The Knock-Out Game. A curious one way crime.

The Statue of Justice has a woman who is blindfolded, showing justice is blind. It must be to be objective. However, this is curious.  Or it it?

Katy man accused of ‘knockout’ hate crime

It took more than a week for 27-year-old Conrad Barrett to work up the courage to sucker-punch an elderly man in an apparent attempt to make himself famous. 

“The plan is to see if I were to hit a black person, would it be nationally televised,” Barrett can be heard saying on cellphone video he took before the alleged attack on Nov. 24. 

On video he recorded, Barrett can be heard laughing and saying “knockout” before fleeing the scene, investigators said. 

Several videos he created were damning enough for prosecutors to charge him with a hate crime punishable by 10 years in federal prison, authorities said Thursday.
The video shows Barrett talking about playing the “knockout game” while driving around the parking lot of the Katy Mills mall, according to court records. There is also video of Barrett walking up to a frail 79-year-old man, saying, “How you doing?” before a loud smack is heard. Barrett punched the man in the face, breaking his jaw and dropping him to the pavement, investigators said. 

“Suspected crimes of this nature will simply not be tolerated,” said U.S. Attorney Kenneth Magidson... 

...Federal officials examined the phone to find several videos, including one of the alleged assault, and an arrest warrant was issued earlier this week. Taken into federal custody Thursday, Barrett will remain behind bars until he appears in court Friday... 

...Federal officials said Thursday that hate crime laws were created to address the type of allegations lodged against Barrett. 

“It is unimaginable in this day and age that one could be drawn to violently attack another based on the color of their skin,” said Stephen Morris, special agent in charge of the Houston FBI office. “We remind all citizens we are protected under the law from such racially motivated attacks, and encourage everyone to report such crimes to the FBI.” 

Shocking to activists 

The allegation shocked activists, including members of Houston Ministers Against Crime. 

“That’s not just a hate crime. That’s ignorance, evil, mental illness,” said the Rev. Robert Gilmore, president of Real Urban Ministry. “We don’t tolerate people like that. ‘The knockout game’ typically involves teenagers. A 27-year-old is scandal. He has to be admonished by the community.” 

The Houston chapter of the Anti-Defamation League applauded law enforcement for the arrest. 

“By investigating this alleged assault as a hate crime, law enforcement officers send a message that these ‘knockout attacks’ aren’t a game,” said Martin Cominsky, the league’s director. “They are crimes that should be taken seriously and should be considered hate crimes when they appear to be motivated by race, religion, or other characteristics that a person cannot change.”

Now I'm glad to see this POS off the streets but I'm curious that the only time I've seen "Hate crimes" being filed in this trend is when a black man was assaulted by a white man.  But for some reason, our esteemed Department of Justice is not interested in black on white crime.  For instance, this is not a hate crime in the minds of the feds:

And I wonder if Eric Holder sent help to New York here:

Police Added in Brooklyn Neighborhood Amid "Knockout Game" Attacks 

The NYPD has put extra officers in a Brooklyn neighborhood where as many as eight people have been smacked or punched as part of a known trend that targets random victims, mostly white Jewish people, on the street. 

Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said Wednesday that some of the attacks were being investigated as hate crimes.The suspects in the Brooklyn attacks have all been black teens, police said. 

Some victims have been slapped, some have been knocked down. The assaults are not robberies. 

"A phrase that is used is 'polarbearing,' or 'polar bear,'" Kelly said. "Knockout has also been used."...

 Or here:

Thugs target N.Y. Jews in disturbing ‘Knockout’ game 

A series of unprovoked attacks on Jews in New York City could be part of a disturbing new game among inner-city youths called the “Knockout” game or “Get the Jew.” 

The NYPD Hate Crimes Task Force is looking into a series of attacks on Jews in Brooklyn, but videos of gangs playing the game are cropping up all over the country. 

The name of the game is to show one’s machismo by sucker-punching an unsuspecting victim and knocking them out cold. Video surveillance of young blacks playing the game have cropped up in major cities all over the country. 

One Jewish man in Brooklyn told CBS New York that his 12-year-old son was attacked last Wednesday because he was dressed in traditional Jewish clothing. 

“It’s clearly anti-Semitism,” he said. “One, full strength with his fist, whacked him, punched him, on the side of the face, full force.” 

CBS reports that a teacher was attacked in Pittsburgh, and in London, a teen was hit from behind. On Nov. 10, a 78-year-old woman was attacked in Brooklyn. 

Video also shows a 19-year-old Jewish man being sucker-punched in Brooklyn. 

“He was actually holding an expensive camera. And they punched him and nothing was stolen,” Rabbi Yaacov Behrman told CBS New York. “And they’re playing a game: ‘Knockout.’ ‘Knock out the Jew,’ maybe. And they’re going around the neighborhood punching Jews.” 

Brooklyn Assemblyman Dov Hikind said the attacks are not about robbing people, but about targeting Jews. 

“I think there have been a total of eight [incidents of anti-Semitism] since September, middle of September,” Police Commissioner Ray Kelly said, CBS New York reported.

The point of this post.  Like any "hate crime", i.e. a crime based on race or religion or other protected class, the protection is only directed one way.  I've heard many a black "leader" say a black man cannot, by definition, but a racist.  So race based crimes can only go on way, white on black.

Again the words of MLK, "...judged not on the color of their skin of but on the content of their character..."  But blind justice is not going to come from a Justice Department led by a thug with a serious chip on his shoulder.  This country deserves better.

Israel and water

Israel's Water ChallengeIsrael's successful efforts to increase water security will lessen one of the country's geographical constraints. But new sources of water are more energy intensive, and this could increase Israel's short-term dependence on energy imports unless domestic energy sources are successfully developed. 

While Israel enjoys relative national security compared to its neighbors, which are struggling with internal fragmentation, this will probably change eventually. Because concerted military efforts have been required in the past to secure water resources, Israel has had a strong incentive to develop technological solutions to improve water security. Additional domestic water resources -- including increasing desalination capacity and continued efforts to recycle water -- allow Israel to mitigate one of its inherent geographic constraints. 

Israel has substantially increased its capacity to desalinize water over the last decade. The arid country of roughly 8 million already has a number of desalination plants -- including the Sorek plant, the world's largest desalination plant of its kind, which became fully operational in October. Israel has plans to increase total desalination capacity through 2020 such that it approaches the estimated annual amount of internally generated natural water resources. 

Naturally Occurring Water 

Israel's total annual internal renewable natural sources of fresh water stand at 0.75 billion cubic meters. It has roughly 265 cubic meters per year of water per person available. This is well below the U.N. definition of water poverty, which is anything below 1,000 cubic meters per person per year. 

For groundwater, Israel relies on two main aquifers: the Coastal Aquifer and the Mountain Aquifer (which is further divided into subaquifers). Both also lie under the Palestinian territory -- in Gaza and the West Bank, respectively.  

Israel's surface water is concentrated mainly in the north and east of the country. Israel is part of the Jordan River system, which also includes Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and the West Bank. The major rivers in the upper part of the basin include the Hasbani, Banias and the Dan rivers. These rivers converge to form the Jordan River near the border of Israel, Lebanon and Syria before flowing into the Sea of Galilee. Downstream, the Jordan River is further fed by the major tributaries of the Yarmouk and Zarqa rivers.Crucially, more than half of Israel's total natural water originates outside its borders: 310 million cubic meters come from Lebanon, 375 million cubic meters come from Syria and 345 million cubic meters originate in the West Bank. All the countries in this arid region compete for the limited resources of the basin. The Palestinian Authority has between 51 cubic meters per person and 333 cubic meters per person per year depending on location, while Syria and Lebanon receive water from additional river systems and operate at 882 cubic meters per year per person and 1,259 cubic meters per year per person, respectively. Jordan has 161 cubic meters per year per person.Allocations of water from transboundary river systems are often disputed. The last basin-wide allocation scheme for the Jordan River system came in 1955 with the Jordan Valley Unified Water Plan (also known as the Johnston Plan, named after the American ambassador involved in negotiations). By allocating water based primarily on agricultural demand, the plan offered a compromise between participating nations. However, because many of the Arab states did not want to recognize Israel, the plan was never ratified. Attitudes toward cooperative distribution strategies continued to sour during the construction of Israel's National Water Carrier, which diverted water from the Sea of Galilee to other points in Israel. However, Jordan and Israel have used the Unified Plan as the basis for subsequent negotiations. 

