Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Hero cops cleared in taser incident


The heroic cops who used a taser weapon on student Andrew Meyer, a noted attention-seeker and fervent believer in conspiracy theories, have been cleared of any wrongdoing. They used the weapon only after giving Meyer (a healthy young man) a clear warning, and only after he had violently resisted six policemen for a lengthy period of time.

In recent weeks, we have seen two major incidents in which fanatics, fueled by their belief in conspiracy theories, have caused major disruptions at events featuring famous liberals. Many progressives have foolishly supported the conspiracists. Convinced that they are right and that everyone else is wrong, the zealots believe that the ends justify the means.

Let me repeat: The conspiracists focused on liberals John Kerry and Bill Maher. I predict that further incidents will occur, and that the targets will always be liberals. I have been familiar with the "conspiracy buff" mentality for decades, and I know that those who dwell within that subculture never have and never will direct this sort of action against anyone on the right.

The most foolish voices within the progressive blogosphere have likened the reaction of the University of Florida police to the behavior of the Nazis. In fact, the comparison goes the other way. As the Nazis rose to power, they often disrupted liberal public speakers.

Both Andy Meyer and the 9/11 CD-ers who attacked Bill Maher are convinced that a "higher truth" gives them right to ignore the rules of civilized behavior. When zealots fired by conspiracy theories go on the rampage against liberals, we are seeing a replay of Munich, 1925.

(Incidentally, this is hardly the first time Nazi-like fanatics have fooled the naive by waving a "progressive" false flag. You probably don't know who Gottfried Feder and Gregor Strasser were, and you may not know what the term "third position" means in Europe. Look 'em up.)

To repeat something I said in an exchange with Brad Friedman (in the comments section of a post below): Yes, the fanatics who attacked Maher and Kerry are different from brownshirted bullyboys who broke chairs at socialist meetings in the 1920s. But the difference is a matter of degree, not of kind.

Soon, I predict, you'll see the gap narrow. As it does, you'll see that I was right to warn of the danger.

And before you say it: Yes, I know about Code Pink's disruption of Condi Rice's testimony on Capitol Hill. Code Pink is an anti-war group, not an organization of conspiracy buffs. That distinction explains why they targeted a right-winger, not a left-winger. At least they understand who the enemy is; to that extent, I can applaud them. But I do not applaud their tactics, which were otiose and foolish; they've simply given the radio rightists a propaganda point.

32 comments:

Anonymous said...

I can applaud them. But I do not applaud their tactics, which were otiose and foolish; they've simply given the radio rightists a propaganda point.

Do you seriously believe the Right wing is going to even allow much less respond to reasoned debate? And as for giving them "propaganda points" -- hey, they'll do that anyway. So what effective methods are available to people who want to take on this administration? Go out and convince the general public? They already are convinced. That's why they voted Dem at the last elections and look what it got them: an increased war in Iraq, increased police state methods. So what do you think works?

And as for brownshirts and Nazis, it doesn't come any clearer than Florida 2000.

BradF said...

What exactly is the "conspiracy" that you are claiming Myer is "buffing"?

Do you disagree with the questions he asked of Kerry concerning rolling over after the '04 election in Ohio despite previous promises to do the opposite???

Joseph Cannon said...

"So what effective methods are available to people who want to take on this administration?"

What Al Gore recommends: The use of reason.

Humor and art are also good weapons.

"That's why they voted Dem at the last elections and look what it got them: an increased war in Iraq, increased police state methods."

Anti-Dem propagandists like you don't understand how the veto works, or how the filibuster works. You also forget recent history. If a bill backed by virtually all congressional Dems (except for you-know-who) had passed, the troop pull-out would have begun on October 1.

Look it up. 51-46 in the senate:

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/usa/news/article_1297025.php/Senate_clears_Iraq_pullout_Bush_set_to_veto__Roundup_

That one went right down your memory hole, didn't it?

I think I know why jerks like you pretend that this vote never occurred. I can't prove it, but I believe that the Republicans are paying for a campaign to foment dissension among "progressives."

Oh -- and if you think that the "pull-out by Oct 1" attempt was insufficiently "pure," look at these polls:

http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm

Only a minority of Americans believe that our troops should stay in Iraq less than another year. It's a strong minority (45%), but still a minority. 62% think that the war is going only "somewhat badly" or "somewhat well." A mere 33% think that the war is going very badly.

I am, of course, among the 33%, and I think we should pull out of this ghastly mess right now. But unlike you, I do not fool myself into thinking that the majority of my fellow Americans share my views. They don't. Get out of the progressive ghetto and take a wider view.

Given these poll numbers, the attempt to begin a pullout on October 1 was remarkable -- and frankly radical. Such a move was NOT popular.

It pisses me off that the Dems do not get points for attempting to do that which was politically difficult, if not impossible. The Dems showed great courage, and progressive purists like you pretend it never happened.

