Thursday, April 30, 2015

Gitmo terrorist who killed army Sgt lived at bin-laden compound freed in Canada

Gitmo Terrorist Who Killed Army Sgt., Lived at Bin Laden
Compound Freed in Canada 

APRIL 29, 2015

An Al Qaeda terrorist guilty of murdering a U.S. Army sergeant and “transferred” from Guantanamo to Canada by the Obama administration has been released from an Alberta prison while he appeals his conviction for war crimes.
His name is Omar Ahmed Khader and he’s a member of Canada’s “first family of terror,” according to an international news report that confirms Khader’s father was an associate of Osama Bin Laden who moved his family to Pakistan to support the Afghan mujahideen in its war against the Soviet Union. In 2010 Khader was convicted of five war crimes, including throwing a grenade that killed Army Sergeant Christopher Speer in Afghanistan during a 2002 combat operation.
Khader spent around a decade at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and in 2010 cut a deal to serve the majority of his sentence in Canada. Under the terms, he admitted being an “alien unprivileged enemy belligerent” and throwing the grenade that killed Sergeant Speer. In 2012 Khader was taken to Canada, where he evidently began working on an appeal. This month a Canadian judge ordered the release of the jihadist while he appeals his U.S. convictions. Canadian government officials argue that the judge has no jurisdiction to hear the unprecedented bail application from an offender convicted abroad and returned to Canada, according to a national news story.
The bottom line is that this terrorist, like so many others who have returned to jihadist causes after leaving Gitmo, never should have been released. To meet his longtime goal of closing Gitmo President Obama has tried clearing out the military compound that still houses the world’s most dangerous terrorists, including 9/11 masterminds Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), Ramzi Binalshibh, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali and Mustafa Ahmed Adam al Hawsawi as well as USS Cole bomber Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri. In December Judicial Watch reported that the U.S. government put an Al Qaeda operative that had been freed from Gitmo on a global terrorist list and offered a $5 million reward for information on his whereabouts.
Hundreds of Gitmo terrorists who have been discharged over the years—under a program that started with President George W. Bush—have reengaged in terrorism. In fact, Judicial Watch has been reporting this for years based on U.S. intelligence sources. Back in 2010 JW wrote about a report that the Director of National Intelligence gave Congress documenting that 150 former Gitmo detainees were confirmed or suspected of “reengaging in terrorist or insurgent activities after transfer.” At least 83 remained at large, according to the document.page2image25280 page2image25440
Now we must worry that yet another radical extremist who hates America is on the loose, in a friendlypage2image27376

neighboring country where cross border travel is quite easy. Khader was encouraged by his father, a senior Al Qaeda leader in Canada, to travel to Khowst Afghanistan to translate for Al Qaeda personnel and participate in jihad against the United States, according to a Department of Defense (DOD) file kept by the Joint Task Force Guantanamo. “Detainee received training and instruction on how to build and plant Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) and how to plant land mines,” the DOD file says. It also reveals that Khader “admitted to taking part in several mining and combat operations” and that he was present during a 2002 raid on a suspected Al Qaeda compound by U.S. Special Forces. “Detainee was wounded and captured after killing the USSF soldier,” the DOD writes.
Khader has direct family affiliations with senior Al Qaeda members, the Pentagon file states, and his entire family lived at one of Osama bin Laden’s compounds in Jalalabad Afghanistan. The U.S. government considered him to be a detainee of “high intelligence value” who provided important information on the Derunta, Al-Farouq and Khalden training camps as well as key Al Qaeda and Taliban operatives. The U.S. let Khader go even though it had labeled him a “high risk” enemy combatant “likely to pose a threat to the U.S., its interest or its allies.” 

Professionally made signs says someone is funding the Freddie Gray protests. Once again I ask why do poster boys for black victimhood have lengthy arrest records. Like Ferguson the truth is irrelevant to revolutionaries.

More than 120 arrested as cops and Freddie Gray protesters clash in NYC, and thousands demonstrate across US on third night of anger

How the philosophy of "broken windows" works. The left always hoping that defining deviancy down you can appease those of a criminal mindset.

