HB4356 and 12,500 chicago voter signatures: everything else is conversation...,

NYMag | Emanuel said last week that he has no intention of resigning. "We have a process; it's called the election," he told Politico. "The voters spoke. I’ll be held accountable and responsible for my actions and decisions I make, and that’s how I approach it." There's no way to force Emanuel out, since Chicago has no mechanism for removing the mayor – but now, two state representatives are trying to change that. Democrats Mary Flowers and La Shawn Ford co-sponsored a bill introduced Wednesday night in the Illinois General Assembly that would amend a 1941 law to create a mayoral recall procedure, which would be "effectively immediately."

Under the plan, a recall election could be initiated with signatures totaling 15 percent of the total votes cast in the last election, in this case 12,500 signatures. Ford drew up the legislation two weeks ago and decided to introduce it after seeing Wednesday's protests. "The people have lost confidence in the mayor and until he can regain confidence, we have to have something in place that we can try to bring the city together," he toldCBS Chicago.

It's far from certain that the procedure will be put in place. House Speaker Michael Madigan would have to bring up the bill for consideration, the Democratic-majority House and Senate would need to approve it, and it would require the governor's signature.

Emanuel may be able to smooth things over by following through on his police reform pledge, but if a recall election were held right now, it seems unlikely that he would survive. A recent poll by the online IllinoisObserver found the mayor's job approval is at 18 percent, and his disapproval rating is 67 percent. "Believe me, there’s a lot of buyers' remorse right about now and there's a lot of I-told-you-so right about now and there’s a lot of second-guessing," Chicago political consultant Delmarie Cobb told Reuters. "I do think that if this continues, certainly he would never get re-elected again with 55 percent of the black vote" as he did eight months ago.

the problematique of the problematique...,

plausiblefutures |  (When I use “politics” or “political” in this post, I simply mean “one coercing another” in the broadest sense. To “coerce” is to compel one to act in a certain way — either by reward or punishment.) 

In 1972, the Club of Rome (COR) rocked the world with a study called LIMITS TO GROWTH. The COR called the multitude of environmental problems facing future inhabitants of planet Earth the “global problematique”.

In the years since 1972, science has made great progress in understanding the natural world. Obviously, the problematique ensemble is a hierarchy of problems. The fundamental problem in the problematique ensemble is “H.Sapiens” (or the “critter”).

The critter is an especially important player in this drama because not only has its activity caused the problematique, the critter is also called upon to solve the problematique. Therefore, understanding the nature of the critter is THE prerequisite to solving the problematique.

In recent years, evolutionary psychologists and microbiologists has made tremendous progress in understanding the scientific nature of the critter. Nevertheless, activists still have made little (if any) progress solving the problematique [1]. This is partially due to the fact that activists do not want to hear the scientific truth about themselves, and partially because they can do little — if anything — about it anyway.

When confronted with the truth about themselves and about their unimportance in the political hierarchy, [2] activists will either become constructivists (take the science lightly, change it, or abandon it entirely when it becomes necessary) or fundamentalists (deal with troublesome science through psychological denial and/or political repression).

So now we have a nested problem: the “problematique of the problematique”. In other words, the “truth” concerning the problematique can be provided by science and political realism, but it is not the “truth” that activists are looking for. What kind of “truth” are activists looking for? Science can answer that question too.

Over millions of years of evolution, the critter has emerged as the apex “political predator” — NOT the engineer, NOT the problem solver, but THE political predator. When confronted with a social problem the critter first resorts to “politics” to insure and enhance its “inclusive fitness”. In fact, “politics” is the reason why we have such large brains:

“The social intelligence hypothesis posits that the large brains distinctive cognitive abilities of primates (in particular, anthropoid primates) evolved via a spiraling arms race in which social competitors developed increasing ‘Machiavellian’ strategies.” [3]

In short, our innate goal is genetic reproduction and our most important tool is “politics”. This is easily seen in other social animals. The dominant male eats first and has his pick of the females.

In our society, “money” is interchangeable for political power. And as Kissinger noted, “power” is the most powerful aphrodisiac. This because women who were attracted to powerful men were more likely to see their children live to reproduce their genes.

So the “real reason” (i.e., the “genetic reason” instead of the “rationalization”) why activists on this list will not accept the truth from science and political realism is not because it’s wrong, it’s because it doesn’t lead to more personal political power. In other words, the scientific truth about the critter does not increase the “inclusive fitness” of the activists themselves.

So activists keep searching for the “other truth” — the Santa Claus or the Good Tooth Fairy “truth” that will get them laid. Unfortunately, Santa Claus and Good Tooth Fairy don’t exist — what you see is what you get. However, I am going to put on my Nostradamus hat and make a prediction.

