb Thursday, leaving four officers and a suspect shot.

One Lakewood police officer who was shot in the face and another who was shot in the foot were taken to a hospital, Deputy Chief Michael Mohel of the Ocean County Prosecutor's Office said. Two others sustained minor injuries when they were struck in their bulletproof vests.

The suspect, Jamie Gonzalez, 39, was taken to a hospital with multiple gunshot wounds, Mohel said.

There was no word on their conditions and the names of the officers have not been released.

Police had planned to search the home in the town about 35 miles east of Trenton for narcotics and weapons, Mohel said.

There aren't a lot of specifics included in this report, but from the looks of what we do know, a SWAT team conducted another no-knock raid on a private residence on the off-chance that it would reveal -- gasp! -- illegal drugs and guns.

For as much as I despise the entire idea of government police, I take no pleasure in knowing that four officers who are probably fathers, brothers, uncles, and sons were nearly killed as they stormed the home of someone who all too realistically could have been nonviolent, or perhaps not even the intended target. After all, I oppose the idiotic "war on drugs" and its associated violent home invasions in part because they needlessly put officers themselves in harm's way.

However, far more crucial is the fact that Jamie Gonzalez was shot -- we have no idea as to the extent of his injuries at present, only that he sustained multiple gunshot wounds -- simply for defending himself and his property from these invaders. That is the real tragedy here.

I don't want to engage in much speculation, but the report certainly doesn't suggest that police were tracking someone who had just committed a violent crime. But even if they were, and especially if Gonzalez were a violent thug who thrives on confrontation, is storming through his front door with guns drawn really a smart idea if officer safety is paramount?

I'm looking forward to seeing how this story shapes up, but if we use recent history as a guide, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to learn that neither drugs nor guns were found in Gonzalez's residence or, even if they were, that they've ever been used on anyone against his or her will.

Police Tase Unarmed, Legless Man in Wheelchair

Because, as we all know, suspicion is enough to confer guilt here in the ol' land of the free.

The man who was Tasered, 40-year-old Gregory Williams, a double-leg amputee, spent six days in jail on suspicion of domestic violence and resisting arrest, although the Merced County District Attorney's Office hasn't filed charges in the case.

Williams, who was released from jail Friday, said he was violently manhandled and Tasered by police, even though he claims he was never physically aggressive toward the officers or resisted arrest.

Williams claims police kept tasing him even after he told them he had a heart condition. And even though he was in close proximity to his two-year-old daughter, whom Williams heroically tried to protect from professional kidnappers known as the Merced County Child Protective Services (sic). Story here, thanks to Jack Slater.

Watch the disturbing video here.

Let's Start a Pool

This is a suggestion from reader Jack Slater, who wonders when government police will start zapping us with Tasers specifically to draw blood samples from citizens stopped under suspicion of driving under the influence.

Police State Indiana

An Indiana man detained under suspicion of drunken driving has filed a lawsuit alleging that police forced him to submit to a blood and urine test after a Breathalyzer showed he was under the legal limit.

[Jamie] Lockard and his attorney claim in the suit that police took him to Dearborn County Hospital and forced him to submit to a urine and blood test.

Police said they obtained a warrant, but Lockard's attorney said his client was shackled to a gurney and had a catheter inserted against his will.

I'm shocked! Shocked!

What Change? Part 124

From today's Washington Post

The Obama administration will largely preserve Bush-era procedures allowing the government to search -- without suspicion of wrongdoing -- the contents of a traveler's laptop computer, cellphone or other electronic device, although officials said new policies would expand oversight of such inspections.

 

O Glorious Taser

Are you fucking kidding me?

If you didn't think we were doomed yet, this ought to clear things up for you.

(Via Radley Balko)

Another Death by 'Non-Lethal' Taser

This time in Arizona.

He had been taken to a nearby hospital after he was shocked by police, but his condition deteriorated and he was pronounced dead at 8:55 p.m. the same day.

The man's name was not released, and police are awaiting his cause of death to be determined by the Maricopa County Medical Examiner's Office.

Only idiots associated with the state would have the audacity to question the cause of this guy's death.

Mother Charged with Child Pornography

For taking photos of herself breastfeeding her baby (!!).

Jacqueline Mercado, a 33-year-old Peruvian immigrant, took a few photos of her young children at bath time. A week later, Richardson police were rummaging through her house for kiddie porn, and a state child welfare worker came to take her kids away.

The photo in question: Jacqueline Mercado and Johnny Fernandez say they took this image last October to memorialize the breast-feeding stage of their son's life. Below: The Lucca Madonna, painted in the 15th century by the Dutch master Jan van Eyck. Defense lawyers argued that while breast-feeding images are a second-degree felony in Richardson [Texas], they are also on public display in the finest art museums in the world.

[...]

With nothing else to support their contention that the photos were related to sex or sexual gratification, the police and the Dallas County District Attorney's Office presented the photos to a grand jury in January and came away with indictments against Mercado and Fernandez for "sexual performance of a child," a second-degree felony punishable by up to 20 years in prison. The charges centered on a single photo, the breast-feeding shot. Fernandez and Mercado say they took it--although the child had ceased breast-feeding--to memorialize that stage of their baby's development.

The criminal charges against Mercado have been dropped, but at the time this story went to press the kidnappers on the dole at CPS continued to hold her other children hostage.

How sick. This poor family would have been better off staying in Peru.  

I want to share this quote from a guy at a libertarian Google group I belong to. I'm not sure he'd want me to give his name so we'll leave it anonymous for now, but he hits the nail on the head.

The United States has the most sexually-repressed yet disgustingly perverted culture on the planet. Only a culture of self-loathing, closeted pedophiles and sexual deviants would consider breastfeeding an erotic activity constituting child pornography. Sickos.

I couldn't agree more.

(HT Manuel Lora)

Ordering a Pizza in 2012

How long will it be before this is your life?

Turn up the volume and watch the pointer.

The Ideological War against Freedom Continues

As I predicted several months ago, the media is continuing its war against freedom by grouping tax protesters and "sovereign citizens" with right-wing militias. I personally have nothing against militias; they are our last defense against this tyrannical government. But given the sheep are frightened of their own shadow, government officials love right wing militia hobgoblin. They can also play the race card and link these militias to white supremacist groups, further frightening the people and cementing their power over us.

This article is like a synopsis of the MIAC report which was released in the winter:

It's reminiscent of what was seen in the 1990s—right-wing militias, people ideologically against paying taxes and so-called "sovereign citizens" are popping up in large numbers, according to the report to be released Wednesday. The SPLC is a nonprofit civil rights group that, among other activities, investigates hate groups.

Once again people who believe taxation is robbery and who believe that they should be free from the violence of the State are now part of the hate groups which threaten the American people. One would hope that the American people would see through this propaganda but their education precludes such assessments.

