TheAgitator.com
43 Responses to “Morning Links”
Leave a Reply
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial NoDerivs 2.5 License.
Site Features
- Home
- Advertise
- About Radley Balko
- Publications
- Speaking Info
- Multimedia
- Resume
- Picasa Photos
- Recommendations
- Traffic Stats
- RSS Feed
Buy One- Buy Agitator Gear
-
-
$12/month Recurring Donation
$6/month Recurring Donation
- My Amazon wishlist
-
Site Credits
More miscreant assholes rioting and busting up other people’s hard-earned property. I don’t care if you’re upset about something, that doesn’t ever make it ‘understandable’ that you go and bust up *somebody else’s* stuff.
Sanford voted against needle exchange and med. marijuana. He voted to ban same sex adoption. He voted yes on making federal death penalty appeals harder no on maintaining the right of habeas corpus in Death Penalty Appeals. He voted no on abolishing race based affirmative action in colleges; He endorsed teacher-led “voluntary” prayer in public schools; He voted against reducing the gun waiting period in S.C.
I’m glad he opposed the bailout, but there’s got to be better candidates out there.
You haven’t taken in the entire entertainment experience of the book link until you’ve read the customer reviews. I made an awful mess of my keyboard and monitor while reading those.
The comments for stacking chairs are hilarious, but it is suspicious when a 213 page report costs $490…
I am adamantly opposed to Alberto Gonzalez being hired as a greeter at WalMart. Do you really want to get waterboarded next time you refuse to show your receipt on the way out of the store?
The tide has turned. If the victim of the BART shooting were white, there probably wouldn’t have been that degree of public uproar.
“believe is a homicide”? What else is it, mayor? If “We are a nation of laws”, that starts with your police officers. Rule of law means that they, too, are answerable to the same laws (in a proper society they would have an even higher standard) and must face punishment when same are broken.
I’m pretty confident that he knew this shooting was unjustified, and, therefore, homicide, aren’t I? Why is that? Because the cops immediately stole every camera that had recorded it. Had it been justified, they would have tried to disseminate the video – and the station’s cameras would have most likely “been working” – to prove their side. The coverup proves that they knew they were wrong.
I’m with you, MacAulay. For instance, unarmed men can be shot in a subway and the rest of the mob tries to cover it up.
All that said, these protesters are being stupid by destroying other people’s property. If you want to do something, go protest at the officer’s home. And I’m not suggesting harming his house or possessions.
Also, at the next elections, you need to make it clear that anybody who tried to cover up with the city is on the way out. DA, mayor, councilmen, whoever.
Someone said it here a few days ago, and it’s still true. Having a mob indiscriminately destroying property – property that belongs to people who might agree with you – will only back fire.
The book link makes me much more comfortable about my own upcoming publication:
“The 2010-2018 Outlook for Washroom Condom Despensers Excluding Seminaries, Catholic Male Dormitories, The Southern Baptist Convention Headquarters, and the Republican Toilets located in Government buildings in Washington D.C.”
Will be available for $986.97 for the paperback version (12 pages total). Make checks payable to ZappaCrappa please.
Good job rioters.
“She should be glad she just lost her business and not her life,” Sykes said.
So now the people of Oakland have to fear the police and a violent mob. Stellar.
Israel-Hamas War?
Don’t they mean “Israeli suppression of riots at Gaza open-air prison?”
Whoops, sorry, that presupposes that the Gazan population is rioting.
Don’t they mean “Israeli demonstration of lethal force on a captive civilian population in order to show what tough guys their politicians are heading into elections?”
Maybe there aren’t words for what the Israelis are doing. Oh, there’s probably a Godwin’s Law violation just waiting to happen now. I’ll stop.
Michael,
““believe is a homicide”? What else is it, mayor?”
It is what the State says it is. Until an organization is formed that is more powerful than the State says so, that is.
In which case, all you have is a new State.
The dog chases its tail.
Dave Krueger,
I’m not sure I understand your point. I am often confused when people propose the hypothetical where the races of the people or persons are reversed and then suggest this proves something.
Clearly the shooting is unjust no matter the race of the victim, but the questions become totally diferent given the context of this nation’s history of racial “insensitivity” on the part of law enforcement, and the fact that we, ya know, wake up everyday to an indisputably racist criminal justice system.
I’m not attacking your point, I am just asking you to clarify.
Micheal Chaney,
You’re missing the best line. THe mayor said, “I sense your frustration.” Not I share your frustration, not I know you are frustrated. “I sense [it]“. As though you need to be Obi-won Kenobi to figure out the riots. The mayor is in his office, “I sense a great disturbance in the force. A million voices crying out then silence.”