When blackouts sweep the country (probably < 5 years, certainly < 10) the political environment WILL change radically, but not in the way most people hope it will. One day we will wake up and suddenly the scientific truth WILL serve the political agenda of the ruling elites. [4] Let’s call that looming revolutionary day the “Pythagorean Revolution” in honor of the man who discovered that the Earth was spherical, and thus finite, approximately 2,500 years ago. [5]

After the Pythagorean Revolution occurs, instead of selling “negawatts”, environmental groups will be selling “negapeople”. “Gosh! Why didn’t we see it before? It’s either tigers or people, what choice do we have? Kill ’em all and let God sort them out!” Instead of “importing” people for labor, we will be “deporting” people to labor camps — if not “illegals” to their own countries, then “overbreeders” and undesirables to internal concentration camps for the next “Final Solution”:

not even gonna lie, I'd mix it up for rula jebreal on a train...,

fp |  In late November, the nonpartisan, Washington-based Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) released a survey showing that 56 percent of Americans now believe that Islam is at odds with America’s values and way of life. At the same time, however, PRRI has previously noted that seven out of 10 Americans have rarely or ever interacted with a Muslim, suggesting that their perceptions of Islam are driven entirely by media and political conversations about the religion. And that conversation has turned increasingly ugly, as the race for the Republican presidential nomination devolves into a frenzy of xenophobic bullying of vulnerable and underrepresented minorities.

The trend emerged with front-runner Donald Trump’s outrageous smears that cast Mexican immigrants as thieves, rapists, and drug dealers. The Republican Party’s rabid attentions soon shifted, with both Trump and fellow contender Ben Carson striving to outdo each other’s blood libels against American Muslims. On Dec. 7, Trump went so far as to issue a call to temporarily bar all Muslims from entering the United States, and he has voiced his support for a federal database to track American Muslims. He and his colleagues have not confined their bullying to those two groups. African-American Black Lives Matter activists, Jewish victims of the Holocaust, providers of health-care services (including abortion) to low-income women, even Americans with disabilities — all have been singled out for derision and abuse in a veritable war on the marginalized, declared by a reckless and cynical cohort of politicians. They’re hardly ignorant of the fact that, by spewing dangerous lies and stoking ignorant fears, they’re fueling the fires of prejudice, hate, and violence. They simply don’t seem to care.

When a couple of Trump supporters in Boston beat up and urinated on a homeless Mexican man, the candidate defended the perpetrators. “They love this country and they want this country to be great again,” he said. “They are passionate.” When his supporters beat a Black Lives Matter activist at a campaign event two weeks ago, he suggested the man “maybe … should have been roughed up.”

can Granny Goodness and can't bust a grape endure Rahm Chiraq blowback?

WaPo |  It is critical that the Justice Department now examine not only the police force, where a culture of impunity and a code of silence are deeply ingrained, but also Chicago’s entire system. That includes the Independent Police Review Authority, which examined 409 cases of police-involved shootings in the eight years ending Sept. 30 — and found just two unjustified. (Both involved off-duty police.) It includes the prosecutor’s office, headed by Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez, which seems to blanch at the prospect of indicting abusive officers, perhaps for fear of losing police cooperation in criminal investigations.

And it includes legal protections enshrined in union contracts as well as a state law known as the law enforcement officers’ “bill of rights.” The effect of those protections is to erect formidable barriers to discipline, let alone prosecution, in the event of police misconduct. For example: Officers involved in a shooting are afforded a 24-hour grace period before they must speak to investigators — a privilege that may be used to ensure their accounts jibe with those of their colleagues. In the McDonald killing, at least seven other officers were on the scene and five of them corroborated the allegedly mendacious account of Mr. Van Dyke, who said Mr. McDonald was menacing him with a knife. In fact, the video shows the victim heading away from the officers.

The problems in Chicago are complex and decades in the making; cleaning up the police force will require investigators to use a wide aperture. While Mr. Emanuel has promised cooperation, there is likely to be a good deal of institutional resistance to the federal probe. But the payoff, in terms of building the case for real reform, could be enormous.

cosa nostra in chiraq tryna destroy 50 years worth of misconduct records...,

WaPo |  Chicago authorities must notify journalists and activists before they destroy decades of records related to police misconduct, Illinois Circuit Court Judge Peter Flynn ruled in an emergency order Thursday.

The order comes after journalist and activist Jamie Kalven petitioned the court after police officials said they would destroy hundreds of thousands of pages of evidence, investigative files and computer records related to Chicago police officer misconduct reports older than four years.

The documents are among a trove of data requested by Kalven and other media organizations, including the Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times, dating back to 1967. Last year, city officials agreed to release all of the police misconduct information, but the city’s police unions sued to prevent the documents from becoming public and the issue remains in limbo. The case will eventually be decided by an Illinois appeals court.

The emergency order comes in the wake of a large public outcry following the release of the video that shows police officer James Van Dyke shooting 17-year-old Laquan McDonald 16 times in October 2014. Van Dyke was charged with first-degree murder hours before the video’s release.

Kalven and his attorney, Craig Futterman, a University of Chicago law professor, played a critical role in the release of the dash-cam footage by reporting on the video’s existence and demanding that officials release it. Kalven expressed relief at the judge’s order, saying it would give him time to go back to court before authorities could set a “bonfire” to decades’ worth of key information about police misconduct in Chicago. “Ministers, civic groups … are all calling for a full examination of the systems of accountability in the city.”

Futterman called the order a “band-aid” and said it’s unclear what would happen if police officials notify journalists they plan to destroy the records. “We would do everything in our power to stop it, but we proactively need to work toward a permanent solution,” he said.