As one of the downstream riparian nations in the basin, protecting Israel's northern borders is essential to maintaining control of surface water resources. Maintaining control of the Golan Heights not only gives Israel a military advantage in dealing with adversaries to the north, it also helps to guarantee access to the Sea of Galilee.Israel historically has demonstrated a willingness to use military force to guarantee access to water resources. In 1964, Syria, with the support of the Arab League, began devising plans to divert the Banias River, threatening roughly 10 percent of Israel's water supply at the time. From 1965-1967, Israel launched attacks to destroy the diversion projects under construction in an effort to maintain access to the water source.Water rights and distribution parameters were included in the 1994 peace treaty between Israel and Jordan. The Oslo II agreement in 1995 between Israel and the Palestinian National Authority also outlined parameters for water cooperation in the West Bank, but in practice, joint management has often failed and the Palestinian population remains heavily dependent on Israel for access to water.  

These treaties also did not remove Israel's imperative to ensure continued access to water resources, nor its willingness to threaten military action to ensure it. In 2002, villages in southern Lebanon installed small pumping stations and irrigation pipelines on the Hasbani River. Ariel Sharon, Israeli prime minister at the time, claimed these actions constituted a "case for war" and threated military action. While no action was taken, the posturing illustrates Israel's wariness of upstream water management schemes.  

Expanding Sources of Water: Conservation and Desalination 

The foundations of Israel's current water infrastructure system were laid in the 1950s and 1960s, when Israel faced a more volatile security situation. Subsequent decades saw further development of the efficient use of water and the development of alternative sources. As a result, Israel has expanded internal water resources without expanding its physical borders, helping mitigate the risk of international confrontations over water.To the same end, Israel has also developed a highly organized water management system, effectively integrating the whole country. An early project known as the National Water Carrier, which comprises a series of canals, pipelines and pumping stations, moves water from the Sea of Galilee in the comparatively water-rich north to areas of higher demand and greater need in the central and southern zones.  

Israel is also a pioneer and global leader in water-efficient irrigation technology. Because agriculture remains the largest water consumer in the country, efficient use in this sector is necessary for continued sustainable water management. In addition to the irrigation technology, by effectively treating roughly 400 million cubic meters of wastewater, using it mostly to irrigate crops, Israel further reduces pressure on water resources.Although Israel has used desalination technology on a smaller scale since the 1960s, the push for a substantial increase in desalination capacity began only after a major drought in 1998-1999. Several droughts over the course of the last 15 years drove home the vulnerability of Israel's water supply. Meanwhile, the overuse of groundwater resources, especially of the Coastal Aquifer, is degrading the quality of the water. 

Israel currently consumes just under 2 billion cubic meters of water per year, and while water management has the ability to improve the efficiency of water usage, increasing populations in the region will continue to pressure these limited resources. These factors combined have pushed Israel toward desalination. 

When the Sorek plant became fully operational in October, Israel gained 150 million cubic meters per year of desalination capacity. Total seawater desalination capacity is expected to reach 600 million cubic meters per year by 2015 and could reach 750 million cubic meters per year by 2020. The production cost of desalinized water depends on the plant, but averages $0.65 per cubic meter, with the new Sorek plant costing roughly $0.50 per cubic meter. This is compared to $0.15-$0.45 for water from natural sources. Advances in the technology that Israel uses, including technologies that improve the energy efficiency of the plants, have helped drive the costs down compared to previous desalination technology. But desalinated water remains far more energy-intensive than naturally sourced water, and it increases demands for power on the national electricity grid and from independent natural gas generators. 

Short-Term Dependence on Imported Energy 

Because Israel has traditionally been an energy importer, increasing reliance on an energy-intensive water resource could in turn increase Israel's dependence on energy-exporting nations. Natural gas will likely be the predominant fuel used to produce desalinated water. The Israeli electrical grid is projected to shift further toward natural gas and away from coal in the coming years, while the desalination plants often independently employ natural gas generators. 

The total fuel required will vary based both on the type of desalination plant, as well as the type of power generation. Even with newer, more efficient equipment, the operation of more than 500 million cubic meters of desalination capacity could require more than 100 million cubic meters of natural gas or the equivalent energy from some other fuel sources to produce the additional power necessary to run the plants.   

Israel had previously been an importer of natural gas, but the total volume of imports has declined in recent years. As of August 2013, imports were only accounting for 13 percent of total consumption. Furthermore, offshore discoveries in the eastern Mediterranean, including the Leviathan fields projected to come online as early as 2016, mean Israel has the potential to become a natural gas exporter. While there are many political and technical constraints surrounding the development and subsequent use of these fields, increased levels of domestic energy production could reduce dependence on foreign partners in terms of energy. This is especially important as Israel pursues a strategy of relying on more energy-intensive water resources. 

Outlook 

Israel traditionally requires a third-party sponsor to survive. And even with the added desalination capacity, Israel may still need to use water from external sources. But it has successfully adjusted to the environment and better insulated itself from its neighbors, complementing an established military superiority. And this could provide additional maneuverability in future negotiations. 

Israel is momentarily in a secure strategic position. Syria will likely remain in a state of civil war for an extended period, and Lebanon remains fragile and fragmented. Israel maintains a working relationship with other neighbors, such as the Hashemite regime in Jordan, as well as Fatah and the Palestinian National Authority and the Egyptian military. This status quo seems unlikely to change in the short term. But although Israel is in a relatively stable position, it knows how mercurial the surrounding region is and will likely still behave proactively around national security issues. 

Israel's proactive solution to ensuring water security is to develop additional domestic resources. Though this will require more imported energy in the short term, the continued development of domestic energy resources could act as a counter-balance, even as water resources become more energy-intensive.

"Israel's Water Challenge is republished with permission of Stratfor."

Officer Down

Deputy Sheriff Clinton H. Frazier
Union County Mississippi Sheriff's Office
End of Watch: Wednesday, December 18, 2013
Age: 36
Tour: 2 years
Badge # 14

Deputy Sheriff Clinton Frazier was killed in a single car crash on Highway 178, just inside the Myrtle city limits, at approximately 9:00 pm.

He was attempting to stop a vehicle when his patrol car left the roadway, struck an embankment, and overturned. The driver of the vehicle he was attempting to stop fled the scene following the crash. She was arrested several days later and charged with culpable negligent manslaughter and leaving the scene of a traffic fatality.

Deputy Frazier had served with the Union County Sheriff's Office for two years. He is survived by his wife and three children.

Rest in Peace Bro…We Got The Watch

Day is done, Gone the sun, From the lake, From the hills, From the sky. All is well, Safely rest, God is nigh. 

Phil Robinson, GLAAD and Freedom of Speech

Unless you have been in the Louisiana swamp for the last week you have heard of the Phil Robinson comments in CG. Well, like most of the media, most of the comments have not shown Phil's actually comments. So here they are:

...Out here in these woods, without any cameras around, Phil is free to say what he wants. Maybe a little too free. He’s got lots of thoughts on modern immorality, and there’s no stopping them from rushing out. Like this one:

“It seems like, to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man’s anus. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying? But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.”

Perhaps we’ll be needing that seat belt after all....


...“Everything is blurred on what’s right and what’s wrong,” he says. “Sin becomes fine.”

What, in your mind, is sinful?

“Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”...

...“I didn’t dredge anything back up. I just put it behind me.”

As far as Phil is concerned, he was literally born again. Old Phil—the guy with the booze and the pills—died a long time ago, and New Phil sees no need to apologize for him: “We never, ever judge someone on who’s going to heaven, hell. That’s the Almighty’s job. We just love ’em, give ’em the good news about Jesus—whether they’re homosexuals, drunks, terrorists. We let God sort ’em out later, you see what I’m saying?”

If I read this right, he doesn't approve of what was known as an "alternative lifestyle" in times past, but he is not calling for discrimination, assault or hatred of gays. On the contrary, he says "We just love 'em..." Not exactly like a like a street thug preacher trying to insight a riot after a 17 year old lies about cops raping her. But let's continue.

On growing up in pre-civil-rights-era Louisiana

“I never, with my eyes, saw the mistreatment of any black person. Not once. Where we lived was all farmers. The blacks worked for the farmers. I hoed cotton with them. I'm with the blacks, because we're white trash. We're going across the field.... They're singing and happy. I never heard one of them, one black person, say, ‘I tell you what: These doggone white people’—not a word!... Pre-entitlement, pre-welfare, you say: Were they happy? They were godly; they were happy; no one was singing the blues.”

Part of this made up (and yes, it's made up) crisis is Phil Robinson saying racist things. I don't see anything against blacks in this quote (if you can find something I missed in the article, please point it out). He isn't calling Obama or Jessee Jackson or Al Sharpton racial epithets, but giving his viewpoint of a "white trash" kid in Louisiana in the 50s.

Now something that hasn't been part of the discussion:

Does it ever wear you down?

“Oh yeah.”

Willie has just come back from Washington, D.C., where he accepted an award at the Angels in Adoption Gala. (He and his wife, Korie, adopted a biracial child named Will and are dedicated advocates of the practice.)...

Here is a man who dominates his family, no one questions that. And if he was a bigot like the usual suspects are saying, would he allow a mixed race child in his family? I wonder. Not really.