Anonymous said...

Is this the most important story out there?

What about the domestic terrorism bill that just passed in the House? Scary.

What about Homeland Security's plan to have all Americans obtain the government's approval before they can get on a plane? Scarier. Much, much scarier.

Anonymous said...

That is total bull-oney. In August Heraldo Rivera was in Times Square and 911 truthers were en masse in front of his cameras asking for air time. The CIA's own former agents were front and center in a republican audience demanding more information about Iraq and 911. This same group has asked Mayor Rudy about various 911 "facts."

Your article is based on a patently false premise. Do your homework.

Anonymous said...

BS
What about the wearechange group that got Ghouliani about wtc7. They also went after many PNAC members. I've lost a lot of respect for this blog. Wakeup and listen to Dr. David Ray Griffin sometime. Do your homework and don't be lazy. You do some good work, CIA/cocaine, but you are also clueless.

Anonymous said...

I guess you didn't see this clip. You hypothesis is invalid!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MBzLTjVMhY

e Are Change New York City confronted Neocon Norman Podhoretz back on October 11th, 2007 at a Barnes and Noble in Manhattan! Listen to the sheer arrogance, disrespect, and pure evil being spewed from his mouth! Ask Questions! Demand Answers! Never back down!!

Joseph Cannon said...

So Brad, shall we retreat to the argument that conspiracy-crazed fanatics are justified in acting fanatically if one can argue that their conspiracy theories may have some measure of validity? I stand with the JFK assassination researchers, but if any of THOSE guys ever "pulled an Andy," I'd be infuriated.

I trust my credentials are in order when it comes to my outrage at what happened in November of 2004. As you know, I cried fraud the very next morning and stayed on it every damn day until Congress officially ratified the vote.

But you've never seen me criticize John Kerry, our finest senator, on this issue. I agree with the views generally given here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1880599#1881671
(Scroll up to top of page.)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=273x139130

And you forget that John Kerry DID answer Andy's swiftboating charges at the event in question.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/9/18/125041/427

The real story of the U of F appearance is that Kerry said things like: "The so-called war on terror is a public relations agenda." If I were just a little more paranoid, I'd say that Andy "Swiftboat" Meyer was PAID to deflect attention from these messages and to make Kerry look bad.

That theory nicely explains why "Swiftboat" Andy told people beforehand to make sure they filmed his antics, eh wot?

Joseph Cannon said...

You tranny assholes have already gotten your answers. You refuse to listen to them.

WATCH SCREW LOOSE CHANGE.

WATCH SCREW 911 MYSTERIES.

Read the "Implosion World" report.

Read the various blogs devoted to giving the pro-science side. (I link to some of them.)

Trannies have NO argument. They have been caught in lie after lie after motherfucking LIE. The leaders of the tranny movement are not merely naive, not merely wrong: They are DELIBERATE LIARS.

As for Dr. Griffen: I place him in the same category with the "experts" who try to convince us that evolution is a myth. Such people will always find a clever rationale on which to hang an argument.

I will have to concede some territory, but only a small amount, on the Podhoretz confrontation.

But:

As one commenter on that YouTube video wisely puts it,

"The movement you have just witnessed is actually spearheaded by the right. Get your facts straight."

The movement being, of course, the tranny movement. And I am glad to see a proper characterization at last: It is NOT a progressive movement; it is a right-wing movement.

Specifically: It is a movement which includes a great many right-wingers who accept anti-Jewish conspiracy theories.

Hence, if ever they do attack a right-winger, it'll be a Jewish right-winger. But if you look at the pro-tranny boards, they reserve their hottest hatred for Bill Maher.

That said: The tranny who attacks Podheretz in the video does not do anything illegal.

I consider Podheretz utterly despicable myself (although not because he is Jewish), and I agree 100% with that one lady who verbally attacked him. She was not a tranny or a conspiracy crank; she was someone with what I consider a sound view of politics and history.

I think she did not cross the line of acceptable behavior, although she came close. Which is to say, she became upset but did not resist the cop who quietly led her away.

Poddy is indeed a vile old fart. But nothing would have justified lashing out at a cop or guard who is simply trying to keep order in a public place. I'm glad the lady in question recovered her cool in time.

Anonymous said...

Bush Executive Order:
Criminalizing the Antiwar Movement
by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky


VIDEO: Shows policemen dressed up as masked demonstrators and charged by the government to start a riot in order to give the police an excuse to stop the demonstration and arrest the demonstrators; this particular demonstration occurred in Canada, but the same tactics are being used in the United States.

* Must have Real Player to watch video.

The Executive Order entitled "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq" provides the President with the authority to confiscate the assets of whoever opposes the US led war.

A presidential Executive Order issued on July 17th, repeals with the stroke of a pen the right to dissent and to oppose the Pentagon's military agenda in Iraq.

