Mark Tapscott of the Washington Examiner has noticed a curious official blog post, written by a lackey to President Obama, that starkly conveys a frightening message for those who wish to communicate an opinion about any provision of the stimulus bill, or the implementation of that same legislation, to the administration:
Another update from Norm Eisen, special counsel to the president for ethics and government reform, in the spirit of transparency as always: (All emphases mine)
Eisen, after this shameless crowing about "transparency", then has the cojones to inform us a couple of paragraphs into his missive that
"Following OMB’s review, the Administration has decided to make a number of changes to the rules that we think make them even tougher on special interests and more focused on merits-based decision making.
First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists. For the first time, we will reach contacts not only by registered lobbyists but also by unregistered ones, as well as anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program."
If we understand Eisen's proclamation correctly, the Messiah is now pronouncing that no one, whether a lobbyist or not, may now bother him with any problems they may have with his administration's handling of the stimulus bill, or express their dismay at any unfair treatment citizens are receiving because of said handling, such as what's currently happening to the secured creditors of the car companies, who are being completely hosed in favor of the UAW, despite written contracts that supposedly protect their monetary interests.
So much for "transparency", so much for the First Amendment, and so much for the right of citizens to seek redress from their government, the lack of which prompted the Declaration of Independence, if we're not mistaken.
This seems to be yet another step in the Messiah's ongoing centralization and concentration of power, along his ongoing attempts to stifle legitimate criticism of his unilateral imposition of unfair terms on private businesses. As Scott Jordan (an online friend of ours) reminds us, this sort of official censorship has happened before, and was put into place by persons with a similar mindset to Obama's:
"'The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition of socialism.'- K. Marx"
How long until the Messiah's people decide to impose similar draconian conditions on every aspect of life in America?
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Friday, May 29, 2009
Voter intimidation: White on black, go to prison. Black on white, meh.
Remember the story we commented on last Election Day, about the three Philadelphia Black Panther thugs who were intimidating and scaring white people away from a local polling place by using a nightstick, curses and threats?
Well, we're sure you'll be happy to know that Obama's and Attorney General Eric Holder's political appointees at the Justice Department have seen fit to overrule career prosecutors at that agency, and have dropped all sanctions against the men, despite video evidence of their misconduct and despite the fact that one eyewitness to the incident named Bartle Bull, a veteran of the 1960's civil rights movement,
"described it as 'the most blatant form of voter intimidation' that he had seen, even during the voting rights crisis in Mississippi a half-century ago."
Incredibly, an affidavit by Bull (a liberal Democrat, by the way) describing in detail the blatant intimidation by the goons didn't even make it into the pile of evidence supporting the government's complaint, according to the story.
Violating the Voting Rights Act, hurling racial slurs and threatening people with violence are all A-OK behaviors with this new administration as long as the perpetrators are black, we guess, especially since it seemed to be a foregone conclusion at the time that we "crackers" were "about to be ruled by the black man", as Bull recalls one of the goons braying in triumph.
Welcome to the new "Justice" Department, soon to be presided over by such reverse racists as Sonia Sotomayor.
Maybe we just don't understand why the men were let off because we're not a Latina woman and therefore lack a certain "richness of life experience", eh, Judge Sotomayor?
Well, we're sure you'll be happy to know that Obama's and Attorney General Eric Holder's political appointees at the Justice Department have seen fit to overrule career prosecutors at that agency, and have dropped all sanctions against the men, despite video evidence of their misconduct and despite the fact that one eyewitness to the incident named Bartle Bull, a veteran of the 1960's civil rights movement,
"described it as 'the most blatant form of voter intimidation' that he had seen, even during the voting rights crisis in Mississippi a half-century ago."
Incredibly, an affidavit by Bull (a liberal Democrat, by the way) describing in detail the blatant intimidation by the goons didn't even make it into the pile of evidence supporting the government's complaint, according to the story.
Violating the Voting Rights Act, hurling racial slurs and threatening people with violence are all A-OK behaviors with this new administration as long as the perpetrators are black, we guess, especially since it seemed to be a foregone conclusion at the time that we "crackers" were "about to be ruled by the black man", as Bull recalls one of the goons braying in triumph.
Welcome to the new "Justice" Department, soon to be presided over by such reverse racists as Sonia Sotomayor.
Maybe we just don't understand why the men were let off because we're not a Latina woman and therefore lack a certain "richness of life experience", eh, Judge Sotomayor?
No shocker there
MSDNCNBC, Obama's lickspittle media "partner" during the 2008 campaign, is now happily promoting their "exclusive" Twitter feed from "inside the White House", which is right this very minute informing us about such earthshaking news as "Photo of Bo on grass outside Oval Office. Very playful, grabbing crew #1 microphone" and "POTUS' body man Reggie Love rocks two blackberrys AND an iPhone".
We're feeling a little underwhelmed by this shining example of modern journalism. We also wonder how the staffers at NBC News look at themselves in the mirror every morning without feeling nauseous.
We're feeling a little underwhelmed by this shining example of modern journalism. We also wonder how the staffers at NBC News look at themselves in the mirror every morning without feeling nauseous.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
One lawyer who sees through the hype
Attorney Allan J. Favish nails down the main argument why Judge Sotomayor is not a good candidate to be a Supreme Court Justice:
"Because the Justices are freed of political influence, the
Framers also designed the system so that the Justices should not make law,
but only interpret law. It would have been undemocratic to allow those freed
of political influence to make law." (Emphasis mine)
People who have lifetime appointments with no provision for recall should not additionally be allowed to have lawmaking powers whether implicitly or explicitly, as that much unchallengeable authority invested in one branch of government is not supportive of a free society.
We've had enough difficulties with the justices already on the Supreme Court finding "rights" in the Constitution that just don't exist, as well as mysteriously ignoring the true individual rights that are plainly stated in that document. There is no need to add someone who publicly admits to such a bias before her confirmation hearings even start.
Full disclosure: I am on an email list with Mr. Favish where ideas and comments are regularly communicated to and fro.
"Because the Justices are freed of political influence, the
Framers also designed the system so that the Justices should not make law,
but only interpret law. It would have been undemocratic to allow those freed
of political influence to make law." (Emphasis mine)
People who have lifetime appointments with no provision for recall should not additionally be allowed to have lawmaking powers whether implicitly or explicitly, as that much unchallengeable authority invested in one branch of government is not supportive of a free society.