The article traces the rise of these groups to the 1992 Ruby Ridge standoff:

The spark for that movement came in 1992 with an FBI standoff with white separatist Randall Weaver at Ruby Ridge, Idaho. Weaver's wife and son were killed by an FBI sniper. And in 1993, a 52-day standoff between federal agents and the Branch Davidian cult in Waco, Texas, resulted in nearly 80 deaths. These events rallied more people who became convinced that the government would murder its own citizens to promote its liberal agenda.

Of course the government would murder its own citizens to promote its liberal agenda. It would murder its own citizens to promote a conservative agenda as well. The State comprises robbers and murderers. The criminals who rule us would kill anyone they think threatens their power. And they will get away with it as long as the people think such violence is justified. The people need a reason to condone arrests and mass murder. Patriotism works well, but fear works even better. Without fear, no State could be established. There may well be wars between groups of peoples, but the systematic robbery for which the State came into existence could not endure. People who realize that self-protection is their right and duty will not be ruled by a minority.

Woman Loses Baby Following Extradition Ride

Maricris Shaw is awaiting trial in St. Mary's County, Maryland on criminal charges of identity fraud, writing bad checks, and vehicle taking. According to the Enterprise, the 35-year-old was apprehended by police in Florida and extradited in May, an experience that she says cost her the life of the unborn baby she carried for six months.

The St. Mary's County state's attorney's office outsources its extradition services to Con-Link Transportation Corp., a company it's used for the past dozen years.

Kevin McDevitt, Shaw's lawyer, said his client had a sonogram done in Florida before she got into Con-Link's van.

"Everything was fine with the baby," he said.

Shaw said she told a judge in Florida that she wanted to return to Maryland and resolve her legal problems, but that she was concerned from the onset when the van's crew put her and other inmates in restraints.

"They put a big chain on my belly," she said. "They put me in the back. I was in the middle [with] inmates on my left and right side."

Shaw says she rode in two different vans with six different drivers through 14 different states by the time her transport was complete. However, during the first couple days she became sweaty and dizzy, to the point where other inmates pleaded with the crew to increase the air conditioning in the van because of Shaw's pregnancy.

But in days following everything got worse. Much worse. Shaw came down with a fever and started bleeding. Instead of immediately taking Shaw to a hospital, Con-Link drivers instead took her to a gas station, where they asked a female attendant to assess her condition. You read that correctly. Instead of seeking professional medical attention in the wake of Shaw's hemorrhaging during a known pregnancy, Con-Link officers instead sought medical advice from a gas station attendant.

In a display of intellectual acuity that was clearly absent in Con-Link's drivers, the female gas station attendant told officers they had to get Shaw to a doctor right away. However, Shaw claims that officers said they were given orders to do no such thing and instead took her to the next jail on their route, where she was seen by a nurse who allegedly said Shaw looked "perfect" without even checking the baby.

Shaw contends that she arrived at St. Mary's jail in Maryland on June 5, which would mean she spent eight days on the road. However, police and Con-Link officials dispute this.

A man answering the phone at Con-Link's offices said Shaw's account would be "impossible" and not in keeping with its inmate delivery schedules.

"Our trips do not last that long," he said.

Capt. Rick Burris of the St. Mary's Bureau of Criminal Investigations said Friday that a detective is continuing an inquiry on the matter, but that no indications of any wrongdoing have been found.

Fair enough, perhaps. The duration of Shaw's transport should be easy enough to verify if Con-Link and St. Mary's County police maintained even minimal record of her extradition (hardly a given, of course). What may not be so easy to explain, however, is why she allegedly was not taken to an actual hospital until four full days after her arrival in St. Mary's County.

Now, it's sort of a running joke in southern Maryland that if you're not dead by the time you get to St. Mary's Hospital, you will be by the time you leave. But what isn't so funny is that Maricris Shaw claims that she felt her baby moving the day she arrived at St. Mary's jail, but by the time doctors at St. Mary's Hospital assessed her baby's condition they could not detect a heartbeat. It was at this point that Shaw was informed that her baby had died.

As despicable as the treatment of Shaw and her unborn baby appears to have been, it's just about on par with what she's getting right now from the state's attorney and other officials attempting to paint her as a liar.

St. Mary's State's Attorney Richard Fritz (R) said last week at his office in Leonardtown that the crimes Shaw is charged with are "all cases that are based on deceit and untruthfulness," and that any liability for the woman's eventual miscarriage would also have to consider any previous health issues and other accounts of what happened.

"It sounds rather unbelievable that someone would keep a human being caged for seven days in a little van," Fritz said. "Her word is not necessarily the last word, nor should her word necessarily be believed without question."

Just when you think it's safe to go back in the water, ladies and gents, there's Rick Fritz reminding you that St. Mary's County is infested with sharks in the police department and prosecutors' office who revel in demonizing their suspects before they ever even get their day in court.

Fritz, ever the humanitarian, claims it's "unbelievable" that Shaw would be caged for days in a van, yet this is the same guy who just last year saw to it that 16-year-old John Edison Jr. was confined in a government cage for nearly six months on charges for a crime that any rational person would have known he didn't commit. This is the same man who essentially admitted that county and state police executed Jamie Dean in 2006, yet he refused to hold any of the offending officers accountable for their actions.

Worst of all, Fritz implies that because Maricris Shaw is merely charged with crimes that are based on "deceit and untruthfulness," we're simply to conclude that she's lying about the way she was treated during her extradition. Yet again, Fritz appears to be doing his best to convince us he operates under the assumption that we're all guilty until proven innocent. Shaw was pregnant at the outset of her transport from Florida and suffered the tragedy of a miscarriage while in the custody of police and affiliated contractors, yet we're to believe that her baby's fate was due to "previous health issues?" How convenient.

Even if Maricris Shaw is guilty of every charge levied against her, it is indisputable that her baby was innocent and undeserving of its fate. At minimum, one would think that if the state's attorney -- who once claimed it was the responsibility of his office to "[make] sure that our police are above reproach in their relations with our citizens" -- cannot be bothered to even consider the prospect of government malfeasance in the matter, he could at least display a little sympathy for a grieving woman.

That he can do neither merely proves that he's just about the last person who should be allowed to have any control over the legal proceedings in St. Mary's County.

Re: White Guys Hate Cops, Too

Brutus, since I can't think of anything else to write about at the moment -- and don't have the time anyhow because I'm swamped in bureaucratic paperwork trying to incorporate my business so I can pimp my chili spice mix before the turn of the next century -- I'll share a couple police stories of my own.