Cops find stolen gun during ‘quality of life’ stop

A Brooklyn man was busted for biking on the sidewalk — one of the “quality of life” offenses the City Council wants to decriminalize — and cops found he had a stolen, loaded handgun, police said Wednesday.
Leonard Roberts, 45, was spotted by two patrol cops as he illegally pedaled near the Marlboro Houses in Gravesend around 7:35 p.m. Saturday. He was riding so fast that pedestrians had to jump out of the way, and the officers used their siren to try to get his attention.
But Roberts — who has 18 prior arrests and once served 8½ years in prison for armed robbery — ignored the cops and rode into the housing complex, police said.
He finally stopped outside 2800 86th St., and cops used a new, NYPD-issued smartphone to run his name. The search revealed an open arrest warrant for failing to answer a Midtown Tunnel toll-evasion ticket.
Modal Trigger
Photo: David McGlynn
The officers searched Roberts’ backpack and found a stolen, .380-caliber Baikal pistol with three rounds in the magazine. He also had a small amount of pot stashed in one of his pockets, cops said.
“He’s a perfect example of how you can’t and shouldn’t discard the broken-windows theory,” said a police source.
“Here we have a silly offense of riding a bike on a sidewalk, and we got a gun off the street that could have been used to kill somebody. Think about that.”
Biking on the sidewalk is one of many low-level offenses that City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito wants to decriminalize and turn into a civil offense punishable simply with a ticket.
The other crimes in her sights include fare-beating, public urination and loitering in parks after hours.
When asked if the bike-riding gunman makes the speaker re-think her position, her spokesman Eric Koch said: “The council is conducting a comprehensive and careful review of proposals that will help continue to keep crime low and New Yorkers safe while also creating a more fair and just city for all New Yorkers.”
NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton has warned that the proposal would bring crime “roaring back” to the bad old days of the 1970s and ’80s — and Mayor Bill de Blasio said Wednesday that he’s “absolutely united” with his top cop.
“What we’re doing now is what we believe in. We believe in quality-of-life enforcement,” Hizzoner said.
City Comptroller Scott Stringer said he also opposes much of Mark-Viverito’s plan.
“Having grown up in this city during the ’70s and ’80s, I am not in favor of people urinating in the street, jumping turnstiles or creating dangerous situations by being drunk,” Stringer said.
Stringer also recalled how, during the bad old days, “When we had 2,000 murders a year, the train that I rode every day, the A train, was a rolling crime scene.”
“People were afraid to go out at night,” he said.
“I think we should proceed with caution.”
Mark-Viverito’s proposal to decriminalize turnstile-jumping — which was blasted Monday by MTA board members and the head of the NYPD’s Transit Bureau — would require a change in state law.

NYC Department of Education like the VA falsifying data to look good or to protect some image.

Education Department hides school violence: audit

It’s a lesson in coverups.
State Comptroller Tom DiNapoli’s auditors turned up 428 incidents — from assaults to sexual offenses — the city didn’t report to the state Education Department in the 2012 and 2013 school years, as required by law, he revealed Wednesday.
And that was just in 10 schools that were randomly audited — two in each borough.
“The big concern here is that when incidents don’t get reported or are, in effect, downgraded, schoolchildren are put potentially in harm’s way,” DiNapoli said.
His auditors counted 1,147 incidents in the schools they visited, but only 989 that were forwarded to Albany, he said.
One Staten Island school, IS 27, didn’t report 165 of 408 incidents, the auditors said.
City education officials slammed DiNapoli’s methodology, saying his auditors misinterpreted which incidents required notification to the state.

Wednesday, April 29, 2015

If only there were more like her...

‘It was just unacceptable': Baltimore mom says she’s no hero

The Clinton's web of corruption widens.

University paid Bill while Hillary steered State Dept. money to its nonprofit affiliate: book