The Executive Order entitled "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq" provides the President with the authority to confiscate the assets of "certain persons" who oppose the US led war in Iraq:

"I have issued an Executive Order blocking property of persons determined to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence that have the purpose or effect of threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq or undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people."

In substance, under this executive order, opposing the war becomes an illegal act.

The Executive Order criminalizes the antiwar movement. It is intended to "blocking property" of US citizens and organizations actively involved in the peace movement. It allows the Department of Defense to interfere in financial affairs and instruct the Treasury to "block the property" and/or confiscate/ freeze the assets of "Certain Persons" involved in antiwar activities. It targets those "Certain Persons" in America, including civil society organizations, who oppose the Bush Administration's "peace and stability" program in Iraq, characterized, in plain English, by an illegal occupation and the continued killing of innocent civilians.

The Executive Order also targets those "Certain Persons" who are "undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction", or who, again in plain English, are opposed to the confiscation and privatization of Iraq's oil resources, on behalf of the Anglo-American oil giants.

The order is also intended for anybody who opposes Bush's program of "political reform in Iraq", in other words, who questions the legitimacy of an Iraqi "government" installed by the occupation forces.

Moreover, those persons or nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), who provide bona fide humanitarian aid to Iraqi civilians, and who are not approved by the US Military or its lackeys in the US sponsored Iraqi puppet government are also liable to have their financial assets confiscated.

The executive order violates the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the US Constitution. It repeals one of the fundamental tenets of US democracy, which is the right to free expression and dissent. The order has not been the object of discussion in the US Congress. So far, it has not been addressed by the US antiwar movement, in terms of a formal statement.

Apart from a bland Associated Press wire report, which presents the executive order as "an authority to use financial sanctions", there has been no media coverage or commentary of a presidential decision which strikes at the heart of the US Constitution.
Broader implications

The criminalization of the State is when the sitting President and Vice President use and abuse their authority through executive orders, presidential directives or otherwise to define "who are the criminals" when in fact they are the criminals.

This latest executive order criminalizes the peace movement. It must be viewed in relation to various pieces of "anti-terrorist" legislation, the gamut of presidential and national security directives, etc., which are ultimately geared towards repealing constitutional government and installing martial law in the event of a "national emergency".

The war criminals in high office are intent upon repressing all forms of dissent which question the legitimacy of the war in Iraq.

The executive order combined with the existing anti-terrorist legislation is eventually intended to be used against the anti-war and civil rights movements. It can be used to seize the assets of antiwar groups in America as well as block the property and activities of non-governmental humanitarian organizations providing relief in Iraq, seizing the assets of alternative media involved in reporting the truth regarding the US-led war, etc.

In May 2007, Bush issued a major presidential National Security Directive (National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive NSPD 51/HSPD 20), which would suspend constitutional government and instate broad dictatorial powers under martial law in the case of a "Catastrophic Emergency" (e.g. Second 9/11 terrorist attack).

On July 11, 2007 the CIA published its "National Intelligence Estimate" which pointed to an imminent Al Qaeda attack on America, a second 9/11 which, according to the terms of NSPD 51, would immediately be followed by the suspension of constitutional government and the instatement of martial law under the authority of the president and the vice-president.

NSPD 51 grants unprecedented powers to the Presidency and the Department of Homeland Security, overriding the foundations of Constitutional government. It allows the sitting president to declare a “national emergency” without Congressional approval. The implementation of NSPD 51 would lead to the de facto closing down of the Legislature and the militarization of justice and law enforcement.

"The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government...."

Were NSPD 51 to be invoked, Vice President Dick Cheney, who constitutes the real power behind the Executive, would essentially assume de facto dictatorial powers, circumventing both the US Congress and the Judiciary, while continuing to use President George W. Bush as a proxy figurehead.

NSPD 51, while bypassing the Constitution, nonetheless, envisages very precise procedures which guarantee the powers of Vice President Dick Cheney in relation to "Continuity of Government" functions under Martial Law:

"This directive shall be implemented in a manner that is consistent with, and facilitates effective implementation of, provisions of the Constitution concerning succession to the Presidency or the exercise of its powers, and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 U.S.C. 19), with consultation of the Vice President and, as appropriate, others involved. Heads of executive departments and agencies shall ensure that appropriate support is available to the Vice President and others involved as necessary to be prepared at all times to implement those provisions."

The executive order to confiscate the assets of antiwar/peace activists is broadly consistent with NSPD 51. It could be triggered even in the absence of a "Catastrophic emergency" as envisaged under NSPD 51. It repeals democracy. It goes one step further in "criminalizing" all forms of opposition and dissent. to the US led war and "Homeland Security" agenda.

Reasonable resistance is no longer an option..

Anonymous said...