For starters, I've long thought there are only two types of police officers: cool ones and complete pricks. I think that's probably still a fairly decent assessment, though the cool ones are being rapidly displaced by power-hungry jerks. Most of my encounters with cops have taken place on the highway, and I think I've been pulled over six times for "speeding." I'm 3 for 6 when it comes to getting off without a ticket.

I remember only four of these occasions specifically. The first was back in college in early 1996 when a buddy and I drove to the train station in Rochester, New York to pick up our friend Marge. The speed limit had just changed from 55 to 65 and though the trip back to Geneseo was only a half-hour, it was hardly routine so I had to pay close attention to the overhead signs. I was going 70 in the middle lane, assuming the speed limit was 65, when a county sheriff's deputy pulled me over. I explained that I was only going 5 mph over the limit, but he eagerly explained that he was hiding behind an area that was still at 55. Whee, I exclaimed, or something to that effect. At any rate I hadn't noticed a highway marker. I knew there was no getting out of this one, so I politely asked if he could hurry it up because I had to pee (I actually had to). At which point he sat in his cruiser for at least 15 minutes.

Verdict: Dick.

The next time was in the fall of 1996 in St. Mary's County, Maryland. I had just moved from New York to Maryland to take my first full-time job, a teaching position at one of the county schools. I had to go to the DMV (Maryland calls it the MVA but I still haven't gotten used to that after more than a dozen years) because my car was still registered in New York and I needed to pay Maryland's extortion fee in order to have the privilege of owning a car here. I was over the grace period and literally thought to myself before I left for the MVA that this would be the day I would get burned on my way up the road -- appropriate given the fact that the cop could nab me for driving an unregistered vehicle in addition to any moving violations. So I was extra careful to watch the speedometer. I didn't matter. I was clocked going 10 over the limit and issued a $60 citation. (Considering the one I'd just paid in Rochester was $120, I asked the cop if I could just give him $100 and have my way on the roads the rest of the day. He declined.) When he asked where I was going, I told him I was on my way to register my car. He laughed and didn't push the issue. I was surprised.

Verdict: He was pretty cool.

I was pulled over again the following year, this time up in Dansville, New York as I was on my way back home to Maryland after visiting my pathetic excuse for a girlfriend. I stopped at a gas station to fill up and get a can of dip for the drive and had no idea what the speed limit was on the way to the highway entrance. I was doing about 45 -- figured that was fair -- when a town cop threw the lights on behind me. I had my license and registration ready to go as he approached like he was waiting for me to hang a tommy gun out the window. I opened the door because my window would fall into the door every time I tried to roll it down, and the officer gave me one of the "Whoa! Whoa!" gestures. This would most likely get you tased or at least form tackled immediately nowadays, but I explained my window situation and he told me to just sit back in the driver's seat. My window ended up falling into the door anyway because I then had to roll it down. He asked where I was going. I said, "On my way back to Maryland, doesn't that suck?" He laughed and said, "Am I going to find anything on your driving record if I run your license?" I said, "I sure hope not." At which point he told me to have a safe drive and let me on my way.

Verdict: Coolest on-duty cop I've met to date.

The last time I was pulled over (knock wood) was in 1998. I was driving through Mechanicsville, Maryland where the speed limit drops from 55 to 45 at the bottom of a hill. Yeah, one of those deals. I was on my way down to 50, but the state trooper must've decided I was too much of a threat to the Amish buggies on the shoulder in that particular patch of highway to let me get on with my day as I decelerated. I had already pulled over before the cop even left the speed trap to roll up behind me, and out popped a hot little Hispanic firecracker. She went all of about 5'2" and I immediately knew I was screwed. Ladies and gents, there ain't no getting around a ticket from a female cop, especially one that can claim double minority status. The world is their enemy and they're out to make you pay for it one motorist at a time. And even though we all know hot chicks can often get their way with male officers, I doubt Brad Pitt has much of a shot with policewomen out to do anything guys can do and better (so take that!). This was the extent of our conversation:

Her: "License and registration."
Me: (sigh, eyes rolling)
Her: "Have a nice day (hands me the ticket)."
Me: "Go fuck yourself (muttered, of course)."

Verdict: Whore.

You know, looking back at this I was pulled over a lot in a relatively short timespan. Funny thing is, even though I didn't even realize how much I hated the state back then, I sure as hell hated it enough not to want to surrender any more money to it than I had to, so I was always conscious of how fast I was driving. But you'll notice that all of these episodes occurred prior to 9/11, before complete militarization of even local police departments had occurred.

Today I practically consider it a divorceable offense for my wife to be pulled over. While she's certainly not as bad a driver as most women, she still puts her makeup on while she's driving and loses track of her speed. (She denies all of this, of course.) I probably shouldn't be such a prick myself; it's the state's fault, after all, for monopolizing road ownership and law enforcement in the first place (and these guys will pull you over for anything if they feel like it, even if you're only going more than a few mph over the posted limit). But you have to be smart enough -- and, yes, cynical and vindictive enough -- to take measures to avoid being pulled over by police at almost any cost these days.

It's bad enough to have to surrender payment at the hands of jackasses dispatched to steal our property just so they can raise more money to hire more officers in order to perpetuate the cycle. But it's even worse to be electrocuted or killed in an age when everyone is fair game as the police remain above the law.

Don't Let People Get Naked in Your Own House

Or drink a beer. Or smoke a plant. Or do anything else they choose to do of their own free will absent harm to anyone else.

Cuz the state, boy, it's comin' for you!

Idaho Police Sodomize Man with Taser

Via Manuel Lora, Boise police officers put a Taser up a man's anus and fired it -- after he was already handcuffed.

Then they placed the taser on his genitals and threatened to do the same. The suspect still had burns inside his right buttock 13 days after the brutal attack.

Torture, sexual assault, and attempted manslaughter -- all in a day's work when you've got a license to kill.

More here.

Drug War in Microcosm

An otherwise nonviolent man murdered by police on his own front porch for having the temerity to protect his property from armed trespassers dispatched by the state.

And don't you just love the fact that you and I qualify for the death penalty here in the "land o' duh free" if we simply confront police while unarmed?

'A Microcosm of America's Foreign Policy'

British commentator hits home runs all the way through this video. And the implication that the U.S. police state does its best to treat its own subjects citizens the same way it treats foreigners is priceless.

(Thanks to Dan)

The Civil War of Democracy

Political tags - such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth - are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. Robert Heinlein

J.D. Tuccille has noticed that even when there is agreement of political issues among people, dissent from orthodoxy can still lead to antipathy and excommunication. He notes the gap between liberals and conservatives continues to widen:

According to orgnet.com, a social networking analysis outfit founded by Valdis Krebs, for the first time ever, there was no overlap at all during the last election cycle among books read by liberals and books read by conservatives.

That makes conversation a little more challenging.