Now how is the article wrapped up:

...“So you and your woman: Are y’all Bible people?”

Not really, I’m sorry to say.

“If you simply put your faith in Jesus coming down in flesh, through a human being, God becoming flesh living on the earth, dying on the cross for the sins of the world, being buried, and being raised from the dead—yours and mine and everybody else’s problems will be solved. And the next time we see you, we will say: ‘You are now a brother. Our brother.’ So then we look at you totally different then. See what I’m saying?”

I think so?

We hop back in the ATV and plow toward the sunset, back to the Robertson home. There will be no family dinner tonight. No cameras in the house. No rowdy squirrel-hunting stories from back in the day. There will be only the realest version of Phil Robertson, hosting a private Bible study with a woman who, according to him, “has been on cocaine for years and is making her decision to repent. I’m going to point her in the right direction.”

It’s the direction he would like to point everyone: back to the woods. Back to the pioneer spirit. Back to God. “Why don’t we go back to the old days?” he asked me at one point. But now, I’m afraid, I must get out of the ATV and go back to where I belong, back to the godless part of America that Phil is determined to save.

Sounds like a man living what he is preaching. He wants to fundamentally transform this country, to borrow a phrase. Wish we would have a few more people doing that.

Now from, oh, an "objective" source, Yahoo news.

‘Duck Dynasty’ Fallout: GLAAD Reeling From Biggest Backlash in Years, Says Rep

In the fallout over Wednesday’s suspension of “Duck Dynasty” star Phil Robertson by A&E for anti-gay and racist remarks, GLAAD is experiencing record levels of backlash.

“In the five-and-a-half years I’ve worked at GLAAD, I’ve never received so many violently angry phone calls and social media posts attacking GLAAD for us speaking out against these comments,” the media watchdog organization’s vice president of communications Rich Ferraro told TheWrap.

He said those reactions range from those who simply believe as Robertson believes to those who feel that GLAAD and A&E’s actions limit the reality star’s free speech.

“I don’t think this is about the first amendment,” Ferraro said. “I feel it’s more about the America we live in today. That is one where Americans, gay and straight, are able to speak out when people in the public eye make anti-gay and racist remarks.”

Robertson’s supporters have started petitions, called for boycotts and include Sarah Palin, Sean Hannity and Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal. Currently, more than 70,000 people have signed the online petition asking A&E to drop the suspension.

“It just means we still have a lot of work to do,” Ferraro said.

GLAAD spoke with A$E representatives on Wednesday morning to discuss why people would be offended by the comments and calls to action. ”They took this very seriously, as soon as the news broke,” Ferraro said.

After the meeting, GLAAD issued its statement on Robertson’s comments. A&E initially released a statement from Robertson in which he said he would “never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me.” But the network declined to comment itself until Wednesday night, when it announced the suspension, which GLAAD applauded.

“We believe the next step is to use this as an opportunity for Phil to sit down with gay families in Louisiana and learn about their lives and the values they share,” the spokesman said.

The organization is also currently researching companies who use Robertson as a spokesperson.

“Silence is agreement in this case,” he said. “With such egregious anti-gay and racist comments, those companies that choose to be affiliated with this family need to speak out.”...

If there is any intolerance here, I think it's the gay organizations quoted here, not regular gay or black people. Yahoo (like AP, the NY Times, et all) instantly present these groups as the spokespeople of all America. And they are not. Jessee Jackson is a spokesman for one man, himself. But that won't stop GLAAD or OFA from trying to stir stuff up. They need to make some money off the race baiting racket.

Phil, stick by your guns, so to speak. Nice to see a man who says what he believes and doesn't care if the offends someone. If you offend by his speech, the solution is more speech. You don't have a right to not be offended. If you are offended by that, go do something Dick Cheney told Pat Leahy to do.

Grandma's Gotta stay inside....

A little dated, but still good!

The DoJ is looking deap and hard!

More comment is not needed.

The secure border....

We have had an open border with Mexico for generations, but the issue has become problematic over the last few decades. Narcotics, illegal immigration and now human trafficking made this a crisis in no exertion of the word. Now if you listen to the DHS and other idiots, the "border has never been more secured". This picture and the enclosed article show that as a flat out lie.

The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security reported that tunnels along the southwest border are a growing and significant threat to security.

According to a report by the DHS OIG released December 11, the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency, charged with protecting the U.S. borders, lacks the technological capability to detect subterranean tunnels.

“Illicit cross-border tunnels along the southwest border are primarily used by criminals to transport illegal drugs into the United States, and they are a significant and growing threat to border security,” noted the report. “In an effort to counter this threat, CBP has modified its operations through patrols, intelligence gathering, and closing of illicit cross-border tunnels, but it does not yet have the technological capability to detect the tunnels routinely and accurately.”

“To best address this capability gap, CBP needs to develop and acquire tunnel detection technology, but it has not been able to identify existing technology that functions effectively in its operating environment,” the IG added.

“CBP is creating a Tunnel Detection and Technology Program to address capability gaps in countering the cross-border tunnel threat,” noted the IG. “As part of this effort, CBP is drafting the documents required by DHS to fund, develop, and acquire tunnel detection technology. Additionally, CBP plans to establish a Program Management Office to provide leadership, strategy, and organization to department-wide, counter-tunnel efforts.”

The link has a great video on the tunneling over the border.

Schadenfreude, pure Schadenfreude. And the best is yet to come.

One of the points I've made in many a discussion is don't confuse intelligence and education. Great example, these highly educated morons (aka liberals) actually bought the lies of Obama and Obamacare. Now they are discovering they may not be getting what they thought they would.

With Affordable Care Act, Canceled Policies for New York Professionals

Many in New York’s professional and cultural elite have long supported President Obama’s health care plan. But now, to their surprise, thousands of writers, opera singers, music teachers, photographers, doctors, lawyers and others are learning that their health insurance plans are being canceled and they may have to pay more to get comparable coverage, if they can find it.

They are part of an unusual, informal health insurance system that has developed in New York, in which independent practitioners were able to get lower insurance rates through group plans, typically set up by their professional associations or chambers of commerce. That allowed them to avoid the sky-high rates in New York’s individual insurance market, historically among the most expensive in the country.

But under the Affordable Care Act, they will be treated as individuals, responsible for their own insurance policies. For many of them, that is likely to mean they will no longer have access to a wide network of doctors and a range of plans tailored to their needs. And many of them are finding that if they want to keep their premiums from rising, they will have to accept higher deductible and co-pay costs or inferior coverage.

“I couldn’t sleep because of it,” said Barbara Meinwald, a solo practitioner lawyer in Manhattan.

Ms. Meinwald, 61, has been paying $10,000 a year for her insurance through the New York City Bar. A broker told her that a new temporary plan with fewer doctors would cost $5,000 more, after factoring in the cost of her medications.

Ms. Meinwald also looked on the state’s health insurance exchange. But she said she found that those plans did not have a good choice of doctors, and that it was hard to even find out who the doctors were, and which hospitals were covered. “It’s like you’re blindfolded and you’re told that you have to buy something,” she said.

The people affected include not just writers, artists, doctors and the like, but also independent tradespeople, like home builders or carpenters, who work on their own.

Some have received notices already; others, whose plans have not yet expired, will soon receive letters in the mail. It is unclear exactly how many New Yorkers are affected; according to state health officials, as many as 400,000 independent practitioners get health insurance through job-related group plans, but that number also includes people who receive coverage through their spouses’ employers.

The predicament is similar to that of millions of Americans who discovered this fall that their existing policies were being canceled because of the Affordable Care Act. The crescendo of outrage led to Mr. Obama’s offer to restore their policies, though some states that have their own exchanges, like California and New York, have said they will not do so.

But while those policies, by and large, had been canceled because they did not meet the law’s requirements for minimum coverage, many of the New York policies being canceled meet and often exceed the standards, brokers say. The rationale for disqualifying those policies, said Larry Levitt, a health policy expert at the Kaiser Family Foundation, was to prevent associations from selling insurance to healthy members who are needed to keep the new health exchanges financially viable.

Siphoning those people, Mr. Levitt said, would leave the pool of health exchange customers “smaller and disproportionately sicker,” and would drive up rates...

...Donna Frescatore, executive director of New York State of Health, the state insurance exchange, said that on a positive note, about half of those affected would qualify for subsidized insurance under the new health exchange because they had incomes under 400 percent of the poverty level, about $46,000 for an individual.

But many professionals make too much money to qualify for the subsidies, and even if they are able to find comparably priced insurance, the new policies do not have the coverage they are accustomed to.

David Rubin, vice president of Teiget, the Entertainment Industry Group Insurance Trust, which had served as a broker for about 1,000 members of creative guilds, said a big complaint was that in New York City and much of the state, the new individual plans both on and off the exchange did not allow patients to go to doctors out of network. “All these people had these customized plans which are better than most of the things out there, and most of them are saving only a small amount of money,” Mr. Rubin said.