Thousands more recent electronic records have already been released to Kalven under a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit decided last year. His organization, the Invisible Institute, made the records available in a searchable database.

chiraq's independent police review chief scuttles quickly for the baseboard

chicagoist | The head of Chicago’s Independent Police Review Authority (IPRA), Scott Ando, has resigned amidst growing controversy over the Chicago Police Department's practices. The Department of Justice is expected to announced an investigation of the CPD this week, and the department just released another video showing officers shooting and killing a young person of color.

“In his four years at IPRA, Scott has taken important steps to move IPRA forward and reduce its backlog of cases,” Mayor Rahm Emanuel said in a press release. “Yet it has become clear that new leadership is required as we rededicate ourselves to dramatically improving our system of police accountability and rebuilding trust in that process.”

IPRA was formed in 2007 to investigate allegations of police misconduct, including shootings of civilians. But of the more than 400 cases of police shootings the agency has investigated, it has only ruled twice that a shooting by an officer wasn’t justified.

"It's hard to believe," said Attorney Joseph Roddy, a former police union lawyer, said in aninterview with the Tribune. "Michael Jordan couldn't make 407 out of 409 shots — even from the free-throw line."

It doesn't help the numbers' credibility that Emanuel appoints the head of the institution, or that several of its members have ties to law enforcement—or are former law enforcement officials themselves. Police officers' contracts allow a 24-hour window before an officer involved in a shooting is questioned by IPRA, and patterns of complaints against officers are not considered during shooting investigations.

Officer Jason Van Dyke, who shot Laquan McDonald 16 times, killing him, had at least 18 civilian complaints against him, and may have had a role in another police shooting.

In fact, one of IPRA’s own investigators, Lorenzo Davis, was fired over the summer for refusing to reverse recommendations he made in six cases where he found shootings by officers were not justified.

o.g. roaches racing for the baseboards in chiraq

wgntv | The Chicago Police Department underwent another major shakeup Monday.

Sources have confirmed to WGN that Constantine “Dean” Andrews has resigned his position as the police department’s chief of detectives.

Andrews was appointed to his position by former Chicago Police Supt. Garry McCarthy in October. McCarthy was fired as superintendent last week in the wake of controversy surrounding the police shooting video of Chicago teen Laquan McDonald.

According to the Chicago Sun-Times, which reported Andrews’s departure as a “sudden retirement,” Andrews and other police officers have been under investigation for their roles in a case involving David Koschman, who was fatally punched in the face by Richard J. “R.J.” Vanecko, a nephew of former Mayor Richard M. Daley. Allegations surfaced about falsifying police reports and false claims that Vanecko had acted in self-defense.

Andrews closed the homicide of investigation of Koschman four years ago, according to the Sun-Times, but the paper’s investigation led to the appointment of special prosecutor Dan K. Webb. Webb’s 17-month investigation led to Vanecko’s indictment in December 2012, and Vanecko pleaded guilty in January 2014.

Andrews, who resigned Monday, was named 114 times in Webb’s report.

can't bust a grape can't put on the tard game-face and pretend to take jihad seriously....,

theatlantic |  At the core of Barack Obama’s terrorism speech on Sunday night lay a contradiction. He gave the address to convince an increasingly fearful nation that he takes the terrorist threat seriously. But he doesn’t, at least not in the way his political opponents do.

For George W. Bush, the fight against jihadist terrorism was World War III. In his speech to Congress nine days after 9/11, Bush called al-Qaeda “the heirs of all the murderous ideologies of the 20th century … they follow in the path of fascism, Nazism, and totalitarianism.” Many Republicans still see the “war on terror” in these epic terms. After the Paris attacks, Marco Rubio didn’t merely warn that the Islamic State might take over Iraq, Syria, and other parts of the Middle East. He warned that it might take over the United States. America, he argued, is at war with people who “literally want to overthrow our society and replace it with their radical Sunni Islamic view of the future.” In his telling, the United States and “radical Islam” are virtual equals, pitted in a “civilizational conflict” that “either they win or we win.”

Obama thinks that’s absurd. Unlike Rubio, he considers violent jihadism a small, toxic strain within Islamic civilization, not a civilization itself. And unlike Bush, he doesn’t consider it a serious ideological competitor. In the 1930s, when fascism and communism were at their ideological height, many believed they could produce higher living standards for ordinary people than democratic capitalist societies that were prone to devastating cycles of boom and bust. No one believes that about “radical Islam” today. In Obama’s view, I suspect, democratic capitalism’s real ideological adversary is not the “radical Islam” of ISIS. It’s the authoritarian, state-managed capitalism of China.

While Republicans think ISIS is strong and growing stronger, Obama thinks it’s weak and growing weaker. “Terrorists,” he declared on Sunday, now “turn to less complicated acts of violence like the mass shootings that are all too common in our society.” In other words, the Islamic State probably can’t do anything to America that we Americans aren’t doing to ourselves all the time, and now largely take for granted.

Obama also argued that the Islamic State is losing in the Middle East, where the “strategy that we are using now—air strikes, special forces, and working with local forces who are fighting to regain control of their own country” will produce a “sustainable victory.”

chumbalones believe POTUS protects them from lawless radical islamic extremists, truth is....,

peakprosperity |  To understand what’s happening in Syria right now, you have to understand the tactics and motivations of the US and NATO -- parties sharing interwoven aims and goals in the Middle East/North African (MENA) region.