We've had enough difficulties with the justices already on the Supreme Court finding "rights" in the Constitution that just don't exist, as well as mysteriously ignoring the true individual rights that are plainly stated in that document. There is no need to add someone who publicly admits to such a bias before her confirmation hearings even start.
Full disclosure: I am on an email list with Mr. Favish where ideas and comments are regularly communicated to and fro.
In other news, less firefighters equals a lot more fire extinguishers being sold
WTOL-TV in Toledo, Ohio has made the startling discovery that local peasants have begun purchasing a lot more firearms and taking training classes on how to use them, now that 75 of the city's cops have been laid off due to budget cuts. That number represents just the first round of firings, by the way. More police cuts are apparently on the horizon.
We don't know why the newsies are so surprised. We like to call that sort of behavior "common sense" around here.
We don't know why the newsies are so surprised. We like to call that sort of behavior "common sense" around here.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
A fascinating story
My good friend and sometime partner-in-fun Joel Rosenberg has masterfully taken the news that the Twin Cities Metro Gang Strike Force in Minnesota has been shut down for "technical difficulties" (5-figure sums of money and thirteen seized cars going "missing" will tend to precipitate that action), summed it up in a quasi-fictional form, and then gone on to note how this latest scandal is only the latest in a line of other wacky, abusive shenanigans that the Force members and their bosses have been up to the last few years.
Some of his description of the Strike Force's affairs is a little bit inside baseball if one doesn't know all of the players involved, but the general story is easy enough to get, and it is certainly well worth the read (click the links in order).
The picture that Joel paints of the group's thuggish, bullying, disregarding of the law behavior doesn't make any of the people involved with the Force (all the way up to Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher and Minnesota Commissioner of Public Safety Michael Campion, both individuals who have tangled with the local pro-carry community in the past over their complete disregard for Minnesota law on many occasions) look very good, to say the least.
Keep on them, Joel. A little sunlight is the best thing for that corner of Minnesota law enforcement right about now.
Some of his description of the Strike Force's affairs is a little bit inside baseball if one doesn't know all of the players involved, but the general story is easy enough to get, and it is certainly well worth the read (click the links in order).
The picture that Joel paints of the group's thuggish, bullying, disregarding of the law behavior doesn't make any of the people involved with the Force (all the way up to Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher and Minnesota Commissioner of Public Safety Michael Campion, both individuals who have tangled with the local pro-carry community in the past over their complete disregard for Minnesota law on many occasions) look very good, to say the least.
Keep on them, Joel. A little sunlight is the best thing for that corner of Minnesota law enforcement right about now.
The Jack-Booted Thug of the Week...
... is the unnamed Laval, Quebec (a suburb of Montreal) police officer who detained and handcuffed a 38-year-old woman and then issued her two tickets worth $420, all because she ignored his demand to hang onto the handrail of the subway escalator she was riding.
"[Laval Constable Nathalie] Lorrain added Kosoian was repeatedly warned that she would be given a ticket if she continued to resist holding onto the handrail."
The "authorities" apparently take their handrail-holding policies seriously up there.
What happens when a person with one arm who's toting a briefcase, or an injured person who can't raise their arms decides to ride the train? Prison?
"The police officers told me she probably had a bad day... Lorrain said."
If we were being unnecessarily harangued by a nanny-state bully, we'd be having a bad day too.
"[Laval Constable Nathalie] Lorrain added Kosoian was repeatedly warned that she would be given a ticket if she continued to resist holding onto the handrail."
The "authorities" apparently take their handrail-holding policies seriously up there.
What happens when a person with one arm who's toting a briefcase, or an injured person who can't raise their arms decides to ride the train? Prison?
"The police officers told me she probably had a bad day... Lorrain said."
If we were being unnecessarily harangued by a nanny-state bully, we'd be having a bad day too.
Just keeping track of the many, many broken promises
The Washington Times has taken notice of the fact that the Messiah has ignored his own campaign pledge to post any completed legislation passed by Congress on the White House Web site for five days before signing said bills on at least four recent occasions, contrary to his nauseatingly oft-stated commitment to "transparency".
"It seemed among the easiest of his transparency pledges and is entirely under his control"
Which just goes to show everyone the true value of Obama's word.
Oh, his press spokesman is quoted as stating that links to any currently pending Congressional bills are available from the White House site, but as the article points out, these recent bills were subject to amendment right up until final passage, after which they were immediately sent over to the President to endorse, so those already-outdated links aren't particularly helpful to those people who are watching for late-added shenanigans, are they?
"Mr. Obama has exempted emergency bills from his promise"
Because, you know, credit card reform just had to be signed into law right this minute, even though the provisions of the law don't take effect until next February.
"It seemed among the easiest of his transparency pledges and is entirely under his control"
Which just goes to show everyone the true value of Obama's word.
Oh, his press spokesman is quoted as stating that links to any currently pending Congressional bills are available from the White House site, but as the article points out, these recent bills were subject to amendment right up until final passage, after which they were immediately sent over to the President to endorse, so those already-outdated links aren't particularly helpful to those people who are watching for late-added shenanigans, are they?
"Mr. Obama has exempted emergency bills from his promise"
Because, you know, credit card reform just had to be signed into law right this minute, even though the provisions of the law don't take effect until next February.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Elections have consequences
President Obama has seen fit to nominate Federal Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, as is his privilege. This lady, who admittedly has a compelling life story, nonetheless is on record as saying the following:
"The Court of Appeals is where policy is made... I'm not promoting it, I'm not advocating it, you know"
"Wink wink, nudge nudge, ha ha. We all know how the game is played, so we'll just leave the rest unsaid."
How completely disgusting.
Judge Sotomayor also saw fit to dismiss with a one-paragraph ruling a lawsuit filed by white firefighters who had passed a promotion exam, only to have those results thrown out when the city of New Haven, Connecticut fretted that the minorities who failed the exam would sue, and also because "promotions based on the test results would undermine their goal of diversity in the Fire Department". The Supreme Court disagreed with Sotomayor's simplistic discarding of the firefighters' grievance, and the case was recently argued in front of them. A decision is expected shortly.
(As an aside, we suspect these exams test the candidates' knowledge of firefighting procedures and techniques, not calculus or particle physics, therefore the passing of such a test would seem to be a reasonable requirement for promotion to a position of responsibility in a fire department where one will be responsible for the safety of people under their command.)