Roy Lyons, managing director of Marsh U.S. Consumer, an insurance brokerage, said he had heard complaints from physicians, lawyers, pharmacists and optometrists. “At first they think it’s the bar association making the decision or the insurance company doing it,” Mr. Lyons said. “We have to explain that this is the Affordable Care Act; that’s what was put into law. Once they understand, they’re less emotional, but they’re not happy with it.”

Among those affected are members of the Authors Guild; the Advertising Photographers of America; the Suzuki Association of the Americas, a music teachers organization; the Society of Children’s Book Writers and Illustrators; the New York City Bar Association; and the New York County Medical Society. (One group, the Freelancers Union, negotiated a one-year exemption with the state.)

“One of the reasons to join a society is to get health insurance,” said Dr. Paul N. Orloff, president of the New York County Medical Society. Even doctors pay a lot for coverage, he said, because the days of trading medical care with colleagues are long gone. “In the old days, professional courtesy was the norm,” Dr. Orloff said.

The medical society has not yet formally notified its solo practitioners, because their insurance plans do not expire until April. But those letters will be going out soon, officials said.

It is not lost on many of the professionals that they are exactly the sort of people — liberal, concerned with social justice — who supported the Obama health plan in the first place. Ms. Meinwald, the lawyer, said she was a lifelong Democrat who still supported better health care for all, but had she known what was in store for her, she would have voted for Mitt Romney.

It is an uncomfortable position for many members of the creative classes to be in.

“We are the Obama people,” said Camille Sweeney, a New York writer and member of the Authors Guild. Her insurance is being canceled, and she is dismayed that neither her pediatrician nor her general practitioner appears to be on the exchange plans. What to do has become a hot topic on Facebook and at dinner parties frequented by her fellow writers and artists.

“I’m for it,” she said. “But what is the reality of it?”

Hey Camille, maybe you should have thought (I know, a novel concept for an Obamaite) about how the plan will work out. If you limit the supply of something like insurance by increasing the requirements (e.g. pap smears for men) the choices and therefor the costs go up. So you end up paying a lot more for less. It's something called the laws of economics and they are more settled than the laws of physics. Maybe if you and your colleges had read, understood and written on them before you went into that voting booth and pulled the lever for B Hussein Obama this could have been avoided. But the best, aka worst is yet to come.

Anyone with a two digit IQ knows what the real purpose of Obamacare is, and its got nothing to do with expanding medical coverage, lowering costs, etc. Obamacare is a bridge to single payer, specifically Medicaid for everyone (except for selected special people like the Obama's, and trust me Camille, you ain't one of them). So in the next few years, between the limiting of the supply of paying customers (you really think a perfectly healthy 24 year old is going to pay 20 grand for a policy he doesn't need) and increasing the supply of taking customers (e.g. old and ill) with no ability to adjust premiums will simply lead to bankruptcy for the health insurance industry. And the only place left is either the government or people actually pay for their services.

On Hotair there was a discussion if this would make these people think and possibly realign party. No, there are born and bread leftist, the true believers, the facts don't concern them. And as we are all going to be suffering do to this (unless John Roberts gets his head out his ass when the next Obamacare case hits SCOTUS) we at least can look at these morons and say, "We told you so!"

Two cops show how it's done....

Great work Officers Mark Morelli and Chantelle Wilson.

Hamilton police arrest video goes viral

A video of a police takedown and arrest in Hamilton is garnering international interest online for the way two officers handled a suspect who is resisting.

With a crowd watching, Hamilton police officers Mark Morelli and Chantelle Wilson spend several minutes subduing and arresting a woman who is screaming and calling out about being hurt as they try to handcuff her. Once she's in handcuffs and in the back of their police cruiser, the breathless officer then explains to the crowd exactly what he was doing.

“Our domestic policy is very specific. Without going into detail, this young woman has broken the law, and we were attempting to place her under arrest and she began to resist," he said to the people watching. “I’m doing my best not to hurt that girl. Our mandate is to affect arrests while doing the minimum amount of damage to people as possible. And that’s what I tried to do.”

He explains that he only used "soft hand techniques," so no punches, kicks or forceful throws to the ground were used to subdue the suspect.

“I’m not going to get into a long wrestling match with a young girl, because the longer she fights, the more likely one of the two of us is going to get hurt,” he said.

The man shooting the video questions the amount of force being used, but the officer reiterates again his approach.

“While it may appear to be very rough to you — and I apologize for you having to see that — but I have the lawful authority to arrest her and I am obligated to arrest her.”...

And I love the "Law and Order" use of force expect on the film. Idiot.

The Army has "a sophisticated heat beam which we called a 'laser'."

There is something to be said for this....

U.S. Army hails success with drone-shooting laser - Washington Times

The U.S. Army said its latest defense technology — a vehicle-mounted laser — has passed a recent test with flying colors, successfully shooting a drone from the sky and intercepting and destroying several mortar rounds.

The laser, dubbed the High Energy Laser Mobile Demonstrator, or HEL MD, and placed atop a military vehicle, hit more than 90 mortar bombs, as well as several drones, during a six-week test period conducted in New Mexico at the White Sands Missile Range, Agency France-Presse reported.
The technology probably won't be completely operational and ready for mission until 2022, because developers are going to be working on increasing the power and range of the lasers. And the Army still has decide whether or not to buy the system, officials said to AFP.

But the technology is proving top-notch and could go far in helping to protect troops from mortar, artillery or rocket fire, said one Boeing official.

"The system is capable of rapidly acquiring with the radar these very small targets and point a laser beam about the size of a quarter and destroy the targets while they're flying," said Mike Rim, a program manager at Boeing, in the AFP report.
Improvements to the system will enable it to take down objects that are moving at faster speeds than mortar rounds — like cruise missiles, the military officials told AFP.

But why do I have this image in my head.

Officer Down

Trooper Ross M. Riley
New York State Police, New York
End of Watch: Wednesday, November 20, 2013
Age: 44
Tour: 17 years
Badge # 2105

Trooper Ross Riley died after falling approximately 30-feet while participating in a high-angle rescue training exercise in Letchworth State Park.

As part of the exercise a life-size dummy had been placed on a ledge of a cliff over Wolf Creek. Trooper Riley, a paramedic for the agency, and two other troopers rappelled to the ledge and secured the dummy to a stretcher. As other personnel began to lift the stretcher Trooper Riley fell backwards and dropped approximately 30 feet into Wolf Creek, suffering severe head injuries.

The other two troopers immediately descended to his location and administered aid. He was transported to Wyoming County Community Hospital where he succumbed to his injuries.

Trooper Riley was a U.S. Marine Corps veteran of the Persian Gulf War and had served with the New York State Police for 17 years. He is survived by his wife and three daughters.

Rest in Peace Bro…We Got The Watch

Day is done, Gone the sun, From the lake, From the hills, From the sky. All is well, Safely rest, God is nigh. 

Two great ones make it another year...

The Nuge! He is 65 today and still not slowing down!!!



And John Anderson is 59!



Happy birthday gentlemen and many more good years with even more music.

Affluenza and other First World Problems

I first saw this on Facebook and my post in response was "You know what you call this in Massachusetts? Senator Kennedy." Started a bit of conversation but I think I made the point with the liberals in the group.

Now just read through this and it should infuriate you.

‘Affluenza’ defense in DWI assailed

“Affluenza,” the affliction cited by a psychologist to argue that a North Texas teenager from a wealthy family should not be sent to prison for killing four pedestrians while driving drunk, is not a recognized diagnosis and should not be used to justify bad behavior, experts said Thursday.

A judge’s decision to give 16-year-old Ethan Couch 10 years of probation for the fatal accident sparked outrage from relatives of those killed and has led to questions about the defense strategy. A psychologist testified in Couch’s trial in a Fort Worth juvenile court that as a result of “affluenza,” the boy should not receive the maximum 20-year prison sentence prosecutors were seeking.

The term “affluenza” was popularized in the late 1990s by Jessie O’Neill, the granddaughter of a past president of General Motors, when she wrote the book “The Golden Ghetto: The Psychology of Affluence.” It has since been used to describe a condition in which children
— generally from richer families — have a sense of entitlement, are irresponsible, make excuses for poor behavior, and sometimes dabble in drugs and alcohol, said Dr. Gary Buffone, a Jacksonville, Fla., psychologist.

But Buffone said Thursday that the term wasn’t meant to be used as a defense in a criminal trial or to justify such behavior.
“The simple term would be spoiled brat,” he said.

“Essentially what he (the judge) has done is slapped this child on the wrist for what is obviously a very serious offense which he would be responsible for in any other situation,” he said. “The defense is laughable, the disposition is horrifying … not only haven’t the parents set any consequences, but it’s being reinforced by the judge’s actions.”