While the populations of Europe and the US are fed raw propaganda about the regional aims involved, the reality is far different.

Where the propaganda claims that various bad dictators have to be taken out, or that democracy is the goal, neither have anything at all to do with what’s actually happening or has happened in the region.

For starters, we all know that if oil fields were not at stake then the West would care much much less about MENA affairs.

But a lot of outside interests do care. And their aims certainly and largely include controlling the region’s critical energy resources. There’s a lot of concern over whether Russia or China will instead come to dominate these last, best oil reserves on the planet.

Further, we can dispense with the idea that the US and NATO have any interest at all in human rights in this story. If they did, then they’d at least have to admit that their strategies and tactics have unleashed immeasurable suffering, as well as created the conditions for lots more. But it would be silly to try and argue about or understand regional motivations through the lenses of human rights or civilian freedoms -- as neither applies here.

Divide And Conquer Instead, the policies in the MENA region are rooted in fracturing the region so that it will be easier to control.

That’s a very old tactic; first utilized to a great extent by Britain starting back in the 1700s.

Divide and conquer. There’s a reason that’s a well-worn catch phrase: it’s hundreds of years old.

But to get a handle on the level of depravity involved, I think it useful to examine what happened in Libya in 2011 when NATO took out Muamar Gaddafi and left the country a broken shell -- as was intended.

I cannot really give you a good reason for NATO involving itself in taking out Gaddafi. I only have bad ones.

The official reason was that after the Arab Spring uprising in Libya in early 2011 (with plenty of evidence of Western influences in fanning those flames) things got ugly and protesters were shot. This allowed the UN to declare that it needed to protect civilians, and the ICC to charge Gaddafi with crimes against humanity, declaring that he needed to stand trial.

Here’s how it went down:

On 27 June, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Gaddafi, his son Saif al-Islam, and his brother-in-law Abdullah Senussi, head of state security, for charges concerning crimes against humanity.^[268] Libyan officials rejected the ICC, claiming that it had "no legitimacy whatsoever" and highlighting that "all of its activities are directed at African leaders".^[269]

That month, Amnesty International published their findings, in which they asserted that many of the accusations of mass human rights abuses made against Gaddafist forces lacked credible evidence, and were instead fabrications of the rebel forces which had been readily adopted by the western media. 

(Source)

After the ICC's indictment, it was a hop, skip and a jump to declaring a NATO-enforced ‘no fly zone’ over Libya to protect civilians.

From there it was just a straight jump to NATO actively shooting anything related to the Gaddafi government. NATO had thereby chosen sides and was directly supporting the rebellion.

The pattern in play here is always the same: cherry-picked events are used as a pretext to support the side seeking to topple the existing government and thereby leave a sectarian wasteland to flourish in the inevitable power vacuum.

nobel laureate can't bust a grape didn't sign on for this world war isht!

tomdispatch |  World War IV would require at least a five-fold increase in the current size of the U.S. Army -- and not as an emergency measure but a permanent one. Such numbers may appear large, but as Cohen would be the first to point out, they are actually modest when compared to previous world wars. In 1968, in the middle of World War III, the Army had more than 1.5 million active duty soldiers on its rolls -- this at a time when the total American population was less than two-thirds what it is today and when gender discrimination largely excluded women from military service. If it chose to do so, the United States today could easily field an army of two million or more soldiers.

Whether it could also retain the current model of an all-volunteer force is another matter. Recruiters would certainly face considerable challenges, even if Congress enhanced the material inducements for service, which since 9/11 have already included a succession of generous increases in military pay. A loosening of immigration policy, granting a few hundred thousand foreigners citizenship in return for successfully completing a term of enlistment might help. In all likelihood, however, as with all three previous world wars, waging World War IV would oblige the United States to revive the draft, a prospect as likely to be well-received as a flood of brown and black immigrant enlistees. In short, going all out to create the forces needed to win World War IV would confront Americans with uncomfortable choices.

The budgetary implications of expanding U.S. forces while conducting a perpetual round of what the Pentagon calls “overseas contingency operations” would also loom large. Precisely how much money an essentially global conflict projected to extend well into the latter half of the century would require is difficult to gauge. As a starting point, given the increased number of active duty forces, tripling the present Defense Department budget of more than $600 billion might serve as a reasonable guess.

At first glance, $1.8 trillion annually is a stupefyingly large figure. To make it somewhat more palatable, a proponent of World War IV might put that number in historical perspective. During the first phases of World War III, for example, the United States routinely allocated 10% or more of total gross domestic product (GDP) for national security. With that GDP today exceeding $17 trillion, apportioning 10% to the Pentagon would give those charged with managing World War IV a nice sum to work with and no doubt to build upon.

Of course, that money would have to come from somewhere. For several years during the last decade, sustaining wars in Iraq and Afghanistan pushed the federal deficit above a trillion dollars. As one consequence, the total national debt now exceeds annual GDP, having tripled since 9/11. How much additional debt the United States can accrue without doing permanent damage to the economy is a question of more than academic interest.

To avoid having World War IV produce an endless string of unacceptably large deficits, ratcheting up military spending would undoubtedly require either substantial tax increases or significant cuts in non-military spending, including big-ticket programs like Medicare and social security -- precisely those, that is, which members of the middle class hold most dear.