Bill Clinton collected hefty speaking fees as the “honorary chairman” of a for-profit university, but suddenly ended his relationship last week after Hillary Rodham Clinton attacked for-profit colleges and the money flow to Bill was threatened.
The new book “Clinton Cash” says government grants to the school’s nonprofit affiliate soared when Hillary became secretary of state.
As Bubba played pitchman for Baltimore-based Laureate University, the State Department steered a $1.9 million grant to the nonprofit, the book claims.
“Isn’t it troubling that while Bill Clinton was being paid by a private corporation, the corporation was also benefiting from State Department actions . . . Isn’t it troubling that this seeming conflict of interest was not disclosed?” writes author Peter Schweizer.
Bill Clinton severed his ties to the university last week — just days after Hillary, on the campaign trail in Iowa, charged that some for-profit colleges were ripping off students.
She said on April 14 that it was important to look at “some of the for-profit schools, some of the scandals that have arisen in these places where they take all the money and put all these young people and their families into debt.”
Hillary’s populist tone was a shift from her days at Foggy Bottom, where the State Department embraced Laureate with open arms, according to the book.
“Shortly after Bill become honorary chancellor in April 2010, Hillary made Laureate part of her State Department Global Partnership,” the book says.
Laureate insisted that Bill Clinton left only because his five-year deal had come to a close.
But the ties between the two were deep.
Laureate and its not-for-profit ­affiliate, the International Youth Foundation, are headed by Doug Becker, and the school donated between $1 million and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation.
The parties never disclosed how much Bill was paid for speeches around the globe promoting the institutions.
But Schweizer estimated that Bill made at least $1 million based on his usual fees.
In 2012, IYF received its first grant directly from the State Department — $1.9 million for work on a Middle East initiative.
“This is yet another false allegation in a book that is fast being discredited,” said Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon.
“The International Youth Foundation was funded by the Bush administration well before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state. And government records show that in the year after President Clinton joined Laureate, [IYF] . . . grants actually went down, not up.”

See where we are heading?

California's greenhouse house gas emission targets are getting tougher

Gov. Jerry Brown seeks fines of up to $10,000 a day for water wasters


Venezuela rations power as demand soars on hot weather

Clinton's to disclose 1100 foreign donations.

The co-founder of the Clinton Foundation's Canadian affiliate is revealing new details about the charity's donors in an effort to counter allegations in the New York Times and the new book “Clinton Cash

Hillary Clinton’s presidential run is prompting new scrutiny of the Clintons’ financial and charitable affairs—something that’s already proved problematic for the Democratic frontrunner, given how closely these two worlds overlap. Last week, the New York Times examined Bill Clinton’s relationship with a Canadian mining financier, Frank Giustra, who has donated millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation and sits on its board. Clinton, the story suggests, helped Giustra’s company secure a lucrative uranium-mining deal in Kazakhstan and in return received “a flow of cash” to the Clinton Foundation, including previously undisclosed donations from the company’s chairman totaling $2.35 million.
Giustra strenuously objects to how he was portrayed. “It’s frustrating,” he says. And because the donations came in through the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership (CGEP)—a Canadian affiliate of the Clinton Foundation he established with the former president—he feels doubly implicated by the insinuation of a dark alliance.
“We’re not trying to hide anything,” he says. There are in fact 1,100 undisclosed donors to the Clinton Foundation, Giustra says, most of them non-U.S. residents who donated to CGEP.  “All of the money that was raised by CGEP flowed through to the Clinton Foundation—every penny—and went to the [charitable] initiatives we identified,” he says.
The reason this is a politically explosive revelation is because the Clinton Foundation promised to disclose its donors as a condition of Hillary Clinton becoming secretary of state. Shortly after Barack Obama was elected president in 2008, the Clinton Foundation signed a “memorandum of understanding” with the Obama White House agreeing to reveal its contributors every year. The agreement stipulates that the “Clinton Giustra Sustainable Growth Initiative” (as the charity was then known) is part of the Clinton Foundation and must follow “the same protocols.” 
It hasn’t.
Giustra says that’s because Canada’s federal privacy law forbids CGEP, a Canadian-registered charity, from revealing its donors. A memo he provided explaining the legal rationale cites CGEP’s “fiduciary obligations” to its contributors and Canada’s Personal Information Privacy and Electronic Disclosure Act. “We are not allowed to disclose even to the Clinton Foundation the names of our donors,” he says. 
On Saturday, responding to the Times story, Maura Pally, the acting CEO of the Clinton Foundation, issued a statement echoing this assertion: “This is hardly an effort on our part to avoid transparency–unlike in the U.S., under Canadian law, all charities are prohibited from disclosing individual donors without prior permission from each donor.” 
Canadian tax and privacy law experts were dubious of this claim. Len Farber, former director of tax policy at Canada's Department of Finance, said he wasn't aware of any tax laws that would prevent the charity from releasing its donors' names. "There's nothing that would preclude them from releasing the names of donors," he said. "It's entirely up to them."
Mark Blumberg, a charity lawyer at Blumberg Segal in Toronto, added that the legislation "does not generally apply to a registered charity unless a charity is conducting commercial activities... such as selling the list to third parties."
CGEP might have a stronger claim if it promised anonymity to donors, says David Fraser, a partner at McInnes Cooper in Halifax, Nova Scotia, who runs a blog on Canadian privacy law. He’s more skeptical of the argument that a charity has a fiduciary duty to donors. "They might have a fiduciary duty to the people they're collecting money to help," he said, "but for the donors that doesn't seem to have the ring of truth."
While Giustra says he can’t reveal any names, he is willing to disclose that CGEP money comes from “mostly Canadian donors.” The charity is registered in Canada, he says, not to hide the identity of its donors but to enable them to receive Canadian tax breaks that can reimburse them for nearly half of what they give. 
However, not all CGEP’s big donors are Canadian. The Canada Revenue Agency—Canada’s IRS—requires charities to reveal whether they receive donations of more than $10,000 (Canadian) from people who are not Canadians, employed in the country, or carrying on business there. In both 2009 and 2010, CGEP filings show that it reported receiving such donations to Canadian authorities.
With millions of dollars and 1,100 donors shrouded in mystery, CGEP has caught the attention of journalist and authors, including Peter Schweizer, whose forthcoming book, Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich, details Giustra’s financial relationship with Bill Clinton and posits nefarious intentions. The fact that the Clinton Foundation promised something that Giustra feels he can’t supply—the identity of his donors—has put him in an even worse spot.
Giustra is fed up, and he’s vowing to do something to ease his disclosure constraints and clear his name. “There is a way around it—but you need each individual donor’s written permission to allow us to disclose their names,” he says. “We’re going through a process now where we’re trying to get the permission.” He adds, “We’re not going to go to 1,100 people. But we’re certainly going to go to the big ones—a couple hundred grand and up—and just see what they say. Now, they can say no. But we’re going to try.”