Sotomayor also seems to believe that her life experience uniquely qualifies her to sit on the Court:
"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,"
directly contradicting both Sandra Day O'Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, two very ideologically different justices who nevertheless agreed that cases should be decided upon the blind rule of law, as opposed to some sort of misguided "empathy", "fairness" or social justice yardstick. Imagine a white male who dared to suggest that just because he was white and male, he was better able to decide the merits of a case than, say, a black woman or an Asian man. He would immediately be discounted as a racist kook, and rightly so. Why doesn't the same standard apply here?
Don't answer that. We already know why not.
Let the confirmation battle begin. We're very interested in what other defining statements Judge Sotomayor has made, and we're quite sure we all will hear about them quite soon.
UPDATE: Yep, she's apparently solidly anti-gun, too:
"Judge Sotomayor, aNew York native, ruled on a Second Circuit Appeals Court panel that the Second Amendment is not a fundamental right and does not apply to the states [and, by extension, to individuals] in the case of Maloney v. Cuomo."
We suppose she feels that other important ideas such as free speech, protection from unreasonable search and seizure and due process are also the exclusive province of the same overbearing Federal government that the Amendments are in place to specifically protect us from.
The Constitution's a "living, breathing document", you know, despite what it plainly states. Yikes.
"The Court of Appeals is where policy is made... I'm not promoting it, I'm not advocating it, you know"
"Wink wink, nudge nudge, ha ha. We all know how the game is played, so we'll just leave the rest unsaid."
How completely disgusting.
Judge Sotomayor also saw fit to dismiss with a one-paragraph ruling a lawsuit filed by white firefighters who had passed a promotion exam, only to have those results thrown out when the city of New Haven, Connecticut fretted that the minorities who failed the exam would sue, and also because "promotions based on the test results would undermine their goal of diversity in the Fire Department". The Supreme Court disagreed with Sotomayor's simplistic discarding of the firefighters' grievance, and the case was recently argued in front of them. A decision is expected shortly.
(As an aside, we suspect these exams test the candidates' knowledge of firefighting procedures and techniques, not calculus or particle physics, therefore the passing of such a test would seem to be a reasonable requirement for promotion to a position of responsibility in a fire department where one will be responsible for the safety of people under their command.)
Sotomayor also seems to believe that her life experience uniquely qualifies her to sit on the Court:
"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life,"
directly contradicting both Sandra Day O'Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, two very ideologically different justices who nevertheless agreed that cases should be decided upon the blind rule of law, as opposed to some sort of misguided "empathy", "fairness" or social justice yardstick. Imagine a white male who dared to suggest that just because he was white and male, he was better able to decide the merits of a case than, say, a black woman or an Asian man. He would immediately be discounted as a racist kook, and rightly so. Why doesn't the same standard apply here?
Don't answer that. We already know why not.
Let the confirmation battle begin. We're very interested in what other defining statements Judge Sotomayor has made, and we're quite sure we all will hear about them quite soon.
UPDATE: Yep, she's apparently solidly anti-gun, too:
"Judge Sotomayor, a
We suppose she feels that other important ideas such as free speech, protection from unreasonable search and seizure and due process are also the exclusive province of the same overbearing Federal government that the Amendments are in place to specifically protect us from.
The Constitution's a "living, breathing document", you know, despite what it plainly states. Yikes.
Monday, May 25, 2009
His Honor's explanation doesn't quite float
It seems that being in charge of a major city means never having to give up your taxpayer-funded perks, regardless of how badly your town is bleeding cash.
Smack in the middle of these ruinous financial times, the Washington Post has discovered that the District of Columbia has decided to outfit one of their 19 outdoor pools with gas heat just in time for summer, at an installation cost of $75,000.
One wonders why that particular pool at Hains Point was picked for such a luxury. It certainly wouldn't be because rabidly anti-gun Mayor Adrian Fenty trains for triathlons there, would it?
Fenty denies the accusation that the heater was installed mainly for his benefit, although his reasoning rings a little hollow:
"He said he swims there only during the traditional outdoor pool season, from Memorial Day to Labor Day weekend."
OK, sure, until one finds out that his natatory schedule is standard for everyone, since the pool doesn't even open for the season until this time every year. That makes the mayor's protestation sound just a bit weak, doesn't it?
It's curious that nobody who should have known about such a large public expense actually was informed of the existence of this "pilot project" until the Post asked them about it:
"D.C. Council member Harry Thomas Jr. (D-Ward 5), chairman of the Committee on Libraries, Parks and Recreation, said he was not aware of the installation until The Washington Post told him, even though he oversees capital projects and maintenance." (Emphasis mine)
And even curiouser that the person (now fired) who pulled the trigger on the heater's installation denies that there were ever plans to put heaters into the other two pools that the Parks and Recreation spokesman quoted in the article insists are next in line for this "pilot project":
"[Clark E.] Ray said he and his staff never discussed a pilot program to put heaters at the other two pools. Banneker and Anacostia are neighborhood pools and probably would not get the kind of traffic that East Potomac would, he said."
And it's curiouser still that the city hasn't publicized this "pilot project" at all, seemingly ensuring its failure as a revenue generator and recognized benefit for all District residents. We don't want a horde of peasant swimmers getting in the Mayor's way, and so forth.
Additionally, one regular swimmer interviewed for the article insists that the whole setup is quite unnecessary in any event, since the pool lacks shade and is usually quite warm by the time it opens at 1:00 p.m. (12 noon on weekends).
It would be very interesting to find out exactly what time Mayor Fenty generally takes his swims. In the early morning, maybe, when he can use the pool exclusively, and a heater would make a little more sense, albeit just for him?
Once again, it appears that hard-earned tax dollars ripped from the pockets of the peasantry are being misused by a big-city government to provide a great perk to one of the bosses, regardless of the dire economic strife that city finds itself in.
Smack in the middle of these ruinous financial times, the Washington Post has discovered that the District of Columbia has decided to outfit one of their 19 outdoor pools with gas heat just in time for summer, at an installation cost of $75,000.
One wonders why that particular pool at Hains Point was picked for such a luxury. It certainly wouldn't be because rabidly anti-gun Mayor Adrian Fenty trains for triathlons there, would it?
Fenty denies the accusation that the heater was installed mainly for his benefit, although his reasoning rings a little hollow:
"He said he swims there only during the traditional outdoor pool season, from Memorial Day to Labor Day weekend."
OK, sure, until one finds out that his natatory schedule is standard for everyone, since the pool doesn't even open for the season until this time every year. That makes the mayor's protestation sound just a bit weak, doesn't it?