District Judge Jean Boyd issued her sentence Tuesday after Couch “admitted his guilt” last week in four cases of intoxication manslaughter in the June accident, according to a news release from the Tar-rant County prosecutor’s office. The ruling came after the judge heard three days of testimony from witnesses, victims’ loved ones, investigators and treatment experts.

Psychologist testimony

The psychologist who testified as a defense witness at Couch’s trial said the boy grew up in a house where the parents were preoccupied with arguments that led to a divorce, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram reported.

But prosecutor Richard Alpert argued in court that if the boy continues to be cushioned by his family’s wealth, another tragedy is inevitable.
A message left for Boyd by the Associated Press was not returned Thursday. But the Star-Telegram reported that the judge said the programs available in the Texas juvenile justice system may not provide the intensive therapy Couch could receive at a $450,000-a-year rehabilitation center near Newport Beach, Calif., that the parents would pay for.

Although Couch’s case was handled in juvenile court, he has been identified publicly by the Tarrant County Sheriff’s Office.

One legal expert said he had never even heard of “affluenza.”

“The concept that I did something because I’m rich and spoiled doesn’t look like a good causation,” Richard Segura, a supervising attorney at the University of Texas at Austin’s Criminal Defense Clinic, told the AP. “It doesn’t sound like something that would ameliorate the punishment.”

However, the judge likely factored in rehabilitation, restitution and other factors when sentencing Couch, Segura said.
Surveillance video

Authorities said the teen and friends were seen on surveillance video stealing two cases of beer from a store. He had seven passengers in his Ford F-350, was speeding and had a blood-alcohol level three times the legal limit, according to trial testimony. His truck slammed into the four pedestrians, killing Brian Jennings, 43, Breanna Mitchell, 24, Shelby Boyles, 21, and her mother, Hollie Boyles, 52....

Enough to really get your blood boiling, but this is an upper income version of what certain "advocates of the poor" have been saying for generations. It's not my fault, blame the system, etc. And it's still as infuriating. You say someone is not mature enough to be held accountable for their actions but they are mature enough to be drive a vehicle, receive and use money, etc (Poorer people get SSI, Kennedy's get their inheritance).

I am fairly new to the fatherhood racket (two beautiful girls) and I've said to them more than once the only person responsible for what you do is you. I don't knock the defense attorney for pushing this tripe, he's getting paid to get a client off. But it's disgusting to see there are "learned" people on the bench who buy this crap.

Now this is what I call a K9 squad!

Who needs it...you have The New York Times, Bloomberg, AP, etc

Russian news agency closed down

The move will make Russia's state-owned agency more economical and increase its reach, the Kremlin says

Russia's President Vladimir Putin has abolished the country's state-owned news agency RIA Novosti.

In a surprise decree published on the Kremlin's website on Monday, Mr Putin announced it would be replaced by a news agency called Russia Today.

The new agency will be headed by journalist and keen Kremlin supporter Dmitry Kiselev.

The state-owned Voice of Russia radio station has also been closed. The decree was effective immediately.

Sergey Ivanov, the head of the Kremlin administration, has told journalists in Moscow that the news agency is being restructured in order to make it more economical while increasing its reach, Interfax reports.

Mr Ivanov was quoted as saying that the agency, which is being dissolved and reorganised as International News Agency Russia Today, needs to make "more rational use of public money" and that it has to be more effective.

"Russia pursues an independent policy and robustly defends its national interests. It's not easy to explain that to the world, but we can and must do this," he said....

Vlad, why are you worried about these people when you have MSNBC and CNN?

Fights, the Knockout Game and Deadly Force.

A point I made in previous blog debates is it's easy to look at what someone did with 20/20 hindsight, but decisions on deadly force are usually made in an instant. Here is a police cadet getting an education on that.

A loudmouth female police cadet, Trayvon Martin, and the “Knockout Game”

In one of the police academies I attended we watched a video of a police shooting. Two officers in two patrol cars were on a traffic stop and tried to arrest a passenger who had given them a fake name. The passenger started swinging, punched both officers and knocked them to the ground, then ran toward the second patrol car. One of the officers shot him.

Several cadets expressed outrage at the shooting. I had already been a cop for a few years, and had a different view. I argued that the cadets should look at the incident from the officers’ perspective. The officers were making a lawful arrest, they had both been assaulted and beaten badly, and may have thought the suspect was running toward the second patrol car to retrieve a weapon. At that point, a few years into my career, I had already been knocked silly a couple of times, and I knew those officers probably had their bells rung and could have honestly believed they were in life-threatening danger. I didn’t argue that the officers were definitely right, just that the situation may have been more complex than the inexperienced cadets thought.

Emphasis mine. As a reminders, the standard for use of deadly force is reasonable fear for life or serious bodily injury against yourself or a third person. Let's go on.

One female cadet blurted, “Just because you were already a cop, you think that whatever cops do is right!”

I groaned quietly. “No. I’m saying the officers got the crap beat out of them and may have thought the suspect was about to get one of their shotguns and shoot them.” Then I asked, “Have you ever been in a fight?”

“I’ve been in lots of fights!” she exclaimed. “I’ve been in fights at school and at clubs, I know what it’s like to get in a fight. Those cops had no reason to shoot that guy. All he did was hit them.”

The instructor shut our conversation down. I didn’t bring it up again. Until several months later, after the female cadet learned a hard lesson.

Toward the end of the academy we went through a very difficult training exercise. We had to run around the academy building, run up and down stairs several times, drag a dummy and a few other things, then get into a ring and fight an instructor for several minutes. The instructor was all padded up, and all we had was a soft foam baton and fake pistol. Most of the cadets got into the ring totally worn out, then got worked over by the instructor.

I was standing outside the ring when the female cadet went through. The instructor she faced was a very strong, female workout fanatic. The cadet ran into the ring panting and sweating, faced the instructor and yelled, “You’re under arrest! Turn around and put your hands behind your back!”

Without a word, the instructor threw a blindingly fast punch and nailed the cadet right between the eyes.

The cadet slammed onto her back. Her eyes were wide open and staring straight up, her mouth hanging slack. She was totally dazed from the blow. You could almost see the birds and stars swirling around her head.

Everyone screamed at her to get up. She eventually did, and did her best to put up a defense. But the fight was pretty much over after the first hit.

After the exercise, I casually said to the cadet, “So, I thought you had been in a lot of fights.”

She answered, “Yeah, but not like that! I was in girl fights. All we did was scratch each other and pull hair. That instructor hit me like a man.”

As I said, she learned an important lesson that day. If that instructor hadn’t knocked the crap out of her, she might have hit the street not knowing that one punch can completely disable someone. The cadet went on to become a very good officer.

During the uproar over the Trayvon Martin court case, I heard a lot of intelligent, educated people comment that “All Trayvon did was hit Zimmerman. That’s no reason to shoot someone.” And I saw in them the same ignorance of reality that the instructor had beaten out of the female cadet.

The people who made those comments have probably never been in a real fight. But, like the cadet, they think they have. They maybe had a few schoolyard scuffles, where neither side was trying to kill the other. They threw a few punches and kicks, without intending to really hurt their opponent, and their opponent landed a few blows without really hurting them. Worst case, someone got a bloody nose, or split lip. Maybe these people only watched others fight, and were never in one themselves.

But no matter. Even though their mental concept of a fight is two five year olds slapping each other under the monkey bars, they still believe their narrow experience with “fighting” makes them qualified to dictate when we’re allowed to use a gun to defend ourselves from someone who’s “only” throwing punches. They don’t seem to notice that no UFC or MMA fighters, people with real, actual fighting experience, are proclaiming “Your life can’t be in danger from being punched.”

Well, here’s some reality for those who think it’s always wrong to shoot an unarmed person, or who can’t fathom how George Zimmerman could have possibly been justified in shooting Trayvon Martin.

Last year an El Paso, Texas police officer was beaten to death by an unarmed 17 year old. The teenager punched the officer, knocked him backward onto the concrete, then straddled him and beat him severely. The officer never regained consciousness and died nine days later. He was a 29 year old Marine Corps veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan.

A few days ago an off-duty NYPD officer was knocked out with one punch. His attacker then repeatedly punched and kicked him while he was unconscious and helpless, and also slammed the back of his head into the concrete. The officer is currently in a medically-induced coma.

He goes on to discuss the Martin-Zimmerman case in more detail, but the point is made. When reviewing what a cop (or a homeowner for that matter) does in a spilt decision to use a weapon against someone, the viewpoint must be the from that person. Not from a third person sitting in an office with a cop of coffee, but of the man or woman in an alley who's just been punched multiple times, is about to loose consciousness and has to decide in a fraction of a second to shoot or not shoot.