So, impatience trumps the Constitution? Only a self serving Democrat can pose that as a legitimate argument. What about Obama sponsored mass illegal immigration?

DHS: No regrets for bypassing Congress on immigration

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson told the Senate Tuesday that he has no regrets at all for going around Congress to implement President Barack Obama’s several immigration-related executive actions.
“Do you regret the actions that you and the administration have taken that have gotten us to this point?” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) asked Johnson at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.
“No, I do not, senator,” Johnson replied. “I believe that the undocumented population in this country, at least half of which has been here more than 10 years, has to be reckoned with. We know they’re here, and they are not priorities for removal.”
“There are millions of people in this country who are not priorities for removal,” he added. “There are dozens of states that allow them to have drivers’ licenses.”
Obama’s latest plan to provide legal protection for millions of illegal immigrants is currently on hold, due to a federal court injunction. But DHS took steps to get ready for that plan, and is lobbying the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to lift that injunction.
Johnson also justified Obama’s immigration action by noting that Obama waited “years” for Congress to act. That prompted Cornyn to ask, “So do you think it’s an excuse for the president to act unconstitutionally because Congress doesn’t act quickly enough to suit him?”
“I have what is in my judgment as a lawyer a very, very thoughtful opinion from the Office of Legal Counsel that we have the legal discretion to do what we did,” Johnson replied.
Johnson spent a good part of Tuesday’d hearing fight back against Republican complaints that Obama’s immigration moves violated the Constitution. He also heard complaints from Sens. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas) that DHS’s effort to enforce immigration laws has waned.
Cruz, for example, noted that the removal of illegal immigrants has dropped dramatically over the last several years. “How do you explain a 41 percent drop in removals of aliens here illegally?” he asked.
Johnson replied that removals have fallen because fewer people are being captured at the border. “The apprehensions are in fact lower on the southern border, so the intake is lower this fiscal year in particular,” he said.
DHS announced last week that border apprehensions are down 28 percent this year, something many Republicans see not as good news, but as a sign that DHS is becoming even more relaxed about its effort to enforce immigration law.