In other words, funding World War IV while maintaining a semblance of fiscal responsibility would entail the kind of trade-offs that political leaders are loathe to make. Today, neither party appears up to taking on such challenges. That the demands of waging protracted war will persuade them to rise above their partisan differences seems unlikely. It sure hasn’t so far.

for racetards and bibtards mistakenly believing they've spotted some common ground...,

salon |  Sometime in 1994, as Afghanistan tumbled into disarray in the wake of the civil war that followed the 1989 Soviet withdrawal, there emerged a highly secretive and heavily armed group known as the Taliban. Its declared purposes were to restore peace, to enforce traditional law and to defend the Islamic character of Afghanistan. The world now knows the rest of the story. After the cleric-led movement captured Kabul, the nation’s capital, in September 1996, it became clear to all observers that the Taliban represented a very troubling development in Islamic radicalism.

The Taliban, which springs from the Sunni branch of Islam, began a genocidal campaign designed to wipe out Shiite Muslims from much of Afghanistan. It openly countenanced international terrorism, harboring the criminal mastermind Osama bin Laden and giving him virtually free rein to plan bombings and assassinations. And it imposed a disturbing and deeply fundamentalist form of Muslim culture on the nation. Under the Taliban regime, girls’ schools were closed and women were forced to quit their jobs (at one time, 40 percent of Afghan doctors were female) and to wear a head-to-toe garment known as the burkha. Movies, television, videos, music and dance — all were banned.

This is a story that needs telling to a wide audience, and journalist Ahmed Rashid, who has covered the Afghan wars for more than 20 years as a correspondent for the Far Eastern Economic Review and the Daily Telegraph, is well equipped to do that. Getting it was not an easy task: The Taliban is about as impenetrable a political organization as exists anywhere in the world. Its acknowledged leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar, has never met with Western reporters or diplomats and has never even been photographed.

The tale is even more complicated, though. There’s also the matter of oil — specifically the desire of international oil companies to build a pipeline from the Caspian oil-producing region (home to Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and several other small nations) to serve potentially massive markets in South Asia. The route goes directly through Afghanistan, and the result has been what Rashid refers to as “romancing the Taliban”: For years, he reports, U.S. economic interests, driven by oil, took precedence over human-rights concerns; only very recently did pressure from American women concerned about the repression of Afghan women finally lead to a reversal in policy. Rashid was on the scene all along, covering what he calls the new “Great Game” in Central Asia, a late 20th century version of the late 19th century colonial struggle for hegemony. “Policy was not being driven by politicians and diplomats,” he writes, “but by the secretive oil companies and intelligence services of the regional states.”

The chief virtue of Rashid’s account is his ability to delve beneath the surface of events without falling prey to a one-sided Marxist-style economic analysis. Oil is important — but so is geopolitics, including the American desire to play off Afghanistan against Iran; and so are the obvious issues surrounding the oppression of women by the Taliban. As Rashid places the Taliban in its historical and social context, he accomplishes the difficult task of maintaining a degree of empathy while still excoriating the organization as cruel, barbaric and repressive. Its members aren’t even good Muslims by anyone’s standard except their own:

ain't nobody tryna hear what hon.bro.can't-bust-a-grape says tonight....,

bizpacreview |  “President Obama will address the nation from the Oval Office about the steps our government is taking to fulfill his highest priority: keeping the American people safe,” the White House said in a statement Saturday.

“The President will provide an update on the ongoing investigation into the tragic attack in San Bernardino,” the statement said. “The President will also discuss the broader threat of terrorism, including the nature of the threat, how it has evolved, and how we will defeat it.”

Obama’s first reaction to the attack in San Bernardino — an attack the FBI has now declared an act of terror — was to push for more stringent gun control laws.

Allowing no crisis to go to waste, the president will likely call on Congress to close a loophole that he claims allows possible terrorists on the country’s No-Fly list to purchase a gun.

Oh, and there’s sure to be a lecture on avoiding “anti Muslim” speech.

Based on the reaction on social media, few may be tuning it Sunday night… seems this president has long ago lost the ear of rational Americans.

your passport and transport ready and right or are you going to stand and fight?

theatlantic | Liberty University’s motto is “training champions for Christ.” Apparently, the training offered by the evangelical college will now include a free concealed-weapons course for its students.

At Liberty’s convocation service on Friday, the school president, Jerry Falwell Jr., responded to the San Bernardino shooting, saying, “If more good people had concealed-carry permits, then we could end those Muslims before they walked in and killed them.” He encouraged students to enroll in the university’s gratis certification course and said he was carrying a weapon “in my back pocket right now.” He concluded by saying, “Let’s teach them a lesson if they ever show up here.”

Falwell’s comments are the latest in a string of proclamations by conservative Christians appealing to religious authority and yet apparently devoid of biblical reflection. Can they claim the Bible as their chief authority if they ignore it when politically expedient?