Curious..do you consider Martin Luther King jr's behavior in Atlanta and elsewhere, his form of protest, unreasonable? Would you have congratulated and supported his stance?
Civil disobedience is part of our evolution as a fledgling democracy and the moment we jettison it as a way of resisting unconstitutional authority, no matter who it is, President, Pope, Priest Mayor, or Maher, we are denigrating and disregarding the very foundation of our system and we will suffer the consequences for it.
We should support any and all forms of Non-violent protest and civil disobedience, especially considering the scale of the violence that is being perpetrated in our name.
The amount of blood that has been shed in Iraq has reached the hundreds of gallons, not unlike the barrels of oil that it represents, and you shit your pants because someone shouts in a room and protests with everything he has, body mind and spirit.
Move On Cannon or shrivel up and blow away.

Anonymous said...

We have to shout to make our voices heard and force others to listen to us and if we go over the line as you call it it is because the news is totally controlled and manipulated. David Ray Griffin is a true American patriot and John Kerry is a phony who is in Skull and Bones in bed with Bush, they are both two wings of the same fascist bird.

Check it out:

Latest OBL tape: newsroom computer system sound in background?

9/11 blogger
Wednesday October 24, 2007

Thanks to another post at http://www.911blogger.com/node/12132, I downloaded the latest recording of bin Laden from Al Jazeera's web site at the following address:

http://www.aljazeera.net/Channel/KServices/...

It is a 6 minute, 18 second Windows Media File, with no introduction, featuring someone who sounds like they might be (or might have been) Osama, speaking in Arabic, with a clear edit about half way through, with the two segments likely recorded at different times.

Most interesting is this: at 26 seconds into the audio file (presumably recorded on a tiny cassette recorder in some distant hut in the mountains of Pakistan), the distinct sound of two high pitched double pulses can be heard behind bin Laden's voice. I immediately recognized this as the one-second bulletin triggered by the INEWS newsroom software (a program file entitled "bulletin.wav").

INEWS is a pretty comprehensive newsroom management system, marketed to large news outlets (and presumably Al Jazeera) to centralize and automate their operations, and also features access to multiple wire services.

http://www.avid.com/products/inews/

When a message formatted as a bulletin moves on a subscribed wire service, the program can optionally make this particular beep through the computer's speakers, and this sound can sometimes be heard in the background of certain newscasts where the newsroom is the set. There are other sounds the INEWS program can make as well (instant message, incoming mail, flash, etc) but the bulletin sound is unique in its distinctiveness.

I plotted both recordings on a waveform to compare them (see image, attached). There are also two brief Windows XP system sounds in the Osama recording, at 3:50 and 4:00 (XP Exclamation.wav), nothing all that surprising, but the INEWS sound heard at 0:26 is proprietary, created when that program is installed on a computer, and is distinct to that software, as far as I know.

This suggests that whoever is speaking on the tape - be it Osama or whoever else - was recorded in a newsroom of some kind, where such software is used, unless what we are hearing was being recorded off a speaker in a room that also had incoming wire services (i.e. Al Jazeera) - which is also a possibility, I guess, but it does very much sound to me like the speaker is in the same room. It would be interesting to try and find out from Al Jazeera whether this is the original recording, or a re-recording of it off a speaker in their newsroom. If it's a re-recording, why wouldn't they want to offer the original recording up for public scrutiny? If it's the original, I wonder who else AVID (the maker of the INEWS software) sells their software to in the Middle East?

Note: this sound is NOT audible in the English translation provided on video by Al Jazeera, found at http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e1a_1193080021 - in comparing these two recordings, the original Arabic is faded under the translator's voice most of the time, and when it is heard again at the 30 second mark in the translation, OBL is already at a later point in the original recording, indicating the portion featuring the beep was either faded or edited out under the translation.

Joseph Cannon said...

Here we go again. Whenever the comment moderation goes off, the fanatics cut-and-paste massive articles and place them in the comments section.

This sort of thing occurred so often last December that Blogger became technically overwhelmed and I could not publish my OWN material -- on what is, after all, my own blog. (A shame, too: I had a really funny Christmas piece with lots of photos.)

All right. Comment moderation goes back on. See what happens when you abuse your privileges, boys and girls?

(By the way: There's a massive difference between what King did and what those assholes in Maher's audience did. And if you don't like me, you know my motto: DIG OR SPLIT.)

BradF said...

JC asked:

"So Brad, shall we retreat to the argument that conspiracy-crazed fanatics are justified in acting fanatically if one can argue that their conspiracy theories may have some measure of validity?"

That's not a retreat. It was a question.

Since you're efforts at framing do not go unnoticed, I'll just mention that defining Myer as a "conspiracy buff" in relation to his legitimate questions is a way to belittle the questions, by belittling him. (as you surely know)

You are, of course, welcome to belittle him AND the questions as you fit. But it does the cause of Election Integrity, in light of the abomination that happened in '04, little good in the end.