It's curious that nobody who should have known about such a large public expense actually was informed of the existence of this "pilot project" until the Post asked them about it:
"D.C. Council member Harry Thomas Jr. (D-Ward 5), chairman of the Committee on Libraries, Parks and Recreation, said he was not aware of the installation until The Washington Post told him, even though he oversees capital projects and maintenance." (Emphasis mine)
And even curiouser that the person (now fired) who pulled the trigger on the heater's installation denies that there were ever plans to put heaters into the other two pools that the Parks and Recreation spokesman quoted in the article insists are next in line for this "pilot project":
"[Clark E.] Ray said he and his staff never discussed a pilot program to put heaters at the other two pools. Banneker and Anacostia are neighborhood pools and probably would not get the kind of traffic that East Potomac would, he said."
And it's curiouser still that the city hasn't publicized this "pilot project" at all, seemingly ensuring its failure as a revenue generator and recognized benefit for all District residents. We don't want a horde of peasant swimmers getting in the Mayor's way, and so forth.
Additionally, one regular swimmer interviewed for the article insists that the whole setup is quite unnecessary in any event, since the pool lacks shade and is usually quite warm by the time it opens at 1:00 p.m. (12 noon on weekends).
It would be very interesting to find out exactly what time Mayor Fenty generally takes his swims. In the early morning, maybe, when he can use the pool exclusively, and a heater would make a little more sense, albeit just for him?
Once again, it appears that hard-earned tax dollars ripped from the pockets of the peasantry are being misused by a big-city government to provide a great perk to one of the bosses, regardless of the dire economic strife that city finds itself in.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
No sympathy for you and your ilk, ma'am
As many as 200 Members of Parliament over in Great Britain are in heap big trouble for using the peasants' money to cover such wacky over-the-top personal expenses as: Paying for, furnishing and maintaining both lavish country estates as well as apartments in London; hiring family members as employees who did no work; keeping "constituent offices" 300 miles away from the district they represent (that one's a real head-scratcher, isn't it?); and, of course, the ol' "I didn't figure my taxes right, so I owe the government some more money" scam that we've seen so much of lately among our own politicians. (Funny how the mistakes are never in the politicians' favor, forcing the treasury to cut them a check.)
Now one of the embattled members, Nadine Dorries, is beseeching the press and public to lay off, claiming that the avalanche of disclosures is creating an "atmosphere of terror", and even intimating that one of her fellow members may soon kill themselves over the embarrassing scandal:
"'People are seriously beginning to crack,' Ms Dorries told the Today programme on BBC Radio 4. 'The last day in Parliament this week was, I would say, completely unbearable'... 'There's a really serious concern that this has got to a point now which is almost unbearable for any human being to deal with.'"
Cram it, ma'am. The finances of members such as yourself being subjected to official scrutiny is part of the job, Ms. Dorries. Either you did nothing wrong, in which case you have nothing to worry about, or you out-and-out stole from the people you represent, in which case you have quite a lot to answer for, both politically and criminally. If the stress of handling such a simple situation is getting to be too much, Ms. Dorries, you are free to quit and go back to being a regular peasant at any time. Of course, the gravy train of perks will come to an abrupt end, but you and your colleagues will no longer have to stress out about Cousin Nigel's no-show position at the local office being uncovered, or how the landscaping and moat cleaning at Snobcroft Manor was paid for (chores for which one recently resigned ex-member, the aptly named Douglas Hogg, actually billed the unwashed). Are those terms a fair exchange? We'll soon find out, as the resignations are currently coming fast and furious.
"Another Labour MP, Ian Gibson, also offered to stand down if the voters demanded it after claims that he had sold his taxpayer-subsidised second home to his daughter at a knock-down rate." (Emphasis mine)
How generous of you, Mr. Gibson, since that would only save them the task of bouncing your elitist butt out of office at the next possible election, since (in case you forgot) you "serve" at their pleasure.
Maybe after a large percentage of these unrepentant thieves are forced out of office in shame, a new and more honest generation of Parliament members will be able to restore some level of sanity to that government.
We can only hope that will be the case, as we truly miss the real ale served over there but refuse to visit until the tax, immigration and crime epidemics of that country are brought under control.
Now one of the embattled members, Nadine Dorries, is beseeching the press and public to lay off, claiming that the avalanche of disclosures is creating an "atmosphere of terror", and even intimating that one of her fellow members may soon kill themselves over the embarrassing scandal:
"'People are seriously beginning to crack,' Ms Dorries told the Today programme on BBC Radio 4. 'The last day in Parliament this week was, I would say, completely unbearable'... 'There's a really serious concern that this has got to a point now which is almost unbearable for any human being to deal with.'"
Cram it, ma'am. The finances of members such as yourself being subjected to official scrutiny is part of the job, Ms. Dorries. Either you did nothing wrong, in which case you have nothing to worry about, or you out-and-out stole from the people you represent, in which case you have quite a lot to answer for, both politically and criminally. If the stress of handling such a simple situation is getting to be too much, Ms. Dorries, you are free to quit and go back to being a regular peasant at any time. Of course, the gravy train of perks will come to an abrupt end, but you and your colleagues will no longer have to stress out about Cousin Nigel's no-show position at the local office being uncovered, or how the landscaping and moat cleaning at Snobcroft Manor was paid for (chores for which one recently resigned ex-member, the aptly named Douglas Hogg, actually billed the unwashed). Are those terms a fair exchange? We'll soon find out, as the resignations are currently coming fast and furious.
"Another Labour MP, Ian Gibson, also offered to stand down if the voters demanded it after claims that he had sold his taxpayer-subsidised second home to his daughter at a knock-down rate." (Emphasis mine)
How generous of you, Mr. Gibson, since that would only save them the task of bouncing your elitist butt out of office at the next possible election, since (in case you forgot) you "serve" at their pleasure.
Maybe after a large percentage of these unrepentant thieves are forced out of office in shame, a new and more honest generation of Parliament members will be able to restore some level of sanity to that government.
We can only hope that will be the case, as we truly miss the real ale served over there but refuse to visit until the tax, immigration and crime epidemics of that country are brought under control.
Friday, May 22, 2009
Another Obama core constituency cut out
This time it's the media, the same profession that had so many of its members shamelessly in the tank for the Messiah during his campaign, that have been discarded as useless to him now that the election is over.