Al Jazeera lawsuit..."I'm shocked, I tell you I'm shocked"

Dylan Byers Blog

Al Jazeera America subject of $15M discriminationlawsuit

By HADAS GOLD | 4/29/15 8:43 AM EDT

A former employee of Al Jazeera America is suing the network for $15 million, alleging that a manager with close ties to top executives discriminated against female employees and made disparaging remarks about Jews and Israel.
Matthew Luke, who started with the network in 2013 ahead of its launch as supervisor of media and archive management, filed the lawsuit in New York Supreme Court on Tuesday. In it, he alleges that Osman Mahmud, who rose through the ranks to become Luke's supervisor as senior vice president of broadcast operations and technology, removed female employees from projects, excluded women from emails and meetings and made discriminatory, anti-Semitic and anti-American remarks such as “whoever supports Israel should die a fiery death in hell.”
Not long after Luke went to human resources to report on the behavior, he alleges he was told he did not fit into the company's culture and was fired.
In an interview with The Washington Post's Erik Wemple, ( wemple/wp/2015/04/28/former-al-jazeera-employee-sues-network-alleging-anti-semitism-anti-americanism/) Mahmud denied the charges, calling them a "pack of lies" and if he had said such remarks more people would've reported
page1image20792 page1image20960 page1image21120 page1image21288 page1image21456 page1image21624 page1image21792

Not long after the lawsuit was filed on Tuesday, the network also announced that two top executives, executive vice president for human resources Diana Lee, and executive vice president for communications Dawn Bridges, were leaving the company. In a memo to staff announcing the departures, the network's chief executive said they were leaving because working in cable is "extremely time consuming" and that the two wanted to change their "work/life mix."
The network, the American arm of the popular and widespread Al Jazeera network, was launched with big budgets and great fanfare last year after buying Current TV. But the network has struggled mightily in ratings and, according to the New York Post, ( is starting to lay off staffers and substitute more programming from Al Jazeera English.
The network said in a statement to media outlets that they do "not comment on pending litigation" though the company "takes these matters seriously and will respond in the appropriate forum."
"Al Jazeera America’s commitment to diversity and inclusion is fundamental to its mission, and is boldly reflected throughout the company: in its staff, its leadership and its programming," the network said.

Read the full lawsuit, posted by TVNewser here ( . Short URL: 

Tuesday, April 28, 2015

Justifying violence du jour

The left is comfortable with tyranny as long as they're in charge. No room for debate, "if it fails to win them over" then what? We club them into submission. Makes you feel all nice and fuzzy doesn't it. It's not enough to be left alone you must dance to their tune. 

Isn't it curious that the media who can identify a conservative to the day of their birth is incurious about these rioters. Well, they speculate from a distance but real facts are missing.

Homeland Security publicly warns of the dangers from the returning veterans while the left loons repeatedly perpetrate more violence and destruction since anybody since Timothy McVeigh. How much did Ferguson riots wind up costing society? 

Remember the judge who berated a small girl about her fear of black people after being a victim of a home invasion by a group of blacks? Well, judge, people live based on  experiences and not through a politically correct lens. 
The Democrat Party has become home to malcontents. Every micro grievance must accommodated. 


Baltimore’s violent protesters are right: Smashing police cars is a legitimate political strategy 

It's crucial to see non-violence as a tactic, not a philosophy. If it fails to win people over it's a futile tactic 

Baltimore's violent protesters are right: Smashing police cars is a legitimate political strategyA Baltimore Metropolitan Police transport vehicle burns during clashes in Baltimore, Maryland April 27, 2015. (Credit: Reuters/Shannon Stapleton)
As a nation, we fail to comprehend Black political strategy in much the same way we fail to recognize the value of Black life.
We see ghettos and crime and absent parents where we should see communities actively struggling against mental health crises and premeditated economic exploitation. And when we see police cars being smashed and corporate property being destroyed, we should see reasonable responses to generations of extreme state violence, and logical decisions about what kind of actions yield the desired political results.
I’m overwhelmed by the pervasive slandering of protesters in Baltimore this weekend for not remaining peaceful. The bad-apple rhetoric would have us believe that most Baltimore protesters are demonstrating the right way—as is their constitutional right—and only a few are disrupting the peace, giving the movement a bad name.
This spin should be disregarded, first because of the virtual media blackout of any of the action happening on the ground, particularly over the weekend. Equally, it makes no sense to cite the Constitution in any demonstration for Black civil rights (that document was not written about us, remember?), but certainly not one organized specifically to call attention to the fact that the state breaks its own laws with regard to the oppressed on a nearly constant basis.
But there is an even bigger problem. Referring to Black Lives Matter protests, as well as organic responses to police and state violence as “non-violent” or “peaceful” erases the actual climate in which these movements are acting, the militant strategies that have rendered them effective, and the long history of riots and direct action on which they are built.
I do not advocate non-violence—particularly in a moment like the one we currently face. In the spirit and words of militant Black and Brown feminist movements from around the globe, I believe it is crucial that we see non-violence as a tactic, not a philosophy.
Non-violence is a type of political performance designed to raise awareness and win over sympathy of those with privilege. When those on the outside of struggle—the white, the wealthy, the straight, the able-bodied, the masculine—have demonstrated repeatedly that they do not care, are not invested, are not going to step in the line of fire to defend the oppressed, this is a futile political strategy. It not only fails to meet the needs of the community, but actually puts oppressed people in further danger of violence.