It's also a mischaracterization of the Myer moment in which he asked journalistically legitimate questions in a less-than-brilliant manner.

One which, while awkward, perhaps even obnoxious if you prefer, was anything but taser-worthy.

"And you forget that John Kerry DID answer Andy's swiftboating charges at the event in question."

As Myer was screaming for his life in pain, while being tasered, yes, I recall well Kerry droning on and giving some pat answer which Myer was, unfortunately, unable to follow up on.

"That theory nicely explains why "Swiftboat" Andy told people beforehand to make sure they filmed his antics, eh wot?"

With due deference to your attempt at Luntz-inizing the situation in order to create a framework that supports your impassioned argument, I have frequently exhorted folks to be sure to video tape themselves anytime asking questions of public officials.

In fact, I have done so myself (made sure a camera was rolling when confronting an official, or someone else in power).

His having done so has been used to inappropriately smear him. By some of the same folks who claimed, contrary to the police report, that Myer "broke in line in front of everyone else".

As to the police being cleared by a police investigation of the police, color me less than impressed.

(Though note: I have yet to read the 300 page report they released.)

Joseph Cannon said...

Brad, let's not pretend that the video shows something different from what is actually there. The basis of Andy's diatribe was clearly the idea that Kerry was somehow colluding in his own election defeat. As I recall, Andy didn't quite reach the point where he started to rant about "Bush and Kerry were in Skull and Bones!" -- but he was obviously coming from that mind-set. He clearly viewed the great victim in 2004 as the bad guy, an attitude I find insufferable and paranoid. Questions like that are not legitimate journalism; that's crackpot crapola, undeserving of the answer Kerry tried to give.

Kerry has said that he had no idea what was going on in the back of the auditoreum, and I believe him. I have lectured before (NEVER AGAIN! I'm lousy at it), and I know that on the two occasions I spoke in front of a hall that size, all sorts of shit could have gone on in back. I could barely hear what questioners said even when they were handed a microphone, and the lights blinded me to everything past the first ten-or-so rows.

And if you scoff (as Randi Rhodes scoffs) at the notion that Kerry did not know...

...well, come on, think about it: Even if we hypothetically accept the premise that John Kerry is Evil Incarnate, from a purely political point of view, from a public relations point of view, would he WANT to be filmed "droning" while some guy is being beaten in the back of the hall?

Cah-MON. That doesn't make one lick of sense!

I don't think he was droning, by the way. I think he was making sense. If he were a dull speaker, would he have won three debates AND the election?

By the way: What was "taser-worthy" about Andy's behavior was RESISTING ARREST. He tried to fight off six cops for a long, long time. He was warned: "If you don't calm down you will be tasered," and STILL he refused to calm down.

That's the part of the story you always leave out, Brad. Come on. You're better than this. You're usually one of the most intellectually honest guys I know.

The only thing I can say in Andy's defense is that perhaps he may have mental or emotional problems. But people with behavioral issues are precisely the reason why police forces adopted the taser. I do NOT think that this weapon should be used indiscriminately -- and I hope that use will always be quite rare. But in this case, I think usage was warranted.

Joseph Cannon said...

One last thing...

"As to the police being cleared by a police investigation of the police, color me less than impressed."

Not sure that's fair. I mean, how many cops smirk and mutter "Sure, whatever" when told that their actions will be reviewed by Internal Affairs?

The University of Florida Police did not investigate themselves. I do not know much about the Florida Department of law Enforcement, but I did read this background page...

http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/about_fdle/general.asp

You may want to glance at it yourself.

AitchD said...

Cool graphic, nice job.

If you don't know or don't have a copy, the DVD is now available of Hans-Jurgen Syberberg's "Our Hitler" (1978) -- the 8-hour epic.

You gotta love this place, where Bill Maher and John Kerry become bosom bedfellows!

(I know, you're baiting the buffery trap to see who'll point out Maher and Kerry had Jewish grandparents. Am I right?)

Joseph Cannon said...

Wow. I have no idea why you brought up Hans Jurgen Syberberg, but I was just thinking about him yesterday, while listening to a recording of Parsifal.

I don't know if you've ever seen the HJS version of Wagner's opera, but it is really....something. I saw it at the Samuel Goldwyn theater (the Academy's theater) at a preview, with HJS in attendance...and he insisted that the volume be turned up to EAR SPLITTING LEVELS.

It works better that way! Especially those bells: "THUNG-tha-THUNG-THUNG"...

I'm told that the DVD transfer is wretched. The VHS certainly was.

I saw Our Hitler all in one eight-hour go when it played at Filmex. Pretty damned amazing. That's a film that rewards "marathon" treatment, and is best seen either in a theater or all alone, at night, all through the night, with all the lights off and the headphones playing the soundtrack at EAR SPLITTING LEVELS.