From the riot article, posted without comment:
“I feel like the night is going great,” said Nia Sykes, 24, of San Francisco, one of the demonstrators. “I feel like Oakland should make some noise. This is how we need to fight back. It’s for the murder of a black male.”
Sykes, who is black, had little sympathy for the owner of Creative African Braids.
“She should be glad she just lost her business and not her life,” Sykes said. She added that she did have one worry for the night: “I just hope nobody gets shot or killed.”
Dumbasses. They need to be busting up the cops, not private businesses. It should be Assault on Precinct BART.
“If “We are a nation of laws”
Statements like that were invented by authoritarian dictatorial prick types that just couldnt stand the fact that we’re actually supposed to be a “nation of freedoms”.
Price:$495.00 & this item ships for FREE with Super Saver Shipping.
I guess the free shipping really makes this book a great bargain.
Oh yeah… its paperback.
I may be one of the few to say this, but I do not agree that it should be a peaceful march against police brutality.
I do not think that they need to destroy innocents properties, but they should make it a living hell to be a BART policeman.
I understand many of you feel that a nice polite walk down the street will make the world a bed of roses, but in all of history that has not been proven out.
MLK did that, and though it worked some, it certainly did not do enough, we are currently seeing how a young black man can be executed by the powers that be. Yet nothing is indicating that his executioner will be charged with what is deserving (2nd degree murder).
Imagine if instead of becoming violent with King George’s Armies the founders just marched around holding signs, who among us would think we would not be British subjects right now.
In fact if not for them uprising to the point of revolution, we may not be allowed to even walk holding that sign.
I have so added “The 2007-2012 Outlook for Public Building Stacking Chairs Excluding Bar, Bowling Center, Cafeteria, Library, Restaurant, and School Stacking Chairs in India ” to my Amazon wish list!
Nick T,
I wasn’t trying to make a serious point, really. I’m just recognizing the fact that the victim being black is no longer synonymous with police brutality being swept under the rug. Personally, I appreciate the public outcry regardless of the race of the victim although I must agree with a number of others on here that the discriminant mob mentality that characterized these riots isn’t going to do much to win sympathy. It’s not very convincing to cry about innocent victims at the same time as you’re torching the business of an innocent victim. In that sense, the public uproar may do more to alienate the general public than gain their support.
[...] Radley Balko asks, “Why does Tanzania have so many Albinos?” [...]
Mack, my views on non-violence aside, a bit of revisionist history:
“Imagine if instead of becoming violent with King George’s Armies the founders just marched around holding signs, who among us would think we would not be British subjects right now.
In fact if not for them uprising to the point of revolution, we may not be allowed to even walk holding that sign.”
Ben Franklin said, “Better to be ruled by one tyrant 3000 miles away than 3000 tyrants one mile away.”
Where does that put us now?
Are we really able to walk around holding that sign? Free-speech zones? Permits to protest?
I wonder if America is really better off having seceded from the British Empire. It is quite clear that government at all levels is tyrannical in America 2009.
Organized shunning/ostracism is a potentially-effective non-violent tool of protest.
Violence is never the answer.
Poison is never the cure for being poisoned.
I see the people of Oakland have chosen the path of “destroy stuff that belongs to people unrelated to the offence”, thereby alienating potential allies in their calls for justice. Heh. Apparently their definition of “justice”, as they so often lament about the opposing side, also means “just us”.
Always sad to be right about depressing shit.
Protest at the cop’s home? The cop’s address isn’t readily available, as The System allows them to be invisible, unlike you and I. Their name does not appear on any public records such as utilities. I wonder if their name would even appear in mortgage records. There is an exception for “law enforcement” to some large degree in public records.
That being said, it takes a bit more work to find where they live, such as doing your own stakeout at their place of work and following them home.
Cynical In CA:
I agree that we may not be better off at this moment, but certainly better off then what was (prior to the Revolution). The England we know now has adopted most of it’s freedoms based on ours.
Before the violence that formed this country, a British squad of goons could open your door, rifle your papers to insure they all had a pic of good old George, thus showing you had payed your stamp tax. If they got tired while looking through your papers they had you sleep in the barn while they slept in your bed. There was no 4th Amendment. There was no 3rd Amendment.
Not only could you not petition for a peaceful march, if you even spoke out against a government official you were put in jail for Sedition. Newspapers could print government approved stories only. There was no 1st Amendment.
If you were accused of a crime you had no due process right, or right to trial by jury, a royally appointed judge (loyal to the king) decided your fate. There was no 5th Amendment. There was no 6th Amendment.