I would argue that as much as liberals and conservatives dislike each other, they have more in common than they will admit. Both groups believe that people need to be controlled; they are simply fighting over the specifics. Should people be controlled for the sake of the environment or marriage or "unrestrained capitalism" or national unity or (insert your statist argument here)? This is what they fight over and this is why they hate each other. Conservatives find reasons liberals want to control and oppress others, and liberals vice-versa. They are engaged in a true civil war which is a war to control the State. However, neither the liberal nor the conservative is willing to give up the power to rule other people. As Mises pointed out in Liberalism, unlimited secession would be a peaceful solution to political conflict. But neither the conservative nor the liberal is interested in peaceful solutions to political conflict. They want to control other people who do not wish to be controlled. Thus, conservative will endure the oppression of liberals just to have the chance in the future to oppress liberals. Liberals will do the same.

Tuccille continues:

The self-tailoring extends beyond ideology to lifestyles that become associated with certain sets of beliefs, report Bill Bishop and Robert G. Cushing in their book, The Big Sort. When people choose neighborhoods where they feel comfortable, the settings come with a prevailing ideology pre-installed. Say Bishop and Cushing in their book, "ways of life now have a distinct politics and a distinct geography. Feminist synchronized swimmers belong to one political party and live over here, and calf ropers belong to another party and live over there."

Surrounded, as they are, by people who share their beliefs, people become more like their neighbors, dumping attitudes that might set them apart, radicalizing their own views, and shunning "heretics" -- just like the more-progressive-than-thou denizens of Mike Judge's spot-on The Goode Family.

While I agree that liberals and conservatives have become more extreme and ossified in their views, I would not say that they are "radicalizing their own views." The word radical is derived from the Latin word radicalis which means having roots. Radicals examine the root or origin of problems. Just what is the root of our problems according to liberals and conservatives? Essentially, they argue that the root of our problems is the policies of the other group. If only a true liberal were in command of the State, claim the liberals, our lives would be better. If we did not have to compromise with these conservatives, we would have a perfect world. If only a true conservative were in command of the State, responds the conservatices, our lives would be better. If we did not have to compromise with these liberals, we would have a perfect world. But neither group realizes or admits that the true reason our lives are as wrecked as they are is due to the State itself. That is the root of the problem and that is why we are the true radicals. We are the only ones who advocate uprooting the real source of our suffering.

Thus, we should keep in mind that the debates between liberals and conservatives are not arguments about how we can all live in a more prosperous and peaceful society. Rather the debates between liberals and conservatives are arguments about why one group should submit to the the will of the other and why the submissive group should be happy to obey. For the radical, however, slavery has no satisfactions, no matter how well disguised.

The Tyranny of Stop Signs

Jeff Tucker has written a fantastic and fiery essay on stop signs on the Mises site. An excerpt:

In some ways, then, it is true that the stop sign — as with every regulation by the state — embodies all that is wrong with the public sector. The rules are made to benefit the state. You are on the hot seat if any policeman says that you have done wrong. The pretense of a fair trial is a complete farce, as you have to tangle with judges who hate you, waste several days of work, and throw yourself on the mercy of the court. Once you are entangled in the web, you can't really get out.

And who makes the rules? The central planners make the rules, and the public be damned. The rules are there to serve the state, not us, and the stop sign that is oddly placed in order to extract revenue makes the point very well.

When you are stopped, you become aware that the imbalance between the citizens and the state couldn't be more obvious. Deliver an insult and you are arrested. Try to run and you are gunned down. Fail to pay and you end up in the slammer. And maybe the cop will find something else about your life to be suspicious of. Whatever they want to know, you must tell them.

Government is not reason; it is force. What was the actual social rationale for that stop sign in the first place? You dare not ask, for then you are questioning the elites who are in charge of your life. And why was it removed? It's not for you to question why; it is for you to do or die. It was there and now it is gone. All "law-abiding citizens" must change with the arbitrary dictate of the traffic masters.

All government rules are backed by violence. The government reserves the right to kill you for disobeying any of its dictates no matter how trivial they may appear. The State can jail you, beat you, or even kill you for failure to pay a parking ticket. Ludwig von Mises made the same observation in Omnipotent Government:

He who says "state" means coercion and Compulsion. He who says: There should be a law concerning this matter, means: The armed men of the government should force people to do what they do not want to do, or not to do what they like. He who says: This law should be better enforced, means: The police should force people to obey this law. He who says: The state is God, deifies arms and prisons. The worship of the state is the worship of force. There is no more dangerous menace to civilization than a government of incompetent, corrupt, or vile men. The worst evils which mankind ever had to endure were inflicted by bad governments. The state can be and has often been in the course of history the main source of mischief and disaster.

America has become a barbaric nation in which each day new arbitrary laws appear at every level of government. We are becoming a nation of criminals simply because the State is outlawing everything. The absolute power of the State has so thoroughly corrupted our rulers that they are willing to threaten fines, imprisonment, beatings, and death for idling. How can people call themselves civilized when they are willing to accept such draconian measures simply because someone leaves his car running?

Land of the Free

Police in Wausau, Wisconsin confiscated an American flag belonging to Vito Congine after the man flew it upside down to protest the village board's refusal to grant him a liquor license.

In mid-June, Congine, 46, began flying the flag upside down — an accepted way to signal distress — outside the restaurant he wants to open in Crivitz, a village of about 1,000 people some 65 miles north of Green Bay.

He said his distress is likely bankruptcy because the village board refused to grant him a liquor license after he spent nearly $200,000 to buy and remodel a downtown building for an Italian supper club.

Hours before a Fourth of July parade, four police officers went to Congine's property and removed the flag under the advice of Marinette County District Attorney Allen Brey.

Funny how you can barely get a flag hung upside down these days before the very tyrants you're protesting show up to prove your point for you.

(Thanks to Jack S.)

Who Will Put an End to U.S.-Led Genocide in Iraq and Afghanistan?

More than 7,500 Afghan men, women, and children have been murdered by the American regime in its apparent War on Poor Farmers, yet the Holy One maintains "we still have a long way to go."

Maybe Obama should just tell us what his magic number of civilian deaths is so we'll actually know when we've "gotten there."

As a rule, politicians will find any excuse to perpetuate programs that grow the state and allow them to accumulate power, money, and terms in office. Content to peddle the Bush line that carpet-bombing Middle East towns can actually prevent someone from detonating a dirty bomb in a London or New York subway, Obama's latest laugher is that "we" have to get through Afghanistan's August 20 presidential election and then turn "our" attention to creating an Afghan army and police force. Apparently because that's already worked out so well in Iraq.

And speaking of Iraq, where 20 civilians are slaughtered for every alleged terrorist killed, Obama has said, "By August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end," contending that all U.S. forces will be out of Iraq by December 31, 2011. Uh huh. And just abandon all those permanent military bases the government's spent billions to build and maintain?