The film is a devastating attack on everything Hitler represented. But now, I'm told, HJS seems to have turned into something of an anti-Semitic crank. Sad, but I'm not completely surprised. However much he assailed German irrationalism, he always seemed secretly attracted to it.

Thanks for the diversion. I really wanted to talk about something other than politics today.

Anonymous said...

you haven't mentioned anything about congressman pete stark's recent comments after Bush vetoed the child healthcare bill; his comments were made into a mountain out of a molehill by the right and Pelosi distanced herself from his comments and then Stark was forced to apologize for his comments.

you are over the line by comparing Meyer to nazi stormtroopers. You say he resisted the police for a really long time, in reality we're talking about less than a minute after Meyer was hustled away from the microphone by the cops and told to shut up and stop making a spectacle of himself.

it won't matter what I say, you are so pissed off at anyone who is a potential loudmouth that you welcome the police to beat the living crap out of any loudmouth.

You have posted those pictures comparing Meyer to a Nazi stormtrooper to enrage those on the left and who believe they have the right to ask tough questions in a public forum.

on a different topic, you'll enjoy this essay today:

American kids, dumber than dirt
Warning: The next generation might just be the biggest pile of idiots in U.S. history
By Mark Morford

I have this ongoing discussion with a longtime reader who also just so happens to be a longtime Oakland high school teacher, a wonderful guy who's seen generations of teens come and generations go and who has a delightful poetic sensibility and quirky outlook on his life and his family and his beloved teaching career.

And he often writes to me in response to something I might've written about the youth of today, anything where I comment on the various nefarious factors shaping their minds and their perspectives and whether or not, say, EMFs and junk food and cell phones are melting their brains and what can be done and just how bad it might all be.

His response: It is not bad at all. It's absolutely horrifying.

My friend often summarizes for me what he sees, firsthand, every day and every month, year in and year out, in his classroom. He speaks not merely of the sad decline in overall intellectual acumen among students over the years, not merely of the astonishing spread of lazy slackerhood, or the fact that cell phones and iPods and excess TV exposure are, absolutely and without reservation, short-circuiting the minds of the upcoming generations. Of this, he says, there is zero doubt. ...

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2007/10/24/notes102407.DTL&nl=fix

Anonymous said...

Anti-Dem propagandists like you don't understand how the veto works, or how the filibuster works. You also forget recent history. If a bill backed by virtually all congressional Dems (except for you-know-who) had passed, the troop pull-out would have begun on October 1.

I don't dispute that.

....It pisses me off that the Dems do not get points for attempting to do that which was politically difficult, if not impossible. The Dems showed great courage, and progressive purists like you pretend it never happened.

They refused to go for the jugular - IMPEACHMENT proceedings in the House. That's why they are irrelevant, ineffectual and a waste of time.

gary said...

I'm OK with the cops being cleared because the guy was resisting arrest, even though I think they could have handled him without the use of the taser. I still do not think that he should have been arrested in the first place. For what? For rudeness? For being a conspiracy nut? Kerry had waved the cops off and was answering his question. For all we know he might have left peacefully after that.

AitchD said...

Anonymous:11:55 PM:

I read the essay you excerpted. Here's another excerpt from that essay:

"... They cannot write an intelligible paragraph. Recently, after giving an assignment that required drawing lines, he realized that not a single student actually knew how to use a ruler."

It made me recall former Harper's editor Lewis Lapham's kvetching about the Yale freshman English class he taught 15 years ago or so, saying the students couldn't compose a sensible paragraph.

Using a ruler? You never know. Ten years ago my wife bought new school supplies for her 5th-grade daughter, including 2 plastic rulers, at K-Mart. I checked out the chinky rulers; one was OFF by 1/16th" per inch! Imagine the assignments and tests for using a ruler, when you're given a line segment and asked to express its length in inches, quarter-inches, eighths, sixteenths. You think you understand, but your cheapshit tools make you flunk. Of course, my stepdaughter never used the ruler because I had checked it. I figure if I'd written to K-Mart's CEO, he'd reply, "Well DOH", nomesayin?

Check out the late Lewis Thomas's concluding essay in his "Late Night Thoughts on Listening to Mahler's Ninth Symphony" from 1983 (it's also the essay's title) available here:

http://www.cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/
Thomas/mahlers-ninth.html

Here's the concluding part:

"Now, with a pamphlet in front of me on a corner of my desk, published by the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment, entitled MX Basing, an analysis of all the alternative strategies for placement and protection of hundreds of these missiles, each capable of creating artificial suns to vaporize a hundred Hiroshimas, collectively capable of destroying the life of any continent, I cannot hear the same Mahler. Now, those cellos sound in my mind like the opening of all the hatches and the instant before ignition.