Prior to the revolution you could grow a tree cut it down and make boards, but you could not make a bed and sale it. You had to sale the wood to a British company at a rock bottom price, then they made a bed with the wood, and sold it back to at the highest price. Look up mercantilism.
We can go on about this through all the Amendments, and acts for hours. Yes we have lost many things, and very recently in our amendments, but it is still better then what was.
So as we can see “history is repeating itself”, maybe it just has not completed it’s cycle yet.
#15 Agreed. They should be going after anything in a BART uniform.
Would have been more efficient it they just took up a collection to pay the local Crips to take down the precinct.
#27 | MacK | January 8th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Just a few rebuttals:
“I agree that we may not be better off at this moment, but certainly better off then what was (prior to the Revolution). The England we know now has adopted most of it’s freedoms based on ours.”
I could go on and on about how less of a degree of tyranny existed in Colonial America than today, but Jacob Hornberger over at the Future of Freedom Foundation – http://www.fff.org – makes a career out of it. As for “the England we now know,” recent history informs us that “Airstrip One” is a testing ground for every new infringement of Americans’ liberty by the national government.
“Before the violence that formed this country, a British squad of goons could open your door, rifle your papers to insure they all had a pic of good old George, thus showing you had payed your stamp tax. If they got tired while looking through your papers they had you sleep in the barn while they slept in your bed. There was no 4th Amendment. There was no 3rd Amendment.”
Well, I hardly expect the IRS to camp out in my home, but they can sure put themselves up at a tony local hotel while they do exactly what you described above in Colonial America. Again, exactly what has changed? You write like you’re one of those Japanese soldiers discovered living in caves 20 years after WWII ended. Wake up, Rip!
“Not only could you not petition for a peaceful march, if you even spoke out against a government official you were put in jail for Sedition. Newspapers could print government approved stories only. There was no 1st Amendment.”
U.S. history post Colonial America is rife with similar examples, beginning with the Alien and Sedition Acts under the Adams(!!!) administration, through suspension of habeas corpus under Lincoln, to the Palmer raids under Wilson, Roosevelt’s concentration camps in California, right on through to the War on Drugs, Terror, etc., etc., ad infinitum. Individual rights exist in America at the whim of the government. Always have, always will.
“If you were accused of a crime you had no due process right, or right to trial by jury, a royally appointed judge (loyal to the king) decided your fate. There was no 5th Amendment. There was no 6th Amendment.”
Do we really need to fisk the U.S. Constitution? Yippee for due process! The government employs due process as its fig leaf to cover the criminal underpinning of its extortion schemes. I’m not impressed!
“Prior to the revolution you could grow a tree cut it down and make boards, but you could not make a bed and sale it. You had to sale the wood to a British company at a rock bottom price, then they made a bed with the wood, and sold it back to at the highest price. Look up mercantilism.”
Don’t need to look up mercantilism. It’s all around us. Have you noticed the mad dash to Keynesian economics lately? Since 1971? Since 1933? What are government licensure laws, permits, zoning regulations, tariffs, etc., except corporatism designed to destroy competition from small upstart firms? Are you actually trying to suggest that there is economic freedom in the U.S.??? Oh, yeah, we’re as free as the government tells us we are.
“We can go on about this through all the Amendments, and acts for hours. Yes we have lost many things, and very recently in our amendments, but it is still better then what was.”
I cannot even begin to imagine how someone born in the 20th Century (presumably) can make a statement such as “it is still better than it was.” You were not there. How about something we can agree on: “I don’t know.”
“So as we can see “history is repeating itself”, maybe it just has not completed it’s cycle yet.”
It has been said that history does not repeat itself, but it rhymes. I think we’re in the coda section of this operetta.
Well, anyway, one of us is right. Keep the faith, Mack.
Thugs only understand violence.
The state through law is supposed to have a monopoly on violence in the name of it’s citizens.
The state has put it’s thugs above the law.
Given these basic facts there is no recourse but citizen violence to teach these thugs they are the servant not the master. In fact under such circumstances it become vitally necessary. Now I am NOT advocating that ANYONE go out and murder cops. However, something needs to be done, albeit something considerably short of murder.
RE: The book
My favorite is the first sentence of the first comment on this book:
“I first discovered Dr. Parker’s brilliant analysis and forecast of Indian stacking chair consumption while completing my thesis on the roll played by wheel based ergonomic office chairs in workplace fatalities.”
Okay, you can argue that someone can be brilliant at analyzing stacking chair consumption, but what business does anyone have writing a thesis on wheel-based ergonomic chairs? Were non-wheel based ergonomic chairs not good enough?