Falwell Jr. inherited the leadership of the school from his better-known father, but Liberty (my alma mater) has remained a popular stop for conservative politicians. Former Republican Senator Jim DeMint, the president of the Heritage Foundation, spoke in chapel prior to Falwell’s comments, which included a criticism of President Obama’s push for more gun control. While the school claims to put Jesus at the center of its curriculum, its president never referred to the Prince of Peace’s teachings in his remarks about gun violence. The absence is unsurprising. It’s hard to imagine how the Jesus’s teachings could support his case. 

gun and body armor sales spike after mass-media chumbalone-chiraq redirection...,

Time | Some stores haven't seen a spike like this since the 2012 Sandy Hook shooting

Gun sales have been spiking in the United States for weeks, especially following the mass shooting in San Bernardino, Calif. Wednesday that left 14 people dead.

Many California gun stores have seen a rush on guns after the San Bernardino shooting, according to ABC. “The knee jerk reaction of politicians is immediately after an event like this to take advantage of it for political goals and will try to restrict the rights of law-abiding gun owners,” Sam Paredes, spokesman for Gun Owners of America, told ABC. “So there is a natural rush to gun stores to purchase guns and ammunition.”

A gun store in Iowa told KCCI that their sales have shot up more than 30% in the past three weeks, and that they’ve been especially busy since San Bernardino.

And the Nardis Gun Club in Texas hasn’t seen gun sales this high since 2012, in the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting, Hawaii News Now reports.

According to the New York Times, the sales haven’t just been spiking after San Bernardino, however. More Americans had their backgrounds checked to buy guns on Black Friday than any other single day on record. 185,345 had their backgrounds checked on Black Friday, which is a 5 percent increase from the year before.

are attorneys general the godfathers in this thing of ours?

techdirt | Earlier this year, Judge Alex Kozinski went much further than his one-off comments in judicial opinions to take the prosecutors to task for… well, pretty much everything. The "epidemic of Brady [exonerating evidence] violations" he noted in 2013's USA v. Olsen decision was just the leadoff. Kozinski teed off on faulty forensic evidence (comparing arson "specialists" to "witch doctors"), the way the "first impression" almost always favors prosecutors (who get to present their case first in criminal trials), and the general unreliability of eyewitness testimony, which is often portrayed as infallible when it's the goverment presenting the witnesses. 

Several months later, the Department of Justice -- home to a great many prosecutors -- has finally responded. And its feelings are terribly hurt.

Federal prosecutors, who Judge Kozinski actually described in glowing terms, took offense at the fact they are not considered infallible by the Judge. And in the last few weeks, they have made their hurt feelings known. 

Andrew Goldsmith, National Criminal Discovery Coordinator at the Department of Justice, and John Walsh, United States Attorney for the District of Colorado, wrote aletter to the Georgetown Law Journal expressing their displeasure with Kozinski’s contribution to the journal. Rather than take the opportunity to join in Kozinki’s call for a more careful justice system, Goldsmith and Walsh demonstrated a stunning lack of awareness about what they do and how often it goes wrong these days.

According to this defensive group of prosecutors, Kozinski's "provocative preface" was certainly food for thought for whoever Kozinski was referring to, but not them, because federal prosecutors are upstanding men and women whom the judge has insulted deeply.

While the preface raises several points that merit discussion, such as the reliability of certain forms of evidence, Judge Kozinski goes too far in casting aspersions on the men and women responsible for the administration of justice in this country. His preface seemed to question not only the integrity of our agents and prosecutors, but also the government’s capacity to self-correct in the (very small) minority of cases when someone falls short.

The problem is, Kozinski is one of a very few judges to question the integrity of prosecutors. And for all the umbrage being hauled in by the semi-truckful, Kozinski was rather restrained when discussing federal prosecutors. Still, the DOJ cannot sit idly by while someone suggests a few prosecutors don't play by the rules and that the rules themselves are faulty. So, it does what the DOJ always does in these situations: defends the honor of the (not even directly) accused. When the DOJ takes down a local police force for misconduct or abuse, it always makes sure to rub the bellies of the police force at large before getting to the bad stuff. 

In this case, the bad stuff preceded the defensive statements from the DOJ, which now have to stand alone.

We have both worked with many prosecutors during our combined thirty-three years at the Justice Department. We have served as line prosecutors and supervisors, and now hold positions with national responsibility. Throughout our careers, what has always struck us is the professionalism, integrity, and decency of our colleagues. They care deeply about the work that they do, not because they are trying to rack up convictions or long sentences, but because they seek to ensure that justice is done in each and every case they handle. This extends to the seriousness with which they take their discovery obligations. Our prosecutors comply with these obligations—because they are required to do so and because it is the right thing to do. It is a principle embedded not only in the Department’s internal rules, but in the Department’s culture.

And being so good is oh so exhausting.

At the Department of Justice, we recognize our responsibility to work tirelessly to improve the work that we do, and to enhance the fair administration of justice.

In support of its assertions, the DOJ claims only a small handful of prosecutions have resulted in the courts calling it out for abusive actions. But that does nothing to diminish Kozinski's points.

a system designed to fail?

Tribune |  Chicago police officers enforce a code of silence to protect one another when they shoot a citizen, giving some a sense they can do so with impunity.

Their union protects them from rigorous scrutiny, enforcing a contract that can be an impediment to tough and timely investigations.

The Independent Police Review Authority, the civilian agency meant to pierce that protection and investigate shootings of citizens by officers, is slow, overworked and, according to its many critics, biased in favor of the police.