"If I were sixteen or seventeen years old, I would not feel the cracking of my own brain, but I would know for sure that the whole world was coming unhinged. I can remember with some clarity what it was like to be sixteen. I had discovered the Brahms symphonies. I knew that there was something going on in the late Beethoven quartets that I would have to figure out, and I knew that there was plenty of time ahead for all the figuing I would ever have to do. I had never heard of Mahler. I was in no hurry. I was a college sophomore and had decided that Wallace Stevens and I possessed a comprehensive understanding of everything needed for a life. The years stretched away forever ahead, forever. My great-great grandfather had come from Wales, leaving his signature in the family Bible on the same page that carried, a century later, my father's signature. It never crossed my mind to worry about the twenty-first century; it was just there, given, somewhere in the sure distance.

"The man on television, Sunday midday, middle-aged and solid, nice-looking chap, all the facts at his fingertips, more dependable looking than most high-school principals, is talking about civilian defense, his responsibility in Washington. It can make an enormous diffference, he is saying. Instead of the outright death of eighty milliom American citizens in twenty minutes, he says, we can, by careful planning and practice, get that number down to only forty million, maybe even twenty. The thing to do, he says, is to evacuate the cities quickly and have everyone get under shelter in the countryside. That way we can recover, and meanwhile we will have retaliated, incinerating all of Soviet society, he says. What about radioactive fallout? he is asked. Well, he says. Anyway, he says, if the Russians know they can only destroy forty million of us instead of eighty million, this will deter them. Of course, he adds, they have the capacity to kill all two hundred and twenty million of us if they try real hard, but they know we can do the same to them. If the figure is only forty million this will deter them, not worth the trouble, not worth the risk. Eighty million would be another matter, we should guard ourselves against losing that many all at once, he says.

"If I were sixteen or seventeen years old and had to listen to that, or read things like that, I would want to give up listening and reading. I would begin thinking up new kinds of sounds, different from any music heard before, and I would be twisting and turning to rid myself of human language."

Your essayist's teacher friend isn't competent to explain the events of 9/11, its whys, or its aftermath's whys because no one is. But I don't think the rate of stupidity or functional illiteracy has increased; the gross numbers have exploded. Thirty years ago Gore Vidal said that only 5% of the populace read books. Um, my stepson's high school teacher told his classes in 1998 that Saddam Hussein had smallpox vaccine to use against us, and nukes also.

"When I think back on all the crap I learned in high school, it's a wonder I can think at all" -- Paul Simon, "Kodachrome".

The article/essay's take on the horrible effects of TV sounds way understated. Anyone who lets their kids watch TV is guilty of child abuse, and I realize that's also an understatement.

AitchD said...

Anonymous : 4:10 AM:

Even if the House has the votes to impeach, there aren't enough votes in the Senate to convict and remove. Who's got time for symbolic nonsense? It's amazing -- even gratifying -- that we're able to begin to recover from the 1994 right-wing takeover of Congress.

Joseph Cannon said...

Boy, I'm glad that I reinstated comment moderation. One of the comments I just rejected advocated mob violence. Another, by a tranny, pointed to an article which labeled Amy Goodman a "gatekeeper," and recommend that instead we read the writings of the fascist Eric Hufschmid. Proof, once again, that trannies are NOT progressives.

Jesus. Why do these people come to my site? Do they actually think they are welcome here?

Anonymous said...

I think your continual bashing of 9/11 skeptics is pretty sad. There's so much evidence to suggest that this event did not happen in a manner consistent with the offical story and yet you continue to attack those who point out these inconsistencies as the enemy.

Just because you don't want to rattle your delicate worldview by postulating that we're being lied to about the events of 9/11 doesn't mean that the official story is accurate.

You should learn to be a little more open minded about things.

Joseph Cannon said...

Oh yeah. Right. My world-view is "delicate." I'm insufficiently "open minded."

Jeez, have you ever even SEEN the other posts on this site? Or are you, like most trannies, so focused on the beatific vision that nothing else matters to you?

If so, then I suggest that yours is the closed mind.

Talking to trannies is like talking to UFO buffs circa 1993. If you don't say what they want to hear, they call you an agent of the great conspiracy.

Well, I started this blog because I am against the right wing. And trannyism is a RIGHT WING phenomenon. I mean, Jesus, what more evidence do I need for that statement? "Don't listen to Amy Goodman -- she's the bad guy. Read Eric Hufschmid!" That's the kind of commentary I get.

Anonymous said...

AitchD --Even if the House has the votes to impeach, there aren't enough votes in the Senate to convict and remove. Who's got time for symbolic nonsense? It's amazing -- even gratifying -- that we're able to begin to recover from the 1994 right-wing takeover of Congress.