According to ABC News, the White House media pool was barred from covering Obama's meeting and photo-op with the Lady Huskies championship basketball team on April 27, but not to worry: The event was covered by Obama TV (cute and appropriate term coined by Jake Tapper), complete with their own professionally designed logo:
So much for that new-found "transparency", eh?
The pool complained mightily but to no avail, according to Tapper.
Ah, nothing like preventing news reporters from covering a legitimate news event, so that you can exercise complete editorial control over all phases of it, and they're won't be any irksome questions to answer that aren't on the agenda.
Pravda and TASS during the Soviet era would be so proud.
According to ABC News, the White House media pool was barred from covering Obama's meeting and photo-op with the Lady Huskies championship basketball team on April 27, but not to worry: The event was covered by Obama TV (cute and appropriate term coined by Jake Tapper), complete with their own professionally designed logo:
So much for that new-found "transparency", eh?
The pool complained mightily but to no avail, according to Tapper.
Ah, nothing like preventing news reporters from covering a legitimate news event, so that you can exercise complete editorial control over all phases of it, and they're won't be any irksome questions to answer that aren't on the agenda.
Pravda and TASS during the Soviet era would be so proud.
A reply from an official who understands the concept of public service
I received the following letter in the mail today (click to enlarge):
I sincerely appreciate Marshal Gonzales's prompt and professional reply to my complaint, and will patiently await the results of his investigation.
Update: A good friend of mine has convinced me that it's not a good idea to broadcast my home address across the net, so I've removed it.
I sincerely appreciate Marshal Gonzales's prompt and professional reply to my complaint, and will patiently await the results of his investigation.
Update: A good friend of mine has convinced me that it's not a good idea to broadcast my home address across the net, so I've removed it.
A great job thwarting a true threat
In case anyone hasn't heard, the FBI and NYPD (with vital help from an informant) have apparently foiled a plot by 4 homegrown jihadist-wannabe Islamist radicals who were attempting to blow up Jewish buildings and take out military planes in New York State.
We spend a lot of time here bashing these particular agencies when they get things wrong (it still happens far too often for comfort, in our opinion), so it's only fair to point out and give them credit when they do a successful and professional job of getting the real criminals and terrorist extremists off our streets, hopefully for good. This incident is shaping up to be one of those times.
Great job, officers and agents.
We spend a lot of time here bashing these particular agencies when they get things wrong (it still happens far too often for comfort, in our opinion), so it's only fair to point out and give them credit when they do a successful and professional job of getting the real criminals and terrorist extremists off our streets, hopefully for good. This incident is shaping up to be one of those times.
Great job, officers and agents.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Thin skins
It looks like the head muckety-mucks at the NIH are already trying to ascertain the damage to their reputations stemming from the embarrassing disclosure of just what kinds of useless, asinine studies they're funding with taxpayer dollars over there:
Good luck.
Good luck.
But Obama could only find 100 million dollars to cut in his budget?
Among the 29 billion dollars of taxpayer-extorted money that the National Institutes of Health spends every year on important "studies" is the one (costing $178,000, no less) that seeks to determine why drug-abusing hookers in Thailand have a high rate of HIV infection.
We could tell the researchers that one for free.
And the results of this ground-breaking research benefits the United States how?
Here's some more fascinating nuggets of medical knowledge that you're helping to pay for:
"Among those projects are a $400,000 study being conducted in bars in Buenos Aires to find out why gay men engage in risky sexual behavior while drunk, and a $2.6 million study dedicated to teaching prostitutes in China to drink less while having sex on the job."
We're currently writing a grant proposal to observe the sexual partner choices of transgendered Finnish dockworkers on Saturdays in July. We hope to score a cool million for that one.
Can't you just wait until the NIH is put in charge of all health care in this country? Just think of the savings!
Oh, by the way, the lead scientist is awfully proud of their chosen topic, and can't wait to discuss its vital importance publicly. Not:
"Attempts to reach the study's director by phone and e-mail were unsuccessful, and the NIH did not respond to requests for comment."
Good to know that at least someone else has been stonewalled by government employees lately.
We could tell the researchers that one for free.
And the results of this ground-breaking research benefits the United States how?
Here's some more fascinating nuggets of medical knowledge that you're helping to pay for:
"Among those projects are a $400,000 study being conducted in bars in Buenos Aires to find out why gay men engage in risky sexual behavior while drunk, and a $2.6 million study dedicated to teaching prostitutes in China to drink less while having sex on the job."
We're currently writing a grant proposal to observe the sexual partner choices of transgendered Finnish dockworkers on Saturdays in July. We hope to score a cool million for that one.
Can't you just wait until the NIH is put in charge of all health care in this country? Just think of the savings!
Oh, by the way, the lead scientist is awfully proud of their chosen topic, and can't wait to discuss its vital importance publicly. Not:
"Attempts to reach the study's director by phone and e-mail were unsuccessful, and the NIH did not respond to requests for comment."
Good to know that at least someone else has been stonewalled by government employees lately.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Extreme (but hilarious) doofusery
You simply MUST read this thread on a sport-bike forum (particularly the first three pages), pointed to at GlockTalk.
We haven't laughed that hard in years.
We haven't laughed that hard in years.
Reality bites
"White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said closing the detention center at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, was a 'hasty decision,' in his daily press briefing with reporters."
Oops.
We tend not to believe that spin, since closing the center was a central theme of Obama's long Presidential campaign, and was an act he promoted the merits of ad nauseaum at every opportunity.
How many of the Messiah's other imperialistic, unilateral impositions on large swaths of American society, defense and the economy, coming from a person who has zero executive, business or foreign policy experience, are going to be proven as disastrous?
We predict a large amount, unfortunately.
Oops.
We tend not to believe that spin, since closing the center was a central theme of Obama's long Presidential campaign, and was an act he promoted the merits of ad nauseaum at every opportunity.
How many of the Messiah's other imperialistic, unilateral impositions on large swaths of American society, defense and the economy, coming from a person who has zero executive, business or foreign policy experience, are going to be proven as disastrous?
We predict a large amount, unfortunately.
Ho-hum
Another day, another unreturned phone message left with the elusive and seemingly thoroughly unprofessional Deputy Marshal Jennifer Harkins. We would even doubt her very existence, save for an acquaintance who used to work at the Florence, Arizona prison assuring us that she is indeed an actual person.