Okay, so South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford is definitely running for president. And the GOP would be stupid not to nominate him.
They will be stupid. Trust.
Here’s another link:
Air Force Releases ‘Counter-Blog’ Marching Orders
WTF is this nonsense now?
Sean — Aren’t you missing the best part of this comment?
“… my thesis on the roll played by wheel based ergonomic office chairs in workplace fatalities.”
Roll? Is this a pun? Or is the commenter referring literally to the roll of the chair being the cause of the fatality?
Jeez. Reminds me of the Detroit riots when I was a kid, where outraged black mobs burned down…wait for it…black neighborhoods.
A bunch of BART cops hanging from lamp posts, I could understand. But what’s the sense in this?
@Cynical:
“I cannot even begin to imagine how someone born in the 20th Century (presumably) can make a statement such as “it is still better than it was.” You were not there. How about something we can agree on: ‘I don’t know.’”
I am sorry, but that statement is profoundly ignorant, not to mention self-contradictory. In the second paragraph you point to someone else making a historical comparison of which you approve (presumably that is fine), but in the end you say your interlocutor can’t know that today is better than the eighteenth century because he wasn’t there. That is… bizarre.
Aside from that, your comparisons in a vacuum do not make any sense. You are essentially arguing that the whole American project is shot all to hell because it is not perfect. Again, that is bizarre.
Just to cherry-pick, the protections recognized under the First Amendment are broader now than they have ever been, despite recent restrictive decisions. Compare the fates of dissenters in WW I to dissenters re: the Iraq war. Could speech be more free? Certainly, but it could also be considerably LESS free.
Regarding barriers to entry, again, look around you. There *are* places in the world it is easier to be an entrepreneur, but not many, and none of those markets are close to as large as the U.S.
Re: mercantilism (not the same thing as domestic barriers to entry, I might add), trade now is freer than almost any other time in world history, and it is certainly more free in the aggregate than it has ever been, which is a net benefit to everyone.
@Mack,
I think you need to reconsider your position re: English freedom. Much of the American Revolution was fought because the King had denied the colonies the traditional rights of Englishmen set forth in, among other places, the Magna Carta (1215), and the English Bill of Rights (1689).
@ John Jenkins
“Could speech be more free? Certainly, but it could also be considerably LESS free.’
I’m not catching your point. Should I ask my boss for a raise because I could “be considerably LESS” effective? Some of us are a bit more ambitious than that. And, it is the ambitious that WANT America to regain a leadership position with regards to freedom (in it’s many forms).
John, you’ve listed that thru history (long run) the dominant trend is for beneficial freer speech and freer trade. Now, speed up the trend and take it further, please.
Instead, America has taken some pretty signficant steps backward and has a whole Congress full of “leaders” that have shown they understand little of free speech or free trade. Why? Because we also have a whole country that keeps electing those same members of Congress. Yes, it is time to sound the alarm bells (well, actually it’s too late…IMHO).
//I’m pretty confident that he knew this shooting was unjustified, and, therefore, homicide, aren’t I?//
If someone’s death is caused by another person’s actions, the death is a homicide, whether it is felonious, justifiable, excusable, or accidental. If the police want to justify that the death in this case was justifiable, excusable, or accidental, they should make that argument. The only way a gunshot death could be anything other than a homicide would be if it was not a foreseeable consequence of anyone’s action. It is hardly unforeseeable that when a firearm is pointed at someone they may get shot.
I’d vote for Mark Sanford. Looks like Bobby Jindal won’t be available for another 12 years or so.
http://www.rightklik.net/
The Esquire Article is one of several editorials published in various places by Gov. Sanford. While I hope he will run for president, he currently denies he will run.
When he starts visiting Iowa, we’ll know for sure.
“Why does Tanzania have so many Albinos?”
Uh, genetics?
@Boyd: I think you are mistaking my point. My point is that just because we don’t have perfectly free speech doesn’t make the level of free speech we have objectively bad. It’s still pretty good, though we can work to improve it.
The analogy to employment doesn’t seem quite right, but I think the difference from the employer’s point of view is that whether it’s worth firing a good employee, who is improving over time, because he is not a perfect employee. I think most observers would agree that firing the employee is a bad decision, at least on that basis.
You are making the same mistake in your analogy that Cynical did originally. It is not how objectively good you are that matters to your boss, it is how good you are relative to your fellow employees and the pool of potential employees. Recognizing that you have something good, doesn’t mean you can’t improve it. Failing to recognize that you have something good, however, is dangerous because you might cast it away while not recognizing how valuable it is.