Great article Mr. Hernandez.

Why is it narcissist is spelled Democrat

The world is noting the passing of Nelson Mandela, which it should. But why is it these two men-children must make it about themselves.

One, here is the little boy from Hope he will shut up, Bubba:

BILL CLINTON: I remember one day, oh, about a month after the whole impeachment business was over, Henry Hyde, who had run the whole show, unbelievably enough, maybe a few months after, it was shortly after, asked for a meeting at the White House, for something that he was interested in. He brought a delegation in. My staff said I can’tve you’re going to do this. I said, it’s my job, he’s a senior member of Congress. They came and left. As far as they knew, I did not even remember what had happened. I was able to do that, because of what Nelson Mandela did for me, the way he helped me.

Not to be outdone, here is the official White House tweet:

I would say I'm surprised, but I'm not.  These two overgrown children simply see the world revolving around themselves.  America deserves much better.

Let It Snow! Let It Snow! Make it So!

No comment needed.

New York's new Top Cop speaks...

Last month I posted on the Playboy interview with Ray Kelly, the outgoing Police Commissioner in New York. Well, got some good news from New York. The incoming idiot Gracie Manor actually has an actual cop going into and he's telling HIZONOEDAMAYER the truth.

BRATTON’S ENDORSEMENT OF STOP-AND-FRISK

Mayor-elect Bill de Blasio has named William J. Bratton his Police Commissioner. In returning to the job he held under Rudolph Giuliani in the nineteen-nineties, Bratton will be in charge of fulfilling one of de Blasio’s most prominent campaign promises: to end the stop-and-frisk tactics that were such a prominent part of Michael Bloomberg’s record as Mayor.

But Bratton’s views on stop-and-frisk may be considerably different from those of his new boss. In May of this year, I profiled Shira Scheindlin, the federal judge who presided over the class-action lawsuit that challenged the N.Y.P.D.’s stop-and-frisk policies. In the course of reporting that piece, I interviewed Bratton, and we discussed stop-and-frisk in some detail.

Bratton emphatically endorsed stop-and-frisk as a police tactic. “First off, stop-question-and-frisk has been around forever,” he told me. “It is known by stop-and-frisk in New York, but other cities describe it other ways, like stop-question-and-frisk or Terry stops. It’s based on a Supreme Court case from 1968, Terry v. Ohio, which focused very significantly on it. Stop-and-frisk is such a basic tool of policing. It’s one of the most fundamental practices in American policing. If cops are not doing stop-and-frisk, they are not doing their jobs. It is a basic, fundamental tool of police work in the whole country. If you do away with stop-and-frisk, this city will go down the chute as fast as anything you can imagine.”

We also discussed the current controversy over stop-and-frisk under Raymond Kelly, Bloomberg’s Police Commissioner. “What you have right now is a controversy in which nobody really understands what they are fighting about,” Bratton said. “Stop-and-frisk is not a tool solely to look for guns. Unfortunately, both the Mayor and the Police Commissioner refer to it that way, and that’s a problem because so few guns are recovered. But so what? The vast majority of stops are for a wide variety of things. Is someone drinking a can of beer on the corner? You want to stop that behavior. If somebody is aggressively panhandling on the street, urinating against a building. Is there somebody that you suspect is casing a building? Or is that two guys just locked out of their apartment? Police officers notice what may be a burglary. Of course they should be noticing and investigating. There are countless examples of what you want police to do.”

Bratton said stop-and-frisk reflected his Broken Windows approach to police work. “This approach is the perfect example of what the city refused to do for thirty years, starting in 1960,” he said. “They stopped basically policing. The police were no longer engaging in controlling behavior in the streets and fare evasion in the subways. You have to take action against minor offenses. It has to be done respectfully, and it has to be done consistently, as Kelly has articulated, time and again. But it has to be done.”...

Yes guys, people in this country ain't that bright on law enforcement. I often look at them funny when they are shocked when I say "I don't need probably cause to stop a person..." or that we don't have to immediately read a suspect the Miranda Warning as he arrested. Sorry, Law and Order is not a good explanation of law enforcement.

Mr Bratton, good luck to you sir. You need it. You not only have to deal with an idiot mayor but with a city council very hostile to law enforcement. And the citizens of New York will have to live with it. But they voted for these morons, and that is the real problem.

TASERs, lawyers and media.

I'm a bit of a masochist in that I read the daily propaganda rag of Houston, the Comical, err Chronicle. I only get the electrons during most of the week, while I get the hardcopy on Sunday. Beth loves them coupons.

Now the Chronicle has little real journalism, like most papers, but pushes an agenda. The paper is not a fan of law enforcement. In the last few years it's come out against police pensions, saying they are not sustainable (But for some reason pensions paid into for 20 plus years are not affordable, but the Chron is not against the full pensions HERONORDAMAYER and the city council get after six years). Last few weeks it's been going on use of force. It was really interesting on how they covered a police shooting of an "unarmed man". Yes, the man was unarmed. He was also trying to push the officer off a bridge 50 feet over US-59. They can't seem to understand if you throw a man from that far up onto a highway with cars that will hit him you can be assured the officer will suffer at least serious bodily injury, if not death. And that is the legal standard for use of deadly force.

But never let facts get the way of the story.

With that as background, here is the top of the front page of this morning's Chron.

Banning Tasers in Texas schools urged

State police commission asked to prohibit nonlethal weapons after Bastrop teen hurt

By James Pinkerton

The ACLU and six other civil rights groups Wednesday asked the state’s police commission to ban Tasers and pepper spray in Texas schools, following a brain injury to a Bastrop high school student who fell after he was shocked and remains in a coma.

Instead, the group suggests police officers use de-escalation techniques and crisis intervention tactics, such as separating students in a fight, talking with them and waiting for the situation to calm.

“Tragic incidents like this one demonstrate why the state should not grant police free rein to wield weapons in schools for the apparent purpose of maintaining order,” said Terri Burke, executive director of the ACLU of Texas. “Schools should be safe havens from this type of police use of force. I hope the commission will heed our call to end use of Tasers and pepper spray...”

You know Ms Burke, they should also be a "safe haven" from fights, narcotics, etc. They ain't. That's why there are police there.

...On Nov. 20, a Bastrop County sheriff’s deputy working at the Cedar Creek High School used a Taser on Noe Nino de Rivera, a 17-year-old student who witnessses said was breaking up a fight between female students and was obeying officer’s commands, his attorney said. De Rivera went limp and fell to the floor, hitting his head. He was taken by helicopter ambulance to an Austin hospital, where he remains in a medically-induced coma, said family attorney Adam Loewy...

...Sheriff: No comment

Bastrop County Sheriff Terry Pickering had no comment on the request, said a department spokeswoman. The department has said the student was acting aggressively and intervened in the fight.

Look at how this the way this is written. The author implies that there is something wrong with the sheriff making no comment, but a legal action is pending against his department. So why should the sheriff make a comment that will be used against his department and twisted, taken out of context and otherwise distorted. When the Chronicle is sued, I assure you they don't make comments before the case is settled.

...The request to bar nonlethal weapons was made by the ACLU, the Texas Appleseed group, along with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Disability Rights Texas, Texans Care for Children, the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition and the National Alliance on Mental Illness Texas.

The use of Tasers and pepper spray was defended by Chief C.A. “Chuck” Brawner, of the Spring Branch Independent School District police force, who said nonlethal weapons are necessary so officers don’t have to use firearms or nightsticks on unarmed students. His officers do not use Tasers but carry pepper spray and have used the caustic agent twice on students since 1987, Brawner confirmed.

“When you take away the pepper spray and you take away the Taser, what do you have left?” Brawn-er said. “What if there are several people and you have one officer and they can’t control them and they could get away and cause other problems, how do you stop them? When you start taking away other options other than a firearm or a nightstick, what else are you going to use?’’

Gee, those really sound like mainstream organizations who only want the best for kids, not leftist hacks wanting a payday from the taxpayers.And the chief is right, as the idiot writing this is not. In case you haven't noted pal, these kids can get big. You put three football players against one cop and this can escalate quick. And I don't know if you been keeping up on reality Mr. Pinkerton, teenagers are not very agreeable to de-escalation techniques. Remember being young and stupid, 18 and knowing everything. Guess what, nothing has changed.

Now what this is all about.

...Attorney Adam Loewy, with Jesus Rivera, the boy’s brother, have sued the Bastrop school district, a deputy and the county on behalf of the teen’s family.

I'm sorry the young man has been injured, but I know this is propaganda is slanted against the cops. It may shock you Mr. Pinkerton, but the "witnesses" you quoted are quoted were presented to you by the ACLU et all. In other words, not very reliable. So yes, this is crap. But it's typical.

And for some reason I will keep reading it. Then again I always read the enemy's propaganda.