There is some good news to report, however. One of the letters we sent to Marshal Gonzales and U.S. Attorney Diane Humetewa seems to have piqued the interest of someone in charge of the courts system, as they took the time to view our humble quest for assurance that law-abiding citizens can remain unmolested should they wish to take pictures of a public building from a public sidewalk:
Hopefully they will respond to our inquiry in a courteous and timely manner, unlike the treatment we've received from Deputy Harkins.
There is some good news to report, however. One of the letters we sent to Marshal Gonzales and U.S. Attorney Diane Humetewa seems to have piqued the interest of someone in charge of the courts system, as they took the time to view our humble quest for assurance that law-abiding citizens can remain unmolested should they wish to take pictures of a public building from a public sidewalk:
Hopefully they will respond to our inquiry in a courteous and timely manner, unlike the treatment we've received from Deputy Harkins.
Worth watching
The Messiah's proposed budget cuts in relation to his multi-trillion dollar overall budget, simplified elegantly:
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Farther down the Trail of Broken Promises
Another of the Messiah's critical voting blocs (gays, this time) are finally realizing that they, too, have outlived their usefulness to him, now that the Prize has been reached.
They have a valid point, despite our not really having a dog in this fight, save for a desire for everyone to have equal rights in this country (which includes not giving people special status over others through bogus "hate crimes" laws, by the way). Even a small gesture to gays and lesbians from Obama, such as immediately changing the "Don't ask, don't tell" military policy, which he could unilaterally do at a moment's notice with little or no political cost (and which he vowed would be one of his first acts once in office), would go a long way towards mollifying their constituency.
Yet the gay community continues to get bupkis, despite their tireless campaigning for him last fall.
We foresee a lot of people scraping off their "Change We Can Believe In" stickers from next to their rainbow flag ones on their Priuses in the near future.
They have a valid point, despite our not really having a dog in this fight, save for a desire for everyone to have equal rights in this country (which includes not giving people special status over others through bogus "hate crimes" laws, by the way). Even a small gesture to gays and lesbians from Obama, such as immediately changing the "Don't ask, don't tell" military policy, which he could unilaterally do at a moment's notice with little or no political cost (and which he vowed would be one of his first acts once in office), would go a long way towards mollifying their constituency.
Yet the gay community continues to get bupkis, despite their tireless campaigning for him last fall.
We foresee a lot of people scraping off their "Change We Can Believe In" stickers from next to their rainbow flag ones on their Priuses in the near future.
Stay inside, D.C. residents, it's playtime for the "professionals"
The Washington Times editorializes about the drunken mayhem that generally ensues when armed off-duty lawmen annually come to the capital to celebrate National Police Week, then rightly wonders why the many cops who decide to misbehave (to put it kindly) during their visit to D.C. never seem to be held accountable for their crimes, unlike the wrath that would descend upon a regular citizen who got popped for doing the same stupid stunts that the visiting cops pull:
"The dangerous activity is not limited to automobiles. Drinking while carrying sidearms is an annual part of the celebrations. A few years back, one inebriated officer tripped out of a bar in Chinatown and unloaded his pistol on the bell tower of nearby St. Mary, Mother of God Catholic Church.
At Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium two years ago, four officers from Signal Hill, Calif., made a public spectacle of themselves at a Nationals-Braves baseball game. With little regard for safety and even less concern for their appearance, these law enforcement officers were chugging down beers while in full uniform with their pistols on their hips and spare bullet clips on their utility belts."
Those officers weren't even questioned, much less arrested and charged. In fact, this was a perfect example of the "blue wall of silence" coming into play:
"At least two concerned citizens called the Signal Hill Police headquarters, were assured that the incident was being looked into, and then received no follow-up despite attempts to discover if any disciplinary action had been taken."
And we're constantly being told that these are the only people "professional" enough to carry firearms in public. The rest of the peasantry would probably only do something incredibly stupid should they be "allowed" the same "privilege" in the District, and proceed to get wasted out of their minds and act the fool while carrying their deadly weapon.
"The dangerous activity is not limited to automobiles. Drinking while carrying sidearms is an annual part of the celebrations. A few years back, one inebriated officer tripped out of a bar in Chinatown and unloaded his pistol on the bell tower of nearby St. Mary, Mother of God Catholic Church.
At Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium two years ago, four officers from Signal Hill, Calif., made a public spectacle of themselves at a Nationals-Braves baseball game. With little regard for safety and even less concern for their appearance, these law enforcement officers were chugging down beers while in full uniform with their pistols on their hips and spare bullet clips on their utility belts."
Those officers weren't even questioned, much less arrested and charged. In fact, this was a perfect example of the "blue wall of silence" coming into play:
"At least two concerned citizens called the Signal Hill Police headquarters, were assured that the incident was being looked into, and then received no follow-up despite attempts to discover if any disciplinary action had been taken."
And we're constantly being told that these are the only people "professional" enough to carry firearms in public. The rest of the peasantry would probably only do something incredibly stupid should they be "allowed" the same "privilege" in the District, and proceed to get wasted out of their minds and act the fool while carrying their deadly weapon.
Monday, May 18, 2009
Why I carry a handgun for protection, Vol. 15
Because law-enforcement resources across the country are being significantly reduced due to unprecedented budget-cutting measures, according to USA Today:
"'For the first time, because of the economy, police departments ... may have to change how they do business,' says Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum, a law enforcement think tank. 'People will see a change in the basic delivery of services,' from longer police response times to a dramatically reduced police presence in some communities." (Emphasis mine)
Put more directly, this translates as: The chances are greater than ever if you call 911 for help that no one will be available to respond, or that response will be a long time in coming.
You would be well served to be prepared to defend you and your loved ones from society's underbelly yourself.
"'For the first time, because of the economy, police departments ... may have to change how they do business,' says Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum, a law enforcement think tank. 'People will see a change in the basic delivery of services,' from longer police response times to a dramatically reduced police presence in some communities." (Emphasis mine)
Put more directly, this translates as: The chances are greater than ever if you call 911 for help that no one will be available to respond, or that response will be a long time in coming.
You would be well served to be prepared to defend you and your loved ones from society's underbelly yourself.
Sunday, May 17, 2009
A police department forced to point out the obvious to its members
Via BoingBoing, we learn that the NYPD in April issued a memo to its officers that should once and for all clarify the fact that the photography of public structures, places and employees, absent any articulable criminal suspicion or interference with the performance of public duties, is entirely legal:
(Image from Craphound)
This should cut down significantly on the instances of unwarranted harassment of law-abiding citizens simply going about their business and enjoying their hobbies, at least in New York City.