Prosecutors, meantime, almost never bring charges against officers in police shooting cases, seeming to show a lack of enthusiasm for arresting the people they depend on to make cases — even when video, an officer's history or other circumstances raise concerns.

And the city of Chicago, which oversees that system, has a keen interest in minimizing potential scandal; indeed, it has paid victims and their families millions of dollars to prevent information from becoming public when it fears the shooting details will roil neighborhoods and cause controversy for the mayor.

In many quarters, it's common knowledge that Chicago's system of investigating shootings by officers is flawed. But the Tribune's examination of the system shows that it is flawed at so many levels — critics say, by design — as to be broken. IPRA's own statistics bear that out. Of 409 shootings since the agency's formation in September 2007 — an average of roughly one a week — only two have led to allegations against an officer being found credible, according to IPRA. Both involved off-duty officers.

Attorney Joseph Roddy, who was a police union lawyer for a quarter-century, said the IPRA figures suggest a deep problem.

"It's hard to believe," Roddy said in an interview. "Michael Jordan couldn't make 407 out of 409 shots — even from the free-throw line."

Lorenzo Davis was more blunt. Davis, a retired Chicago police commander who joined IPRA and became a supervisor, sued the agency in September after he said its chief ordered him to change his conclusions in six cases in which he found officers wrongly shot citizens.

"The public cannot trust anyone who is currently in the system," said Davis, who himself was cleared in two shootings while an officer years ago.

under federal case law - overseer lying can't be used to prosecute the lying overseer?

Tribune |  Federal officials also are investigating the shooting. A federal grand jury investigation has involved more than 80 witnesses and branched into possible obstruction of justice by the officers at the scene, sources told the Tribune. In particular, the sources said, federal prosecutors are investigating the officers who made statements as well as the officers who prepared the reports of the statements.

Records show that a federal grand jury subpoenaed the Chicago Police Department for these same reports on Aug. 28.

Bringing charges against the officers for their statements could be difficult, however. Under federal case law, statements the officers were compelled to make as part of the police department's internal investigation cannot be used against them in any criminal prosecution.

The reports state investigators viewed the video and found them consistent with officers' accounts. The reports also note the 911 call after the shooting and radio transmissions from the scene "were consistent with the statements of the police officers."

The city has released information — including the video — in dribs and drabs, prolonging the scandal around McDonald's shooting. It was only after the video's release, in fact, that Emanuel fired Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy, saying McCarthy had lost the public trust.

chumbolones believe CPD protects them from lawless black teenagers, truth is...,

What interests me is that it is now clear that a significant number of CPD officers witnessed the murder, did nothing to prevent it, did nothing to assist the victim, and then went back to their desks and falsified their official reports with convenient narratives of a lunging, threatening attacker. Where are the reports of the 6 or 8 officer suspensions?

The situation is so "amiss" in Chiraq that lying on official reports is considered standard operating procedure. Forget about a fraternal or a fraternal order (police union) blue wall of silence.  This goes well beyond that. This right'chere is Omertà, straight up, simple, and plain.

Pervasive, systemic, overseer corruption from the top to the bottom and the bottom to the top - when it comes to covering up civilian murders - means that CPD is the mafia in Chiraq.

This level of corruption simply and elegantly answers a number of key questions concerning the flow of illegal guns and narcotics into Chiraq: Why haven't overseers stopped the flow of guns into Chiraq? Why haven't overseers stopped the flow of drugs into Chiraq?  Why hasn't there been any organization and control of criminal gangs since the terminal incarceration of Jeff Fort thirty years ago? Why so much ceaseless strife and disruptive violence around the drug business (not good for business) - unless somebody else profits from the strife, violence, and the chumbolone narrative about gangs? 

Who gets to sleep peacefully at night, not have to look over their shoulders, and rake in the hundreds of millions (billions) being harvested in the Chicago drug trade?

Chumbolones love to believe that blacks are inherently criminal and too stupid to organize themselves like every other ethnic group that did dirt, got paid, and went legit. Chumbolones love to believe that the blue mafia only makes clean kills of savage and inherently criminal blacks - because they're heroic first-responders who have every right to come home safely and enjoy a good nights sleep with the families.

Chumbolones are so fscking stoopid that they can't see what is conspicuously obvious to any reasonably astute casual observer. CPD has worked tirelessly to make the south side a feared and fearful community, the object of international scorn and derision, America's very own Chiraq.  CPD, with the full faith and backing of Chiraq's elite civic community and scum sucking political establishment, has done absolutely nothing to prevent Mexican drug cartels from making a home there and exploiting the city's unique status as America's number one rail and commerce hub.

Given the bounty of an endless supply of drug wholesale money, the stereotypical racist narrative of inherently savage and disorganized Black youths, watch now as the politics in Chiraq shift so as to require the political installation of a Mexican superintendent to work with the Mexican money people in Chiraq. 

Not only is all of the above entirely plausible, just watch it play out. I'm telling you what's going to happen. Watch, and you too will quickly come to understand that it is in fact an entirely true and accurate account of what's up in Chiraq (as well as many other major metropolices all across Uhmurkah.) The shooting of Laquan is a deja vu moment in the Matrix. You need to look at this situation closely. It's a HUGE glitch in the otherwise seamless Chumbolone sleep machine.