Militance is about direct action which defends our communities from violence. It is about responses which meet the political goals of our communities in the moment, and deal with the repercussions as they come. It is about saying no, firmly drawing and holding boundaries, demanding the return of stolen resources. And from Queer Liberation and Black Power to centuries-old movements for Native sovereignty and anti-colonialism, it is how virtually all of our oppressed movements were sparked, and has arguably gained us the only real political victories we’ve had under the rule of empire.
We need to clarify what we mean by terms like “violence” and “peaceful.” Because, to be clear, violence is beating, harassing, tazing, assaulting and shooting Black, trans, immigrant, women, and queer people, and that is the reality many of us are dealing with daily. Telling someone to be peaceful and shaming their militance not only lacks a nuanced and historical political understanding, it is literally a deadly and irresponsible demand.
The political goals of rioters in Baltimore are not unclear—just as they were not unclear when poor, Black people rioted in Ferguson last fall. When the free market, real estate, the elected government, the legal system have all shown you they are not going to protect you—in fact, that they are the sources of the greatest violence you face—then political action becomes about stopping the machine that is trying to kill you, even if only for a moment, getting the boot off your neck, even if it only allows you a second of air. This is exactly what blocking off streets, disrupting white consumerism, and destroying state property are designed to do.
Black people know this, and have employed these tactics for a very, very long time. Calling them uncivilized, and encouraging them to mind the Constitution is racist, and as an argument fails to ground itself not only in the violent political reality in which Black people find themselves, but also in our centuries-long tradition of resistance, one that has taught effective strategies for militance and direct action to virtually every other current movement for justice.
And while I don’t believe that every protester involved in attacking police cars and corporate storefronts had the same philosophy, or did what they did for the same reasons, it cannot be discounted that when there is a larger national outcry in defense of plate-glass windows and car doors than for Black young people, a point is being made. When there is more concern for white sports fans in the vicinity of a riot than the Black people facing off with police, there is mounting justification for the rage and pain of Black communities in this country.
Acknowledging all of this, I do think events this weekend in Baltimore raise important questions for future direct and militant action in all of our movements. In addition to articulating our goals, crafting our messaging and type of action, we need to think carefully about what the longer term results of militant action might potentially be. Strategies I might suggest, and important questions I think we should try and answer as we plan or find ourselves involved in political actions are these:
  • Are we harming state and private property, or are we harming people, communities and natural resources? Is the result of our action disrupting state and corporate violence, or creating collateral damage that more oppressed people will have to deal with (i.e., Black families and business owners, cleaning staff, etc.)? Are we mimicking state violence by harming people and the environment, or are we harming state property in ways that can stop or slow violence? Are we demonizing systems or people?
  • Who is in the vicinity? Are we doing harm to people around us as we act? Is there a possibility of violence for those who are not the intended targets of our action? Are we forcing people to be involved in an action who many not want to be, or who are not ready?
  • Who is involved in the action? Are people involved in our action consensually, or simply because they are in the vicinity? Have we created ways for people of all abilities who may not want to be present to leave? Are we being strategic about location and placement of bodies? If there are violent repercussions for our actions, who will be facing them?
We should attempt to answer as many of these questions as possible before action occurs, in the planning stages if possible. We also need backup plans and options for changing our actions in the moment if any of the agreed-upon conditions are not the same when it comes time to act.
I rolled my eyes when inquiries in Ferguson “shockingly” revealed racist emails sent throughout local government, including higher-ups in the Police Department. I think many of us knew the inquiry of virtually any police department would yield almost identical findings. The riots in Baltimore have many drawing parallels between policy and conduct in both cities now. What kind of action brought to light for the less affected what Black people have always known? What kinds of actions will it take to make it widely understood that all policing is racist terror, and justice can only come with its permanent abolition?
Black power, Queer power, power to Baltimore, and to all oppressed people who know what time it is.