It's one thing to fall for propaganda when emotions are running high, especially when the horrors of a massive terrorist attack are still fresh. But it's another thing entirely to condone genocide after you realize the government had to fabricate evidence and advance lies in order to justify its criminal invasions and occupations in the first place.

In a shameful display of our disregard for anything that doesn't immediately disturb our daily lives, Americans have made it clear that as yet we will not be the ones to put an end to these atrocities. While there may be just causes, it certainly isn't clear -- when so many innocents must bear the consequences of indiscriminate killing -- that there's ever been anything remotely resembling a just war.

A Little Bit of Good News for the Residents of Washington, DC

An appeals court has hit D.C. with a restraining order forbidding Mayor Adrian Fenty and Police Chief Cathy Lanier from erecting any more police barricades to prevent violence. These checkpoints allowed the police "to stop motorists, check IDs, and turn back anyone without 'legitimate business' in Trinidad." This law has echoes of an 1807 Maryland law which limited residence of blacks in Maryland to two weeks. Or an 1821 District of Columbia law which required blacks to register and post bond. Or an 1826 North Carolina law which forbade blacks from entering the State. But I guess it's not slavery or oppression since many blacks serve in the DC government. Our mayor and several DC council members are black. And blacks in this country would never enslave or oppress other blacks.

Anyhoo, D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles, architect of the quarantine, was disappointed with the decision and he may appeal. He asked, "How are we going to control these Negroes if we can't watch where they go and whom they consort with?" Oops, I mixed him up with someone else. 

Police union Chairman Kris Baumann, an early and outspoken critic of the quarantine, said that rank-and-file officers deserve credit for speaking against the program. Perhaps they do, but they won't get any from me. If rank-and-file officers really thought that this quarantine was a bad idea, they could have refused to set up the checkpoints. Instead the rank-and-file officers simply submitted to the myth of the rule of law. 

The residents of the Trinidad could also have resisted and demanded that the police respect their rights. But I guess their education made submission necessary. 

More Heller Redux

Thanks to Manuel Lora for alerting us to the abominable Cory Booker, mayor of Newark, NJ and champion of a program encouraging neighborhood snitches to turn in gun owners for $1,000.

To everyone who naively believes the Heller decision was a victory for gun rights, I ask you to explain why every gun-controlling public serpent (thanks, Kent) references it when justifying his or her latest "reasonable" restrictions on gun ownership. Specifically, Booker states (.pdf):

In District of Columbia v. Heller, the United States Supreme Court affirmed an individual’s right to bear arms, effectively striking down the ban on hand gun ownership enacted by the District of Columbia. In its decision, the Court clearly recognized and affirmed a government’s right to take reasonable measures to limit gun ownership in order to ensure community safety. It is within this space that we must now act.

I conclude by quoting Mr. Lora:

There’s that word again, “reasonable,” coming out of the mouth of a local tyrant, mimicking the same attitude echoed by the Supreme Court. “Sure,” they say–there are gun rights, “as long as there are reasonable restrictions.” Nothing is reasonable with the state. Including you, Mr. Booker. Maybe he should be turned in for having an entire and terribly dangerous police department. All with evil guns.

We're Quickly Becoming a Nation of Criminals

Yesterday I used the example of a drunk-driving incident to briefly illustrate how unjust the American legal structure is. From your county commissioners right on up to the federal government, the state constantly seeks to prosecute us for the mere potential to commit crimes, not simply in response to harm done intentionally to someone else or his property.

The problem with this system of governance is that it is extremely tyrannical. From a moral standpoint, you can't have a criminal without a victim, yet the state increasingly criminalizes nonviolent habits or behaviors that do no harm to anyone, save perhaps the individual who chooses to engage them. And even when the state does prosecute someone who's actually violated the property rights of others, the state doesn't merely force the individual to pay for his own crimes; it compels innocent taxpayers to pay for them as well when it robs us at the point of a gun in order to feed, clothe, and incarcerate the miscreant.

Sadly, the vast majority of Americans not only condones but actually encourages this so-called system of "justice," even though granting the state such enormous power means there literally is no limit to the abuses that can be wielded on nonviolent citizens. To illustrate this further, I will reprint some comments I received yesterday at the Examiner in response to my post.

Read the entire article.

Our Unjust Legal System

Prosecutors in New Jersey are seeking the maximum penalty of nearly three years in prison for a man who initiated a head-on collision with a truck carrying a man and his daughter while he was intoxicated.

Shaun Campbell of East Rutherford told a judge Tuesday that he had been drinking "quite a bit" of beer when he crashed his SUV head-on into a pickup in April. The truck's occupants, a man and his 4-year-old daughter, were not seriously hurt.

The 40-year-old Campbell's blood-alcohol level was .288 percent, more than triple the state's legal limit.

Authorities say Campbell's license has been suspended 78 times in 22 years. He still faces drunken-driving charges in two other New Jersey cities.

First of all, it doesn't matter how many times Campbell's license has been suspended in the past. None of those incidents is relevant to the issue at hand. And if Campbell didn't hurt anyone or cause property damage while he was driving under the influence in any of the previous cases, he never should have been charged for civil or criminal offenses, much less had his license suspended. You can't have an offender without a victim.

Moreover, forget the fact that current drunk-driving laws have apparently put no dent in Campbell's recidivistic behavior. What's most imperative is that the accident that occurred as a result of his intoxication is between him and people in the vehicle he struck, not between him and "society" in general. However, instead of being compelled to compensate his victims in the form of monetary damages, thereby bearing sole responsibility for his offense, Campbell will most likely be sent to a government cage where tax-surrenderers will be forced to house and feed him for the duration of his sentence.

If you're wondering how a system of "punish the innocent in order to punish the guilty" can be even remotely just, congratulations, you're beginning to think like a libertarian.

A Taser Twist

A Pennsylvania student could serve almost two years in jail for using a police officer's Taser against her as she tried to arrest him.

Twenty-year-old Jeremy Spisak, of McDonald, was sentenced Monday after pleading no contest in January to disarming a law enforcement officer and other charges.

I can't comment on Spisak's actions without knowing the specifics of the incident, but there are any number of circumstances under which this kid's actions could have been legitimate -- say, if he was defending himself against an illegal arrest or protecting his person from an officer who simply initiated physical violence for any reason.

Of course, given that the government's goon squads are virtually entitled to operate above the law -- even in plainclothes but especially when fully costumed in state garb -- Spisak would almost certainly have faced jail time even if his actions were morally justified. After all, notice that it's apparently against the law to disarm a law enforcement officer no matter what.