“The core group of the mob appeared to be about 40 people, several of whom were with Revolution Books, a Berkeley bookstore. A man distributed the “Revolution” newspaper – whose tagline is ‘voice of the Revolutionary Communist Party, U.S.A.’ – as he shouted “This whole damn system is guilty!”
Well there…you…go. Disaster socialism in action! Naomi Klein, care to comment about ideologues taking advantage of a tragedy to promote their radical economic ideas?
This lil’ riot reminds me of the tune “Trouble Every Day” by Frank Zappa and the Mothers:
“Well, I seen the fires burnin’
And the local people turnin’
On the merchants and the shops
Who used to sell their brooms and mops
And every other household item
Watched the mob just turn and bite ‘em”
This shit will solve very little, and will lead to even more friction in the community. I don’t claim to have the solution, but I will say that a massive “cop watch” program may be in order in the Bay Area. If the police are faced with video cameras and cell phone cameras every time they turn around, and people begin to (non-violently) assert their right to control THEIR police, then maybe we will see progress. Burning cars and throwing rocks, conversely, will only bring comfort to those who desire a police state.
Damn, Helmut. You had to go quoting Zappa. Threw off my timing for the rest of my post. Liked the “disaster socialism.” A lot better than that non-sequitur Radley threw out about “disaster anarchism.” [Easy there Radley, easy.]
A rebuttal to John Jenkins:
Cynical wrote: “I cannot even begin to imagine how someone born in the 20th Century (presumably) can make a statement such as “it is still better than it was.” You were not there. How about something we can agree on: ‘I don’t know.’”
Jenkins replied: “I am sorry, but that statement is profoundly ignorant, not to mention self-contradictory. In the second paragraph you point to someone else making a historical comparison of which you approve (presumably that is fine), but in the end you say your interlocutor can’t know that today is better than the eighteenth century because he wasn’t there. That is… bizarre.”
Damn, dude, how about some props for the dig on MacK’s age? I thought that was real creative of me. Anyway, I’m admitting a bit of presumption on my part as well. After all, history is written by the winners. Unless one is an eyewitness, the epistemology just doesn’t hold up 100%. Just a small concession on my part, but I think the rest of my argument (assuming a true reading of history) holds water. And you should read Hornberger’s site. The man makes a very strong strict constructionist argument, if that’s one’s bag.
Jenkins: “Aside from that, your comparisons in a vacuum do not make any sense. You are essentially arguing that the whole American project is shot all to hell because it is not perfect. Again, that is bizarre.”
That’s your interpretation, and I wouldn’t mind an example. I thought mine was a well-reasoned post. But that’s not at all what I’m arguing. The whole American project is shot to hell because it is more of the same thing (plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose). America is a State, just like any other. All institutions are destined to fail. Entropy sees to that, and then supplies the world with a new State.
See, the King sent his agents throughout the land doing all the nasty stuff Jefferson wrote about. Now, the U.S. government sends IRS agents all throughout the land doing all the nasty stuff Jefferson wrote about. Is that a good enough example of a “failed experiment?” Joke’s on you — that’s exactly the way it was intended, no failed experiment at all, a rousing success for the State!
Jenkins: “Just to cherry-pick, the protections recognized under the First Amendment are broader now than they have ever been, despite recent restrictive decisions. Compare the fates of dissenters in WW I to dissenters re: the Iraq war. Could speech be more free? Certainly, but it could also be considerably LESS free.”
I can’t believe we’re debating relative degrees of freedom. Freedom is digital, not analog. Freedom is on or off. 0 or 1. You either have it or you don’t. The leash Wilson held was short — Bush holds a leash a couple of inches longer. That matters to you?
Jenkins: “Regarding barriers to entry, again, look around you. There *are* places in the world it is easier to be an entrepreneur, but not many, and none of those markets are close to as large as the U.S.”
See above. And what you’re saying is that, in the interest of making a buck, you’d sacrifice your freedom. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Jenkins: “Re: mercantilism (not the same thing as domestic barriers to entry, I might add), trade now is freer than almost any other time in world history, and it is certainly more free in the aggregate than it has ever been, which is a net benefit to everyone.”
I’d appreciate a little substantiation from you. My understanding is that trade was at its most free in the 19th Century, according to much of the economic history that I’ve read over the last few years. Much of that can be accessed at Mr. Hornberger’s site. And from what I’ve read in the news lately, trade protectionism is making a strong comeback as many nations impose prohibitive tariffs to support home industry.
I’m not shining you on, Jenkins. If you really want to make a debate out of this, I’m game.