Sheeeeiiiiitt......, this situation is so squalid and deep from the top to the bottom and the bottom to the top - that a false flag sleeper operation had to be set off in San Bernadino to redirect all media - all at once - away from this ginormous glitch in the Uhmurkan Political Matrix.

Watch now as the sleep police systematically redirect your collective attention away from this tear in the fabric of Uhmurkan consensus reality. Spike Lee movie notwithstanding, the hole in consensus reality is not going to get much more attention from the national press. This fact is a major story in and unto itself.

Hell, it's not going to get top billing in Chiraq. Centrally controlled and consolidated Chiraqi media is doing everything in its power to diffuse the cover-up.

The Chicago Tribune has broken it up into digestible Chumbolone-sized servings:

"Emanuel objects to federal probe of police, but may not be able to stop it"

"Emanuel: 'I don't appreciate' family vacation question"

"Cop in Laquan McDonald video tied to another police shooting death"  (Van Dyke is a fscking button man/torpedo)

"Chicago's violent crime changed little during McCarthy's time"

If I can scry Chiraq's real deal from 670 miles away, do any of you believe that local Chicago media can't do any better with all its many sources and boots on the ground right there at home?  The Chicago Tribune, WGN (Tribune Broadcasting) and CLTV (also Tribune Broadcasting) - are all in on the hustle. Like agents in the Matrix, their job is to keep the Chumbolones soundly asleep.

If you hadn't realized why there used to be law against a major local newspaper owning a major local broadcast system in the same city, now you know why those restrictions were lifted.

Chumbolones - Subrealism is school for you..., Accept no substitutes!

I've stopped and frisked a thousand young punks fscking chumbolones...,

urbandictionary |  Noun. Pronounced: "chum'-buh-loan"
1) term originally used primarily in and around the Chicago area to describe a person who is easily tricked into doing something directly counter to their own personal self-interest; 2) since the 2008 presidential election, also applied to anyone outside the Chicago area who exhibits similar incapacity for sound judgment; 3) a person so devoid of common sense that they can be manipulated in any number of ways without having the slightest clue as to how ignorant and/or stupid they are. 

Application: Originally applied to lesser-educated Caucasians of lower intelligence who tend to believe anything that government officials and the news media tell them; since the 2008 election, now also applied to better-educated and intelligent Caucasians of all ages and genders who are totally devoid of any street smarts whatsoever, as well as to members of all other races, age groups and genders who also continue to believe whatever is told to them by government and media representatives evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.

Synonym: chump, dupe, stooge, imbecile, sucker, idiot, hick, hayseed, moron, roundhead, ignoramus, dumb-ass, dip shit.
Antonym: urban street-wise denizen, intelligent well-versed voter.
Government Manipulator: "I'm doing this for you, because it's really in your best interest." Chumbolone: "Well, heck, gee wiz, OK, why didn't you just say so- just tell me what I should do."

Government Manipulator: "If you give me $20 I'll make your life much better." Chumbolone: "Well, jeez, now you're talkin'- here's $40, so you can make my life twice as good!"

dirty metropolices - this one in dothan al - and straight up, grade-A pulitzer work

Henry County Report | HUNDREDS OF CASES PROSECUTED WITH PLANTED EVIDENCE, MANY WRONGLY CONVICTED STILL IN PRISON

The Alabama Justice Project has obtained documents that reveal a Dothan Police Department’s Internal Affairs investigation was covered up by the district attorney. A group of up to a dozen police officers on a specialized narcotics team were found to have planted drugs and weapons on young black men for years. They were supervised at the time by Lt. Steve Parrish, current Dothan Police Chief, and Sgt. Andy Hughes, current Asst. Director of Homeland Security for the State of Alabama. All of the officers reportedly were members of a Neoconfederate organization that theSouthern Poverty Law Center labels “racial extremists.” The group has advocated for blacks to “return” to Africa, published that the civil rights movement is really a Jewish conspiracy, and that blacks have lower IQ’s . Both Parrish and Hughes held leadership positions in the group and are pictured above holding a confederate battle flag at one of the club’s secret meetings.

The documents shared reveal that the internal affairs investigation was covered up to protect the aforementioned officers’ law enforcement careers and keep them from being criminally prosecuted.

Several long term Dothan law enforcement officers, all part of an original group that initiated the investigation, believe the public has a right to know that the Dothan Police Department, and District Attorney Doug Valeska, targeted young black men by planting drugs and weapons on them over a decade. Most of the young men were prosecuted, many sentenced to prison, and some are still in prison.  Many of the officers involved were subsequently promoted and are in leadership positions in law enforcement. They hope the mood of the country is one that demands action and that the US Department of Justice will intervene.

The group of officers requested they be granted anonymity, and shared hundreds of files from the Internal Affairs Division. They reveal a pattern of criminal behavior from within the highest levels of the Dothan Police Department and the district attorney’s office in the 20th Judicial District of Alabama. Multiple current and former officers have agreed to testify if United States Attorney General Loretta Lynch appoints a special prosecutor from outside the state of Alabama, or before a Congressional hearing. The officers believe that there are currently nearly a thousand wrongful convictions resulting in felonies from the 20th Judicial District that are tied to planted drugs and weapons and question whether a system that allows this can be allowed to continue to operate.