The biggest problem here is that way too many people believe that arrests are legitimate as long as they're made in conformance with the laws. However, this assumes all laws are just when nothing could be further from the truth. Any law that criminalizes nonviolent behavior is unjust, meaning that while it may be legal it certainly is not necessarily moral.

Therefore, if the police officer who was tased was in the processes of detaining Spisak in response to a legitimate crime, Spisak's actions may very well have been criminal. Even in an anarchic society -- i.e., one in which police forces and courts were privatized -- there would likely be some point at which private forces would have to detain suspects who turned out to be innocent of the charges against them. But the difference between that hypothetical environment and that which exists today is that the state's enforcers cannot be held accountable for detaining the wrong people, whereas private law enforcement forces could be.

Now let's assume Spisak was targeted mistakely by the female officer who was attempting to arrest him. Should it be considered a criminal act to use any reasonable means possible to escape this unjustified attack? After all, remember that the state insists Tasers are non-lethal weapons. If I knew I was being forced to submit to the will of someone who really didn't know whether I was innocent or guilty, I may very well choose to put up with the abuse in the hope that the matter would resolve itself without further harm to myself, but certainly I would be under no moral obligation to oblige such violent treatment -- especially considering the state is a criminal gang in the first place, given that it could never exist without first stealing from the innocent to fund its exploits.

An even simpler exercise would be to apply this logic to a situation where a cop initiated an arrest (violence) in response to a nonviolent act that was merely deemed illegal by a legislative mob that enjoyed majority rule. For instance, let's say I refused to put on my seatbelt after being ordered to do so by an officer. I can assure you such spirited opposition to an unjust demand would eventually be met with 50,000 volts of state "justice," and that's probably if I was lucky. However, if the officer so much as laid a threatening finger on me, I would be entirely morally justified in removing it, even though in today's society I would almost certainly be facing the prospect of using a commode in front of perfect strangers immediately henceforth.

Even if we assume Spisak acted illegitimately in tasing the female officer, it doesn't obviate the fact that state abuse is ingrained in our pysche these days; and what's worse, it's actually encouraged by scores of delinquents who put "safety" ahead of their own freedom. The vast acceptance of public police forces proves this point. But in actuality, crimes by the state would almost be bearable in this pitiful reality in which we live if the police could merely be held accountable for their own misuse of their weapons, too.

(Thanks to Wolf, who really needs to blog more often!)

Another Form of Concealed Carry

My wife took this picture a couple weeks ago while we were up in Baltimore. We were on our way to Hooters in the Inner Harbor when I decided I'd exercise a little civil disobedience and conceal my bourbon and diet in a Starbucks cup I found in my hotel room.

 

I know. I'm a badass. Especially with my son's diaper bag over my shoulder.

'Operation Dry Water': A Boatload of Hysteria and Abuse

American pirates who go by the names "Coast Guardsmen" and "Natural Resources Police" will be joining forces this weekend to ramp up their harassment of boaters who might be operating vessels while under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

According to its website, "Operation Dry Water" -- be sure to check out the fancy police-state artwork in the logo -- is a government initiative ostensibly "aimed at reducing the number of alcohol-related accidents and fatalities" amongst boaters.

Certainly it has nothing to do with increasing the scope of the state's authority in its attempts to control us and generate revenue. Per one report out of Maryland:

"Nationally, one in five boating deaths are directly caused by operating under the influence of alcohol," said Capt. Mark O'Malley, the Captain of the Port of Baltimore.  "That equates to between five and 15 people who are at risk of being injured or killed this year within Maryland state waters. That's unacceptable. Standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the NRP, we're going to get ahead of this problem this year," he said.

[...]

"We will be out in force looking for boat operators who are operating a vessel while impaired by alcohol or drugs," said Sgt. Art Windemuth, the public information officer for NRP. "Impaired boaters caught this weekend can expect penalties to be severe. In Maryland, they include one year in jail and a $1,000 fine for the first offense."

Unless death is perceived to be a lesser penalty than a year in jail or a $1,000 fine, I'm not sure how any serious person could feasibly believe that this increased enforcement has anything at all to do with preventing alcohol-related deaths.

Moreover, one wonders how the police are going to detect those who are boating under the influence. Boats generally rock from side to side, so maybe they'll just wait for our vessels to touch one of the yellow or white lines painted on the waterways. Given that marine police need no probable cause to detain boaters, we can expect these floating fascists to conduct even more random inspections than usual.

As I pointed out in an article a few years ago as Maryland was contemplating a statute that would have required all boaters to wear life vests while underway, the percentage of boaters killed in Maryland in 2004 for any reason was virtually zero. I wrote:

According to Boating Statistics 2004, published by the U.S. Coast Guard in September 2005, there were 206,681 motorboats registered in Maryland in 2004 and only 16 boating fatalities.

According to a Maryland Natural Resources Police report for 2008, there were nine boating fatalities last year throughout the entire state, with only three attributable to alcohol. Three. Out of how many hundreds of thousands of boating expeditions that took place all year?

Furthermore, per page 4 of the same report, only 3 percent of boating accidents can be blamed on alcohol in the first place. Considering that "operator inattention" (9 percent), "operator inexperience" (12 percent), and good ol' "human error" (6 percent) account for 27 percent of all accidents, clearly the state of Maryland needs to just cut to the chase and ban boating altogether!

The only plausible conclusion one can draw when assessing the state's hysteria over "boating under the influence" is that this is an undeniably safe activity -- you don't need to be sober to realize the statistics prove that alcohol consumption on the water is a non-issue.

Indeed, the biggest threat to American boaters is the heavy-handed, civil liberties-trampling state itself.

Tasah Tasah Tasah!!

Gee, a guy who refuses to cooperate after being treated worse than a rooster at a cockfight. Go figure.

And check out the sucker punches toward the end of the video.

Four police officers and all of them too pussy to just jack the guy's arms behind his back if they really needed to handcuff him so badly.

(Thanks to Manuel Lora)

You Can Stick Your Slavery Apology

So the Senate's backing a resolution that would generate a formal federal government apology for slavery. Unanimously, even. Whee.

Forgive me if I don't get all giddy in anticipation of what would amount to little more than eye candy -- or ear candy, as it were -- should the American superstate "apologize" to today's enslaved masses for past actors who sanctioned chattel slavery.

As Brutus has correctly pointed out on several occasions, the state's putrid physical enslavement of blacks was atrocious and unforgivable, but the difference between political slavery and chattel slavery is merely one of degree and not kind.

From bevies of taxes, fines, and fees to regulations and arbitrary diktats governing virtually every waking minute of our days, the leviathan state we live beneath today is every bit the slavemaster it was in previous centuries when its intentions were simply more apparent.