Some great news from Huntsville Texas

Another of Texas' worse has been permanently rehabilitated!!!!

Corrections officer killer Jerry Martin executed in Texas

HUNTSVILLE, Texas, Dec. 3 (UPI) -- Jerry Martin, convicted of killing a corrections officer on horseback by plowing a stolen truck into her after an escape, was put to death Tuesday in Texas.

The 43-year-old death row inmate was executed just after 6 p.m. at the state prison in Huntsville, KWTX-TV, Waco, reported.

Martin had requested no additional appeals be filed on his behalf, clearing the way for his execution, the TV station said.

Martin was the 16th person to be executed in Texas in 2013. No other executions are scheduled in the state this year.

Martin was serving a 50-year sentence for attempted capital murder when he and a second inmate ran off from a work detail outside a Huntsville-area prison in September 2007. The two inmates then stole a city of Huntsville truck and Martin drove it into corrections officer Susan Canfield, 59, who fell and suffered fatal head injuries.

Rest in Peace Officer Canfield. And Mr Martin, hopefully your final judge is more merciful than you deserve.

We'll end this with a great one from Ron White.

Illegal Mayors Against Guns.....

I've posted on multiple occasions (here, here, here and here, among other times) on how much I despise Michael Bloomberg. The multibillionaire who wants to tax the rich as long as he can dodge them. Who is opposed to guns, except for the ones who guard his ass. But he has good company in his Mayors Against Illegal Guns, right. I mean, a mayor is an example to others.

Illegal mayors against guns

They call themselves Mayors Against Illegal Guns. But apparently not all of them are against all illegal activity.

MAIG was co-founded in 2006 by Michael Bloomberg and his counterpart in Boston, Thomas Menino.

But come January, the two men will be out of office. When they depart, attention will likely focus on some of their less well-known members — and that could be a problem.

The latest of the legally challenged is Mayor Gordon Jenkins of Monticello, NY. Last week, he was arrested for driving under the influence and for literally punching a police department clock, which forced cops to handcuff him to a chair.

He’s not alone. Over in Spring Valley, Mayor Noramie Jasmin was arrested for accepting bribes from an FBI informant in April. In Marcus Hook, Pa., Mayor James Schiliro was arrested for reckless endangerment after firing a handgun inside his home during a drunken argument.
Down in Gainesville, Fla., Mayor Craig Lowe was charged with a DUI after being found asleep at the scene of a car accident. Meanwhile, other

MAIG members from Hartford to Detroit have found themselves facing prosecutors over charges that include felony corruption, assault and attempted sex crimes with a child.

Clearly MAIG needs tougher screening — or a more accurate name.

Typical. All too typical. Not that I will think Bloomturn will be challenged on this. And we know if a Tea Party mayor were jailed this would be the only subject on TV.

I'm not a grammar NAZI, but these people should be better than this....

I'm not a particularly good speller but these are supposed "journalist" and make their money communicating. Proficiency in the English language should be expected.

HPD: Ambulance crash scene causes deadly motorcycle crash

Police said a crash that landed two paramedics in the hospital triggered a series of events that led to a deadly motorcycle crash.

Paramedics were treating a female dancer from Fantasy Plaza for an injury around 2:30 a.m. Saturday, according to Houston police....

...HPD said while that scene was being cleared, traffic was backed up on the opposite side of the freeway. Apparently a motorcycle rider did not see that traffic while he was coming over a hill and ended up braking suddenly, losing control of his bike, and slamming into a wall.

Two cars behind the motorcycle could not stop and ran over the rider.

Police say one of the cars did not stop and left the scene. The other vehicle waited for police and was questioned by officers.

The motorcycle rider died at the scene. His name was not immediately released...

Some great quotes:

1. "The other vehicle waited for police and was questioned by officers."

I wonder what the vehicle told the police?

2. ...Ryan Jones writes like an A&M grad.

3. Attention grammar police!

Clean up on aisle 5!

4. The person(s) that wrote this story should return to ESL class immediately...!

Pardon me, a car does not decide to drive away or not. The driver, i.e. a human operating the car makes that decision. Just like in the final paragraph, the motorcycle didn't die, its rider did. The pathetic example of writing here is far too common.

Lets Roll!....get rid of the TSA!

One group of bureaucrats I really despise is the Transportation Screwup Agency, aka TSA.  If I want to be grouped by perverts I can get it for free in some of the parks in my patrol district and they stop as many terrorist attacks as the TSA.  Here is a great column in of all places the editorial page of USA Pravda.

Abolish the TSA: Column

This government agency is unpopular and unnecessary.

In the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, the United States took a number of rapid actions. One was the passage of the Patriot Act...

...There's now some talk about repealing or revising the Patriot Act, and the failure of the Department of Homeland Security to do much good seems pretty widely acknowledged. But it's widely accepted -- even by the Government Accountability Office -- that the TSA's army of unionized federal employees is no better, and perhaps worse, than private screeners.

This should come as no surprise. When, as was the case before 9/11, security screeners were contractors employed by airlines, they had every incentive to do a good job: Airlines don't want their planes hijacked or blown up. And they also had every incentive to be speedy and pleasant: Airlines don't want to irritate their customers, or to make flying an unpleasant experience in general.

Federal employees have no such incentives, and it often shows. If people miss their flights, or just give up on flying because it's too much hassle, the TSA doesn't suffer. Even if bombs or hijackers get through, the most likely consequence isn't a bunch of higher-ups at TSA losing their jobs -- when does anybody in the government get fired for failure these days? -- but rather an increased budget and more staff "to make sure this won't happen again." The incentives don't align.

Most other advanced nations use private screening services, and their security is just fine -- and, according to most accounts, less of a hassle for travelers. Some American airports, from San Francisco to Jackson Hole, are already trying out that approach. Why not take that national?

One reason, of course, is that the TSA's bloated unionized workforce will oppose it. But the TSA is also one of the most unpopular agencies with the public. What's more, as Bruce Schneier notes, it has never caught a terrorist. It's not about security, but about "security theater" designed to give the appearance of security. I think the traveling public has caught on to that, and travelers account for more votes than screeners do.

We wanted to be sure that something like 9/11 could never happen again, but as Brad Todd wrote just a few days after the attacks, that was already made sure of by the passengers' themselves on United Flight 93. As Todd wrote:

Just 109 minutes after a new form of terrorism -- the most deadly yet invented -- came into use, it was rendered, if not obsolete, at least decidedly less effective. Deconstructed, unengineered, thwarted and put into the dust bin of history. By Americans. In 109 minutes. And, in retrospect, they did it in the most American of ways. They used a credit card to rent a fancy cell phone to get information just minutes old, courtesy of the ubiquitous 24-hour news phenomenon. Then they took a vote. When the vote called for sacrifice to protect country and others, there apparently wasn't a shortage of volunteers. Their action was swift. It was decisive. And it was effective.
The 9/11 attacks worked because they caught people -- used to theatrical hijackings that didn't kill anyone -- by surprise. Once Americans figured out this new game, which took, as Todd notes, only 109 minutes, they put an end to it by themselves. The creation of the TSA didn't do any good, and it costs a lot of money, and it does a lot of harm. Put an end to it...

I don't see this happening before 2017, after (I pray) a conservative president and a conservative congress reforms this. God knows the SEIU will not allow Obama to cut his, and their own throats. That is a great was to describe it, "security theater". Do I think rent-a-cops will be great, no. But I know they will not be worse than the TSA and we might as well not pay five times as much.

Geopolitical Weekly: Israel's New Strategic Position, December 2, 2013.

By George Friedman

Israel has expressed serious concerns over the preliminary U.S.-Iranian agreement, which in theory will lift sanctions levied against Tehran and end its nuclear program. That was to be expected. Less obvious is why the Israeli government is concerned and how it will change Israel's strategic position.

Israel's current strategic position is excellent. After two years of stress, its peace treaty with Egypt remains in place. Syria is in a state of civil war that remains insoluble. Some sort of terrorist threat might originate there, but no strategic threat is possible. In Lebanon, Hezbollah does not seem inclined to wage another war with Israel, and while the group's missile capacity has grown, Israel appears able to contain the threat they pose without creating a strategic threat to Israeli national interests. The Jordanian regime, which is aligned with Israel, probably will withstand the pressure put on it by its political opponents.

In other words, the situation that has existed since the Camp David Accords were signed remains in place. Israel's frontiers are secure from conventional military attack. In addition, the Palestinians are divided among themselves, and while ineffective, intermittent rocket attacks from Gaza are likely, there is no Intifada underway in the West Bank.

Therefore, Israel faces no existential threats, save one: the possibility that Iran will develop a nuclear weapon and a delivery system and use it to destroy Israel before it or the United States can prevent it from doing so. Clearly, a nuclear strike on Tel Aviv would be catastrophic for Israel. Its ability to tolerate that threat, regardless of how improbable it may be, is a pressing concern for Israel.