Impeachment proceedings in the House have a life of their own. The media can't pretend it is not happening, and whether the issue is lying to Congress over Iraq, illegal wiretapping or refusing Congressional subpoenas the public will be forced to confront the unequivocal claim that this President (and his cohort) is operating outside the law. While this is happening he's at least back to being a mortal and the rest of his PR juggernaut slows on other issues. The alternative is the beaten wife who learns to accommodate to her child abusing husband. Do you understand what went on with MoveOn,org? Pete Stark? The Repugs will accept nothing less than the Dems sucking their dicks. They insist on it. They demand it. They will use lies and violence to get it. People need to make a choice. They should get off their fucking knees. Or they can gag on "symbolic nonsense" while Bush has his dick stuck in their mouth. He has done it so far and he loves it.

...oh, but, it's impractical...the numbers...the purists...

That's OK, get on your f-ing knees, bitch.

AitchD said...

Anonymous : 3:42 PM:

About impeachment I was paraphrasing Representative Conyers, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. You're correct about the Big Media's having to report the flagrant treasons and misdemeanors in the event of a show trial. Conyers was speaking code. He probably meant that his committee lacks the police power and ordnance to back up his call to order on day one. Pelosi spoke code when she said impeachment is off the table. It's her table since the fair and free election took place and she replaced Hastert. Kucinich's table manners seem to have led to his increasingly becoming marginalized, most recently by dumb gossip. You're advocating and demanding a form of manic politics, so you might try to imagine the swift response by the accused, especially in light of the kinds of crimes you attribute to them.

Yes, it's a hostage situation, yet there's still a government's everyday business to take care of. It's tough shit that you're pissed off about not being able to participate more than once every four years, or two. Are you mad as hell and not going to take it anymore, or what?

While explaining her book, "The End of America: Letter of Warning To A Young Patriot", on CSPAN last week, Naomi Wolf made me gasp when she said she won't go out of her way to stop this administration only because she has young children and therefore doesn't want to be arrested as "an enemy combatant" and detained without recourse to counsel until her kids are grown. You can watch/listen to the interview at:

http://www.booktv.org/programs_archive.aspx?SectionName=After%20Words

Read her book and pass it on to your neighbor demanding that your neighbor read it and pass it on to another frustrated and anxious citizen. It's not written in code; on the contrary, it's a deciphering code breaker.

Anonymous said...

Nothing personal in my remarks, AitchD. I appreciate your comments. I only wanted to emphasize the point that Naomi Klein has made (also Larissa). We are now in the stage where people are fearful to speak out. Where Princeton Professors like Walter F. Murphy are on the terrorist no-fly list for writing academic criticisms of Bush's actions. All it takes now is for some prominent public figures to be jailed and the silence will become deafening. This is why I take issue with Joseph's diatribes against terribly impolite political activists. When measured against concerns raised by Klein and Murphy I think we've moved beyond getting upset over minor activists who act out. The real, larger crimes, are being waved in our faces. Guantanamo. Padilla. There's no rudeness to Joseph intended but sometimes I feel I've strayed on to a web site dealing with table manners and etiquette. I excuse pretty much any and all protesters these days. Let a thousand protests bloom.

Joseph Cannon said...

No, anon. Let a thousand EFFECTIVE protests bloom. Let the counter-productive protests cease immediately.

Let's take the image of that Code Pink lady flashing bloody hands at Condi. Can you name one person -- anywhere in the world -- whose mind was changed as a result? "Wow, I was supportin the war before, but now that I saw THAT, I'm completely turned around!"

No. You will never be able to name one person in that category.

Will Condi's mind be changed? Come off it. If Robert McNamara was unaffected by the sight of a guy actually setting himself on fire...

So who did Code Pink help? The rightwingers. The Pinkies made anti-war activists look like people throwing hyper-emotional tizzy fits.

I'm not asking you to think like Judith Martin. I'm asking you to think like Bobby Fischer. Think three moves ahead. Ten moves. What will the ramifications be? If your strategy doesn't help your side, then WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU DO IT?

AitchD said...

Anonymous : 5:41 PM:

You meant Naomi Wolf, not Naomi Klein. I can read minds. Ms. Klein's current work is "The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism", essentially a critique of the U of Chicago school of economics promulgated by Milton Friedman. Also, Klein is Canadian (and a master at supressing her dialect).

Hey, Naomis, if you're reading -- team up and hit the lecture circuit, the college lecture halls and other small, intimate theaters! ("Dear God, but I do love brunettes so!" -- Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.)

Anonymous said...

You have made it abundantly clear that you believe the folks who tasered the "Vote 2004 tranny" were justified, but while I am sure in my heart of hearts that nothing John Kerry has to say is worth interrupting and being tasered over, you'd might consider it unfair were it you that were tasered for conspiracy to commit freedom of speech, unless of course you pay an escort service for such treatment willingly; battery cables not included in the fee.

I believe what is at the heart of the 911 tranny movement, that is those folks who are genuinely interested in full disclosure, is Truth; and they have nothing to fear from a Presidency that has been lucid, fair and transparent, now do they?

I guess we're all trannies, at the end of the day.