If our rulers really want to apologize for slavery, they can pass their resolution, clock out one final time, and close the doors on every one of the federal buildings in the federal cesspool known as Washington, D.C. Only then will each and every one of us truly be set free.

Update on My Prophecy

Here's an article detailing the downward spiral of accused museum shooter James von Brunn. As I predicted, the media continue to conflate hatred toward the State with hatred toward Jews and blacks as they investigate the life of von Brunn. Some quotations:

Von Brunn had talked about giving up "precious things" — even the computer from which he spread his angry diatribes against Jews, interracial dating and the government, said fellow white supremacist John de Nugent....

On his Web site, von Brunn said he is a descendant of German immigrants who became convinced Jews controlled the government.

After he got out, he became a regular in white supremacist circles and soon had his own file with watch groups such as the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League. He wrote an anti-Semitic text and maintained his conspiracy theories on the Web site....

"I was stunned to have met anyone who acted like that. I don't remember encountering anyone that bigoted before in my life," Riley said. "He was right out there for all to know and see and he was just so angry, it was kind of alarming to be around him."

The reader is left with the impression that this man so seethed with hate toward blacks, Jews, and the government that he went to the Holocaust Museum to murder Jews. So clearly if an individual expresses hatred toward racial minorities, Jews, or the government, he must be planning to kill. If he believes in conspiracy theories, like those anti-patriotic 9-11 Truthers who do not trust the government, then he is a ticking time-bomb. Thus, we need the government to watch these people more closely, especially those people who are angry at racial minorities, Jews, or the government. The government may even need to just put those people in jail to preempt any future attacks. And the government is once again our savior.

Yes, these are interesting times for the Remnant.

The Martial Law Mindset Continues

Apparently 72-year-old women who have the temerity to resist "protection" can also be tased. Kathryn Winkfein was tasered by Texas Deputy Chris Bieze after a traffic stop. Ms. Winkfein was cited for driving 60 in a 45-mph-zone. Under Texas law a driver is supposed to sign the ticket and be arrested if he resists (Which is ridiculous and should demonstrate to people just how absolutely corrupting power is. Are we really to believe that placing someone in handcuffs for not signing a piece of paper is even a remotely justified use of force? You don't have be an anarchist to see the inherent immorality of such a law; you only need to have a sense of decency and morality, which quite frankly a lot of people in this country don't have. And if you don't believe me, just read some of the comments).

This is yet another example of Martial Law Mindset. Our "protectors" believe that if we serfs do not comply with their demands with celerity, such disobedience is to be interpreted as a threat. The officer is then authorized to use any force he deems necessary to compel submission. It matters not whether you are a woman or elderly or a child. If you resist, you may be beaten, tased, and/or killed for noncompliance. And the lovers of our police state continue to cheer on such behavior by our "protectors".

Three Cheers for Restraint

Via Drudge, a handyman who reportedly lived out of his minivan in New York City apparently lay dead for weeks as unsuspecting police officers repeatedly left parking tickets on his vehicle below an underpass.

George Morales, 59, died naturally from heart disease, the medical examiner's office said Friday. The body was found in the backseat Wednesday when a city marshal tried to tow the vehicle from beneath an overpass on the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway, police said. He was believed to have been living out of the white Chevrolet minivan, which had North Carolina plates.

You can interpret this story a couple different ways depending on the type of agenda you're trying to push. On one hand, you could criticize the police for failing to notice that there was a dead body inside the minivan as they left tickets on the windshield. Or, you could praise the officers for refraining from snooping inside the vehicle without probable cause.

According to the report, the windows of the minivan were tinted and "ticketing officers don't normally search cars."

It's bad enough that the government maintains a monopoly over the roads, the enforcement of traffic laws, and all the other nanny-state policies it enforces (like seatbelt and helmet laws) under the guise of securing our safety. As unfortunate as it is that Mr. Morales met his demise under less than ideal circumstances, at least the officers in question didn't compromise the man's dignity by rummaging through his final resting place.

Niagara Falls Police Use Taser to Obtain DNA

Ryan S. Smith, a shooting and robbery suspect from upstate New York, told Niagara Falls police he'd rather sit in jail instead of consenting to an order to submit a DNA sample.

A police officer said that when Smith was ordered by officers to give his DNA, he adamantly refused.

“I ain’t giving up my DNA again. I already gave it up once. I’ll sit in jail. I ain’t giving it up. You’re going to have to Tase me,” the officer’s report stated.

So tase him they did. And as is usually the case when the state determines the merits of its own behavior, a Niagara County judge has ruled that the electrocution was legally permissible.

Niagara County Judge Sara Sheldon Sperrazza decided that the DNA sample obtained Sept. 29 from Ryan S. Smith of Niagara Falls — which ties him to a shooting and a gas station robbery— is legally valid and can be used at his trial.

Smith was handcuffed and sitting on the floor of Niagara Falls Police Headquarters when he was zapped with the 50,000- volt electronic stun gun after he insisted he would not give a DNA sample.

Smith had already given a DNA sample without protest a month earlier. So why did police feel the need to obtain it on a second occasion, you ask? Well, they sent the first sample to the wrong lab, "where it was opened and spoiled." Apparently torture is a reasonable remedy for incompetence.

Smith may very well be guilty of the crimes with which he's been charged, but even the most unsavory of characters are entitled to due process.

Sperrazza even admitted that police should have arrested the disobedient Smith -- you know, in accordance with the law -- and brought him to court where he would have been warned about the penalties for noncompliance with a court order. But instead of adhering to established precedent herself, the judge ruled that it's legally permissible to use a Taser to obtain DNA as long as it's not done "maliciously, or to an excessive extent, or with resulting injury."

Ah, well as long as it's not done "maliciously" or "excessively!" No doubt such ambiguity is comforting to anyone who understands the all-too-lethal nature of the "non-lethal" Taser.

All laws are ambiguous when the state is allowed to interpret them to its liking; that's one of the primary reasons I hate the state. However, for all the abuses such abstract terminology will henceforth legitimize in a legal sense, that's not even the biggest problem with this ruling.

Sperrazza's decision that use of a Taser is legally permissible in order to enforce compliance with a court order is severely misleading and unlawful per se -- she ruled on the means through which state officials are allowed to collect DNA evidence when she should have ruled specifically on the legal propriety of compelling it in the first place.

In other words, even if electrocution were a perfectly acceptable method of coercing the nonviolent -- it's not -- the officer(s) who tased Smith broke the law by collecting the DNA sample prior to allowing the suspect to appear before a judge to be informed of the consequences of failing to comply with a court order.

If one is pulled over and suspected of drunk-driving but refuses a breathalyzer test, standard protocol for an officer is to issue an arrest and haul the suspect to jail, not to administer 50,000 volts of electricity to someone who merely refuses an order. Yet, anyway.