In this context, Iran's nuclear program supersedes all of Israel's other security priorities. Israeli officials believe their allies, particularly those in the United States, should share this view. As a strategic principle, this is understandable. But it is unclear how Israel intends to apply it. It is also unclear how its application will affect relations with the United States, without which it cannot cope with the Iranian threat.

Israel understands that however satisfactory its current circumstances are, those circumstances are mercurial and to some extent unpredictable. Israel may not rely heavily on the United States under these circumstances, but these circumstances may not be permanent. There are plenty of scenarios in which Israel would not be able to manage security threats without American assistance. Thus, Israel has an overriding interest in maintaining its relationship with the United States and in ensuring Iran never becomes a nuclear state. So any sense that the United States is moving away from its commitment to Israel, or that it is moving in a direction where it might permit an Iranian nuclear weapon, is a crisis. Israel's response to the Iran talks -- profound unhappiness without outright condemnation -- has to be understood in this context, and the assumptions behind it have to be examined.

More than Uranium

Iran does not appear to have a deliverable nuclear weapon at this point. Refining uranium is a necessary but completely insufficient step in developing a weapon. A nuclear weapon is much more than uranium. It is a set of complex technologies, not the least of which are advanced electrical systems and sensors that, given the amount of time the Iranians have needed just to develop not-quite-enough enriched uranium, seems beyond them. Iran simply does not have sufficient fuel to produce a device.

Nor it does not have a demonstrated ability to turn that device into a functioning weapon. A weapon needs to be engineered to extreme tolerances, become rugged enough to function on delivery and be compact enough to be delivered. To be delivered, its must be mounted on a very reliable missile or aircraft. Iran has neither reliable missiles nor aircraft with the necessary range to attack Israel. The idea that the Iranians will use the next six months for a secret rush to complete the weapon simply isn't the way it works.

Before there is a weapon there must be a test. Nations do not even think of deploying nuclear weapons without extensive underground tests -- not to see if they have uranium but to test that the more complex systems work. That is why they can't secretly develop a weapon: They themselves won't know they have a workable weapon without a test. In all likelihood, the first test would fail, as such things do. Attempting their first test in an operational attack would result not only in failure but also in retaliation.

Of course, there are other strategies for delivering a weapon if it were built. One is the use of a ship to deliver it to the Israeli coast. Though this is possible, the Israelis operate an extremely efficient maritime interdiction system, and the United States monitors Iranian ports. The probability is low that a ship would go unnoticed. Having a nuclear weapon captured or detonated elsewhere would infuriate everyone in the eastern Mediterranean, invite an Israeli counterstrike and waste a weapon

Otherwise, Iran theoretically could drive a nuclear weapon into Israel by road. But these weapons are not small. There is such a thing as a suitcase bomb, but that is a misleading name; it is substantially larger than a suitcase, and it is also the most difficult sort of device to build. Because of its size, it is not particularly rugged. You don't just toss it into the trunk, drive 1,500 miles across customs checkpoints and set it off. There are many ways you can be captured -- particularly crossing into Israel -- and many ways to break the bomb, which require heavy maintenance. Lastly, even assuming Iran's acquisition of a nuclear weapon, its use against Israel would kill as many Muslims -- among them Shia -- as Israelis, an action tantamount to geopolitical suicide for Tehran.

A Tempered Response

One of the reasons Israel has not attempted an airstrike, and one of the reasons the United States has refused to consider it, is that Iran's prospects for developing a nuclear weapon are still remote. Another reason is difficulty. Israel's air force is too far removed and too small to carry out simultaneous strikes on multiple facilities. If the Israelis forward-deployed to other countries, the Iranians would spot them. The Israelis can't be certain which sites are real and which are decoys. The Iranians have had years to harden their facilities, so normal ordnance likely would be inadequate. Even more serious is the fact that battle damage assessment -- judging whether the site has been destroyed -- would be prohibitively difficult.

For these reasons, the attack could not simply be carried out from the air. It would require special operations forces on the ground to try to determine the effects. That could result in casualties and prisoners, if it could be done at all. And at that the Israelis can only be certain that they have destroyed all the sites they knew about, not the ones that their intelligence didn't know about. Some will dismiss this as overestimating Iranian capabilities. This frequently comes from those most afraid that Tehran can build a nuclear weapon and a delivery system. If it could do the latter, it could harden sites and throw off intelligence gathering. The United States would be able to mount a much more robust attack than the Israelis, but it is unclear whether it would be robust enough. And in any case, all the other problems -- the reliability of intelligence, determining whether the site were destroyed -- would still apply.

But ultimately, the real reason Israel has not attacked Iran's nuclear sites is that the Iranians are so far from having a weapon. If they were closer, the Israelis would have attacked regardless of the difficulty. The Americans, on the other hand, saw an opportunity in the fact that there are no weapons yet and that the sanctions were hurting the Iranians. Knowing that they were not in a hurry to complete and knowing that they were hurting economically, the Iranians likewise saw an opportunity to better their position.

From the American point of view, the nuclear program was not the most pressing issue, even though Washington knew it had to be stopped. What the Americans wanted was an understanding with the Iranians, whereby their role in the region would be balanced against those of other countries, particularly Saudi Arabia, the Arabian emirates and to some extent Israel. As I've argued, the United States is still interested in what happens in the region, but it does not want to continue to use force there. Washington wants to have multiple relations with regional actors, not just Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Israel's response to the U.S.-Iran talks should be understood in this way. The Israelis tempered their response initially because they knew the status of Iran's nuclear program. Even though a weapon is still a grave concern, it is a much longer-term problem than the Israelis admit publicly. (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has tried hard to convince the United States otherwise, the United States isn't biting.) Since an attack has every chance of failing, the Israelis recognize that these negotiations are the most likely way to eliminate the weapons, and that if the negotiations fail, no one will be in a more dangerous position for trying. Six months won't make a difference.

The Israelis could not simply applaud the process because there is, in fact, a strategic threat to Israel embedded in the talks. Israel has a strategic dependency on the United States. Israel has never been comfortable with Washington's relationship with Saudi Arabia, but there was nothing the Israelis could do about it, so they accommodated it. But they understand that the outcome of these talks, if successful, means more than the exchange of a nuclear program for eased sanctions; it means the beginning of a strategic alignment with Iran.

In fact, the United States was aligned with Iran until 1979. As Richard Nixon's China initiative shows, ideology can relent to geopolitical reality. On the simplest level, Iran needs investment, and American companies want to invest. On the more complex level, Iran needs to be certain that Iraq is friendly to its interests and that neither Russia nor Turkey can threaten it in the long run. Only the United States can ensure that. For their part, the Americans want a stronger Iran to contain Saudi support for Sunni insurgents, compel Turkey to shape its policy more narrowly, and remind Russia that the Caucasus, and particularly Azerbaijan, have no threat from the south and can concentrate on the north. The United States is trying to create a multipolar region to facilitate a balance-of-power strategy in place of American power.

Israel in 10 Years

I began by pointing out how secure Israel is currently. Looking down the road 10 years, Israel cannot assume that this strategic configuration will remain in place. Egypt's future is uncertain. The emergence of a hostile Egyptian government is not inconceivable. Syria, like Lebanon, appears to be fragmented. What will come of this is unclear. And whether in 10 years the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan will remain Hashemite or become a Palestinian state is worthy of contemplation. None have military power now, but then Egypt went from disaster in 1967 to a very capable force in 1973. They had a Soviet patron. They might have another patron in 10 years.

Right now, Israel does not need the United States, nor American aid, which means much less to them now than it did in 1973. They need it as a symbol of American commitment and will continue to need it. But the real Israeli fear is that the United States is moving away from direct intervention to a more subtle form of manipulation. That represents a threat to Israel if Israel ever needs direct intervention rather than manipulation. But more immediately, it threatens Israel because the more relationships the United States has in the region, the less significant Israel is to Washington's strategy. If the United States maintains this relationship with Saudi Arabia, Turkey and others, Israel becomes not the anchor of U.S. policy but one of many considerations. This is Israel's real fear in these negotiations.

In the end, Israel is a small and weak power. Its power has been magnified by the weakness of its neighbors. That weakness is not permanent, and the American relationship has changed in many ways since 1948. Another shift seems to be underway. The Israelis used to be able to depend on massive wellsprings of support in the U.S. public and Congress. In recent years, this support has become less passionate, though it has not dried up completely. What Israel has lost is twofold. First, it has lost control of America's regional strategy. Second, it has lost control of America's political process. Netanyahu hates the U.S.-Iran talks not because of nuclear weapons but because of the strategic shift of the United States. But his response must remain measured because Israel has less influence in the United States than it once did.

"Israel's New Strategic Position is republished with permission of Stratfor."