The lost wisdom of Booker T. Washington.

“There is another class of coloured people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs — partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs.” 

“Character, not circumstance, makes the person.” 

“I will permit no man to narrow and degrade my soul by making me hate him.” 

“I have begun everything with the idea that I could succeed, and I never had much patience with the multitudes of people who are always ready to explain why one cannot succeed.” 

“No race can prosper till it learns that there is as much dignity in tilling a field as in writing a poem.” 

“Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of stupidity” 

“Among a large class, there seemed to be a dependence upon the government for every conceivable thing. The members of this class had little ambition to create a position for themselves, but wanted the federal officials to create one for them. How many times I wished then and have often wished since, that by some power of magic, I might remove the great bulk of these people into the country districts and plant them upon the soil – upon the solid and never deceptive foundation of Mother Nature, where all nations and races that have ever succeeded have gotten their start – a start that at first may be slow and toilsome, but one that nevertheless is real.” 

― Booker T. Washington

Compare this man with the vile Saul Alinsky.

“Black people are dying in the streets. We’ve been dying in the streets for months, years, decades, centuries" Is he talking about Baltimore or Chicago?

Posted By Chuck Ross On 11:35 PM 04/27/2015 In 
Marc Lamont Hill, a Morehouse College professor and regular CNN commentator, embraced radical violence in the streets during an interview Monday on CNN.
“There shouldn’t be calm tonight,” Hill told CNN host Don Lemon as riots raged in the streets of Baltimore.
“Black people are dying in the streets. We’ve been dying in the streets for months, years, decades, centuries. I think there can be resistance to oppression.”
Van Jones, a former adviser to President Obama, served as a moderate voice to Hill’s extreme position. He condemned the riots and looting occurring across Baltimore, saying that while “black lives matter,” “black jobs matter, black businesses matter, and black neighborhoods matter.”
Hill responded, reiterating his position that rioting serves a purpose.
“I think we should be strategic in how we riot,” Hill responded.
He back-pedaled some, adding, “I’m not saying that we should see the destruction of black communities as positive.”
“I’m saying we can’t have too narrow a perception of what the destruction of black communities mean. It seems we have all of our outrage tonight and not the 364 days before tonight.”

Baltimore riots and the movie "Purge" Look at pictures of the rioters and note the abundance of three figure sneakers

Baltimore rioting kicked off with rumors of 'purge'

By Justin Fenton and Erica L. Green The Baltimore Sun
APRIL 27, 2015, 
I t started Monday morning with word on social media of a "purge" — a reference to a movie in which crime is made legal. It was to begin at 3 p.m. at Mondawmin Mall, then venture down Pennsylvania
Avenue to the Inner Harbor.
With tensions in the city running high on the day of Freddie Gray's funeral, police began alerting local

businesses and mobilizing officers.
The University of Maryland, Baltimore was one of the first institutions to acknowledge law enforcement concerns. With exams about to begin, school officials abruptly canceled classes "on recommendation of the BPD."
T. Rowe Price sent employees home; Lexington Market closed early. One by one, other businesses shut down.
When 3 p.m. came, 75 to 100 students heading to Mondawmin Mall were greeted by dozens of police officers in riot gear. The mall is a transportation hub for students from several nearby schools.
The students began pelting officers with water bottles and rocks. Bricks met shields. Glass shattered up and down Gwynns Falls Parkway. Officers sprayed Mace. Confrontations bled into side streets, where officers threw bricks back. A heavily armored Bearcat tactical vehicle rolled through the neighborhood.
One officer, bloodied in the melee, was carried through Westbury Avenue by his comrades. Police used tear gas to move crowds down the street.
Vaughn DeVaughn, a city teacher, watched the scene.
"This is about anger and frustration and them not knowing how to express it," he said. "Everyone out here looks under the age of 25. I'm out here for them."
Some said the presence of the police antagonized the neighborhood.
"The thing is if the cops never came up here, they weren't going to [mess] up Mondawmin," said a young woman who was watching the clash. " What are they going to [mess] up Mondawmin for? They shop here. This is their home."
Karl Anderson, who works at a community center in the Mondawmin neighborhood, said he believed students misunderstood what it looks like to fight for civil rights.
"This is going to be their history," Anderson said. "Not the Rosa Parks, the Martin Luther Kings.
"They don't understand that."
Sandra Almond-Cooper, president of the Mondawmin Neighborhood Improvement Association, said it wasn't