We're still waiting for the Federal memo to be sent out.
(Image from Craphound)This should cut down significantly on the instances of unwarranted harassment of law-abiding citizens simply going about their business and enjoying their hobbies, at least in New York City.
We're still waiting for the Federal memo to be sent out.
Promises, promises
The Messiah's been breaking them by the handful lately:
1. He's abruptly decided to attempt to block the release of photos documenting the treatment of detainees, despite campaigning on platitudes like "openness" and transparency":
"Obama’s reversal is sure to set off an outcry on the left, which has pushed the Obama administration to come clean about terror policies and other actions carried out by the Bush administration.
Obama endorsed such openness during the campaign" (Emphasis mine)
Poor saps. The lefties haven't yet realized how badly they were used, then discarded once January 20 rolled around.
2. His other campaign promise regarding detainess, to shutter Guantanamo, is also running into a bit of difficulty, since there happen to be a bunch of genuine bad guys being held down there, and he has no earthly idea of where to put them:
"The administration's internal deliberations on how to deal with Guantanamo detainees are continuing, as the White House wrestles with how to fulfill the president's promise to shutter the controversial prison."
Just moving the prisoners to another place, while still not giving them things you complained mightily that your predecessor didn't give them (such as, oh, trials) doesn't count as "change", sir.
3. Here's an ironic headline:
"Obama Says U.S. Long-Term Debt Load ‘Unsustainable"
Ironic because Obama himself is the one piling up multi-trillion dollar budgets that can't possibly be paid for by anything except the play money that the Treasury is printing by the ton, and by riskily borrowing more and more from foreign countries to pay the daily bills, a policy that he condemned in this very same speech:
"'We can’t keep on just borrowing from China," Obama said at a town-hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque."
Where's the money going to come from, then? The millions of taxpayers you promised weren't going to see one cent of new taxes, that's who. Wait until the chumps find out what a load of crap that was.
Let's jack up the national debt to Brobdingnagian proportions, then whine about the unsustainability of it all? What kind of sane economic policy is that?
"Two weeks ago, the president proposed $17 billion in budget cuts, with plans to eliminate or reduce 121 federal programs. Republicans ridiculed the amount, saying that it represented one-half of 1 percent of the entire budget. They noted that Obama is seeking an $81 billion increase in other spending." (Emphasis mine)
Cutting a dollar in one are while simultaneously spending a million of them somewhere else isn't going to get the job done, you know. How is doing things such as that possibly going to fulfill your campaign promise to "Rebuild our economy on a new, sustainable foundation"?
Liberals, meet the new boss. Same as the old boss, unfortunately.
1. He's abruptly decided to attempt to block the release of photos documenting the treatment of detainees, despite campaigning on platitudes like "openness" and transparency":
"Obama’s reversal is sure to set off an outcry on the left, which has pushed the Obama administration to come clean about terror policies and other actions carried out by the Bush administration.
Obama endorsed such openness during the campaign" (Emphasis mine)
Poor saps. The lefties haven't yet realized how badly they were used, then discarded once January 20 rolled around.
2. His other campaign promise regarding detainess, to shutter Guantanamo, is also running into a bit of difficulty, since there happen to be a bunch of genuine bad guys being held down there, and he has no earthly idea of where to put them:
"The administration's internal deliberations on how to deal with Guantanamo detainees are continuing, as the White House wrestles with how to fulfill the president's promise to shutter the controversial prison."
Just moving the prisoners to another place, while still not giving them things you complained mightily that your predecessor didn't give them (such as, oh, trials) doesn't count as "change", sir.
3. Here's an ironic headline:
"Obama Says U.S. Long-Term Debt Load ‘Unsustainable"
Ironic because Obama himself is the one piling up multi-trillion dollar budgets that can't possibly be paid for by anything except the play money that the Treasury is printing by the ton, and by riskily borrowing more and more from foreign countries to pay the daily bills, a policy that he condemned in this very same speech:
"'We can’t keep on just borrowing from China," Obama said at a town-hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque."
Where's the money going to come from, then? The millions of taxpayers you promised weren't going to see one cent of new taxes, that's who. Wait until the chumps find out what a load of crap that was.
Let's jack up the national debt to Brobdingnagian proportions, then whine about the unsustainability of it all? What kind of sane economic policy is that?
"Two weeks ago, the president proposed $17 billion in budget cuts, with plans to eliminate or reduce 121 federal programs. Republicans ridiculed the amount, saying that it represented one-half of 1 percent of the entire budget. They noted that Obama is seeking an $81 billion increase in other spending." (Emphasis mine)
Cutting a dollar in one are while simultaneously spending a million of them somewhere else isn't going to get the job done, you know. How is doing things such as that possibly going to fulfill your campaign promise to "Rebuild our economy on a new, sustainable foundation"?
Liberals, meet the new boss. Same as the old boss, unfortunately.
That train's long since left the station
Some members of the Twin City Metro area's Gang Strike Force have filed a lawsuit against their bosses, as well as the Department of Public Safety, because the Minneapolis Star-Tribune newspaper named them publicly in an April story about a seemingly overly large number of them attending a conference about Asian gangs. In Hawaii. On the public dime.
Ordinarily, we'd be very supportive of the officers as well as their lawsuit, since undercover gang work is quite dangerous yet is necessary for stopping that particular urban scourge, and officers performing such duties as well as their families shouldn't be unnecessarily exposed to possible retaliation from the kind thugs they deal with daily.
It's hard to be very sympathetic with these particular cops, however, since they've already done a bang-up job of outing themselves:
"One officer's gang Strike Force affiliation is listed on the social networking site classmates.com. Another is cited as a Strike Force member who donated to a social service agency.
A third was mentioned online as the recipient of a medal for undercover police work. A fourth is on the public roster of his police department."
If you go so far as to brag about your job on a social network, you probably don't have much of a case for complaining about someone else discussing your employment status publicly as well.
Ordinarily, we'd be very supportive of the officers as well as their lawsuit, since undercover gang work is quite dangerous yet is necessary for stopping that particular urban scourge, and officers performing such duties as well as their families shouldn't be unnecessarily exposed to possible retaliation from the kind thugs they deal with daily.
It's hard to be very sympathetic with these particular cops, however, since they've already done a bang-up job of outing themselves:
"One officer's gang Strike Force affiliation is listed on the social networking site classmates.com. Another is cited as a Strike Force member who donated to a social service agency.