However, with rulings like the one issued by Sperrazza, who herself contorted the laws so she could absolve fellow tax-feeders of their due process violations, our devolution into a full-fledged police state continues apace.

(Thanks to Wolf for sending the story.)

I'll Take Private Gangs over Government Gangs Anyday

Police in Anne Arundel County, Md., suspect gang links in the killing of 14-year-old Christopher Jones, who was attacked and beaten to death over the weekend in Crofton, allegedly by 16-year-old Javel Marqueth George and an unidentified 14-year-old boy.

"Whatever dispute he has, whoever he hangs around with, whatever those factors are -- he doesn't deserve to be assaulted while riding his bike," said Anne Arundel County Police Captain David Waltemayer. "It is ridiculous."

Ridiculous indeed. Just about as absurd as when Anne Arundel police officers sexually assault young women during field sobriety tests, kill unarmed suspects in the middle of the street, or murder pregnant women during tyrannical drug raids.

The difference is, private citizens are (rightly) almost always held accountable for their crimes whereas tax-eating parasites in government law enforcement are hardly ever even charged for their criminal offenses, much less prosecuted and convicted.

Maryland, My Maryland? Yeah, Right...

The despot's heel is on thy shore,
Maryland! [My Maryland!]
His torch is at thy temple door,
Maryland! [My Maryland!]
Avenge the patriotic gore
That flecked the streets of Baltimore,
And be the battle queen of yore,
Maryland! My Maryland!

This is the first stanza of a poem written by James Ryder Randall that later became Maryland's official state song. How ironic that a song that once called for the South to fight the Union's tyrants now belongs to the least free state in our corrupt union.

(We'll leave aside for now the additional irony that Maryland's official state moniker is, laughably, the Free State).

If Mr. Randall were alive today, he likely would be despondent to know that the despots now reside in Annapolis.

Kidnappers Abduct Three Children in South Carolina

The gang of criminals known as the Newberry County Sheriff's Department has kidnapped three small children from a house in which it found just over an ounce of tobacco apportioned into small baggies. Three suspects were charged with possession of tobacco with intent to distribute.

“When deputies arrived at the residence, they ...were able to see in plain view a [tobacco] plant growing at the residence,” said sheriff’s Major Todd Johnson in the press release.

“The officers also observed a partially smoked [Marlboro] cigarette on the porch of the residence.”

For the record, an ounce of tobacco fits in a small sandwich bag. But I have to come clean. The officers didn't really arrest these people for tobacco, they busted them and abducted their children over an ounce of marijuana.

So how many of you were ready to march to South Carolina with shotguns when you thought police confiscated innocent children in the name of tobacco, but couldn't care less now that you know it was actually marijuana?

In order to prosecute victimless "crimes," the state is willing to commit actual crimes by initiating violence against nonviolent people and their property. This is evil incarnate.

At Least Jihadists Admit to Their Brutality

I know this will come as a complete shock, but the U.S. is denying a report in a British newspaper alleging that photographs depicting Iraqi prisoner abuse include images of rape and sexual abuse. In fact, Barack Obama is so confident in the report's deceptiveness that he's trying to block release of the photos.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the Daily Telegraph newspaper had shown "an inability to get the facts right".

"That news organization has completely mischaracterized the images," Whitman told reporters. "None of the photos in question depict [sic] the images that are described in that article."

Hey, I'm pretty sure I know at least one good way to verify the allegations of the report: release the damned photos.

Obviously, if the Obama administration has nothing to hide, it has nothing to fear should the photos see the light of day. (Our benevolent defenders ought to be familiar with that line, eh?) After all, the photos are from 2004, well before Obama became commander-in-chief of the armed forces.

No matter. We all know Our Holy Savior is so dedicated to "change" that he'll just toe the Bush line on torture and "state secrets." No harm, no foul. Better yet, no reason to have to explain this, especially considering he just gave that Memorial Day speech touting America's "moral authority":

The newspaper said at least one picture showed an American soldier apparently raping a female prisoner while another is said to show a male translator raping a male detainee.

Others were said to depict sexual assaults with objects including a truncheon, wire and a phosphorescent tube.

Ah, the ol' phosphorescent tube trick. Brings back memories. So much for all that "transparency" Obama's been promising though, huh?

Actually, I expect the president to be a pompous slimeball, slinking around and covering his ass after breaking all his empty promises. But considering the praise the vast majority of Americans shower on the U.S. military, you'd think more officers wouldn't be such transparent hacks. Say, like retired U.S. Army Major General Antonio Taguba, who conducted the 2004 investigation into the abuse at Abu Ghraib prison and concluded that the pictures in question revealed "torture, abuse, rape and every indecency."

So far, so good. But then Taguba goes on to illustrate how the state's goons ultimately stick together by explaining why he actually supports Obama's cover-up:

"I am not sure what purpose their release would serve other than a legal one," he said. "The sequence would be to imperil our troops, the only protectors of our foreign policy, when we most need them, and British troops who are trying to build security in Afghanistan."

Yes, thank goodness the American people are denied the ability to hold their rulers LEGALLY ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR WAR CRIMES.

At least craven sociopath Taguba got one thing right: the release of these obviously damning photos would necessarily imperil our troops. Indeed, just today Will Grigg recalls the testimony of U.S. Army Major Matthew Alexander, a military interrogator who "asserts that torture and other abuses at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, not Islamic ideology, served as the main recruiting theme for foreign Jihadists who gathered in Iraq." Grigg continues (and I set this apart to drive the point home):

By his reckoning, torture contributed directly to the death of more Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan than occurred on September 11, 2001.

For all the despicable actions of the Jihadists who videotape their murderous, sadistic exploits, at least it can be said that they are capable of admitting to their brutality. At least they spare us the self-righteousness that we're so accustomed to hearing from American politicians and torture apologists, who claim they're setting the moral course for humanity as they torture innocent prisoners and then disguise their cowardice in admitting to their behavior as concern for "the troops'" well-being.

We Are All Slaves

Don't blame anyone but yourself if one day you wake up and find you don't even have the freedom to take a leak without first checking in with your slavemaster known as the state. After all, Emperor Obama and his little flying monkeys like Nancy Pelosi are making clear they intend to centrally plan, control, and micromanage every aspect of our lives.

In answering a question from a student about how Pelosi was going to get Americans to cut back on their carbon emissions, the leading Democratic lawmaker said it was important to educate children on how to conserve energy and for citizens to build more environmentally friendly homes.

"We have so much room for improvement," she said. "Every aspect of our lives must be subjected to an inventory ... of how we are taking responsibility."

By the way, my grandmother would have laughed at all the enviro-ninnies today who so pusillanimously capitulate to the nanny-statists.

Is It Possible That Obama Is Worse Than Bush?

Yes.