A third was mentioned online as the recipient of a medal for undercover police work. A fourth is on the public roster of his police department."
If you go so far as to brag about your job on a social network, you probably don't have much of a case for complaining about someone else discussing your employment status publicly as well.
So much for religious and medical freedoms
A rural judge in Minnesota has ruled that a 13-year-old boy diagnosed with Hodgkin's lymphoma may be forcibly treated with chemotherapy, despite he and his parents wishing to use only alternative therapies, citing their sincerely held religious beliefs.
Our view? That family is crazy not to utilize the standard treatment protocol, which is very effective with only a minimal chance of severe side effects or mortality. That's not our call, however, and neither is it the call of the judge in this case, who is squashing this family's rights both to follow their own religion's dogma as well as to choose the type of health care they wish their child to receive. This isn't some 6-month-old baby we're talking about here. It's an almost high-school-age boy who has stated himself that he will physically resist the chemotherapy that's being crammed into him, should it come to that.
While listening to this topic being discussed on talk radio, the host made one point that really resonated with us:
If the kid and his parents insist on using alternative healing methods and the boy dies, the mother and father will probably be charged with child abuse and neglect.
But, if the judge and/or CPS orders the kid to be treated with chemotherapy, and the child dies as a direct result (a small but very real chance), shouldn't they be just as liable for that bad outcome as well?
"[Brown County Judge John] Rodenberg said the state's interest in protecting the child override the constitutional right to freedom of religious expression and a parent's right to direct a child's upbringing."
Parents seemingly no longer have any rights, according to this judge, if they somehow conflict with his interpretation of the legality of the Nanny State's ever-more intrusive ways of "protecting" children. How long until a buffoon such as this rules that the Second Amendment has no place in a home that contains children, for the very same reason?
Our view? That family is crazy not to utilize the standard treatment protocol, which is very effective with only a minimal chance of severe side effects or mortality. That's not our call, however, and neither is it the call of the judge in this case, who is squashing this family's rights both to follow their own religion's dogma as well as to choose the type of health care they wish their child to receive. This isn't some 6-month-old baby we're talking about here. It's an almost high-school-age boy who has stated himself that he will physically resist the chemotherapy that's being crammed into him, should it come to that.
While listening to this topic being discussed on talk radio, the host made one point that really resonated with us:
If the kid and his parents insist on using alternative healing methods and the boy dies, the mother and father will probably be charged with child abuse and neglect.
But, if the judge and/or CPS orders the kid to be treated with chemotherapy, and the child dies as a direct result (a small but very real chance), shouldn't they be just as liable for that bad outcome as well?
"[Brown County Judge John] Rodenberg said the state's interest in protecting the child override the constitutional right to freedom of religious expression and a parent's right to direct a child's upbringing."
Parents seemingly no longer have any rights, according to this judge, if they somehow conflict with his interpretation of the legality of the Nanny State's ever-more intrusive ways of "protecting" children. How long until a buffoon such as this rules that the Second Amendment has no place in a home that contains children, for the very same reason?
Friday, May 15, 2009
Playing host
On my way to pick up some family that's coming to visit this weekend, so blogging will probably be very light for a couple of days. No promises until Monday, May 18.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
They got an education, all right
Two people with active deportation orders decided to go on a White House tour today as part of an adult education group, apparently not realizing that the Secret Service runs standard background checks on all tourists who go on such tours.
The pair are now in custody, and probably have started their long-delayed journey back to where they properly and legally belong.
Have a nice trip home.
The pair are now in custody, and probably have started their long-delayed journey back to where they properly and legally belong.
Have a nice trip home.
Mail away
I am on my way out to post two letters by certified mail, one to U.S. Marshal David Gonzales:
Marshal Gonzales:
Marshal Gonzales:
My name is Douglas Hester, and I am a resident of Scottsdale, Arizona. On Monday, April 6, 2009 I was unlawfully detained and threatened with arrest by security personnel at the O’Connor Federal Building while engaged in lawful activities on a public sidewalk adjacent to the structure.
I filed a formal complaint with L/CSO Juan Prieve on Thursday, April 9, requesting that Officer Prieve review the circumstances of my harassment, and to apply any corrective measures/retraining that he felt was warranted.
On Thursday, May 7, I contacted Officer Prieve by telephone to obtain a status report on my complaint. He informed me that the matter was no longer under his purview and that I would have to contact Deputy Marshal Jennifer Harkins in order to obtain updated information regarding my complaint.
I have left several telephone messages for Deputy Harkins from Friday, May 8 through Wednesday, May 13 without them being returned, despite being told by Officer Prieve as well as the woman who answers the general phone number at the Marshal’s office that Ms. Harkins is indeed in the office and working. This is unacceptable rudeness from a public service employee and shows a lack of professionalism on the part of Deputy Harkins, in my opinion.
I am writing to respectfully ask that you direct Deputy Harkins to return my calls, as well as provide me with a formal update on the status of my complaint.
Thank you very much for your assistance in this matter.
and one to U.S. Attorney Diane J. Humetewa:
Dear Ms. Humetewa:My name is Douglas Hester, and I am a resident of Scottsdale, Arizona. On Monday, April 6, 2009 I was unlawfully detained and threatened with arrest by court security personnel at the O’Connor Federal Building while engaged in lawful activities on a public sidewalk adjacent to the structure, specifically taking photographs and videos of the building and surroundings. More information as well as video of the incident can be found here:
http://northernmuckraker.blogspot.com/2009/04/rousted-by-federal-court-security.html
I filed a formal complaint about my treatment that day with L/CSO Juan Prieve, the head of security at the O’Connor Federal Building, on Thursday, April 9, but have yet to receive any information regarding the completion or outcome of any investigation related to what happened to me, despite numerous recent attempts to follow up with Deputy Marshal Jennifer Harkins by telephone. Please find attached my letter to U.S. Marshal David Gonzales which attempts to generate some action from his employees on that subject.
I would very much appreciate it if you or your designee would communicate to the Marshals Service as well as to Federal court security personnel at the O’Connor Federal Building that photography of a public building from a public sidewalk is perfectly legal, and that attempts to wrongly deter or intimidate law-abiding people from doing so may expose them to criminal and/or civil liability.
Thank you very much for any assistance that you can provide in this matter.
It's shameful that I actually have to take this step, but welcome to today's helpful Federal government, which employs professional public "servants" such as Deputy Marshal Jennifer Harkins.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