page1image22280 page1image22440 page1image22600
the first confrontation between these students and police.
"These kids are just angry," Almond-Cooper said. "These are the same kids they pull up on the corner for no reason."
The crowds at Mondawmin were thinning when police tweeted that a police officer had been assaulted at the busy intersection of Pennsylvania and West North avenues.
A line of officers looked south as smoke rippled into the sky. Two Maryland Transit Administration vehicles had been set on fire. People were tearing a city police vehicle apart.
People took turns standing on the roof, taking selfies. A group of men located a crowbar and pried open the trunk, where police store equipment.
A CVS store and a check-cashing store were breached. Then, a mom-and-pop grocery store. People walked away with garbage bags full of supplies: diapers, bleach, snack foods, prescription drugs.
Next door, another business remained intact. A man stood in the locked vestibule wielding a shotgun.
"The kids are acting up because there's no one to hold them accountable," said Anthony Cheng, who lives on the block.
A group of men who said they were members of the Crips — they wore blue bandannas and blue shirts — stood on the periphery and denounced the looting.
"This is our hood, and we can't control it right now," one of the men said.
But another bystander, who said his name was Antwion Robinson, 26, said the outburst had been building.

"They are killing us," Robinson said. "They are actually killing us, and then they make this seem like we're out of control. But they're killing our neighbors and brothers. We're just supposed to sit back and take that?"
As Robinson spoke, a man walked by.
"Don't do anything without your face covered," he said.

Tyrone Parker, 64, watched the mayhem. He said police broke his arm two years ago, but he didn't approve of what he was seeing.
"They're [messing] the whole neighborhood up," he said.
Traffic continued along North Avenue. Sometimes, motorists pulled over to collect items looted from stores, then took off.
As police vehicles screamed through, people threw items that exploded on their windshields. One unmarked police vehicle wobbled back and forth, and nearly fishtailed out of control.
Crowds moved downtown, wandering through Mount Vernon and toward the Inner Harbor, smashing windows along the way.
At least nine businesses were breached by a group of men along Centre Street in Mount Vernon and Eutaw

Street nearby.
Boubacar Sall said looters destroyed Benita's, his sister's beauty salon. They stole hair extensions, a television set and boxes of hair products.
Construction workers descended on Trinacria Italian Cafe on Center Street to board up windows. They were sent by a project manager from a nearby building site.
"This is a tough situation for anyone," said project manager Dan Harrington, of the construction company Saje Build.
The workers sawed plywood sheets and boarded up broken windows. A man at the cafe who would not give his name expressed his gratitude.
"I am shocked," he said. "I owe this man my life. He has a heart of gold." Outside the cafe, Paula Easton began to cry.
"This is absolutely horrible," the lifelong Baltimorean said. "They aren't doing it for [Freddie Gray]. They're taking an opportunity for personal gain. They're tearing up their own neighborhood."
Looters smashed windows and broke through a metal roll-down door in the Save-a-Lot shopping center on McMechen Street in Bolton Hill. Neighbors arrived minutes later to stand in front of the stores, board them up and help sweep up the debris and broken glass.
Despite their efforts, looters came back — this time, not the bands of young men the neighbors had seen before, but people driving SUVs and cars. Neighbors, African-American and white, shouted at them to go away, and said they were writing their tag numbers down.
Then came another group of six or seven young men, and a fight broke out between the neighbors protecting the stores and looters trying to run into Rite Aid. A neighbor sprayed a yellow cloud at a young man. He fled, but not before someone was hit on the head.
Looters darted into the back of the store and hauling out goods and loading them into cars. There were no police in sight. People could be seen walking casually away with large loads of looted goods piled high in grocery carts.
Late Monday, as Gov. Larry Hogan was activating the National Guard and State Police were calling for reinforcements from neighboring states, a massive blaze broke out on the city's East Side. Looting broke out on Monument Street, a strip of business near Johns Hopkins Hospital. Police said someone fired shots at an officer in the Park Heights area of Northwest Baltimore.
And police rushed back to Mondawmin Mall, where the conflict started. People had broken in and were looting the stores inside.
Baltimore Sun reporters Liz Bowie, Yvonne Wenger and Colin Campbell contributed to this article

The level of corruption in NY politics is stunning, especially among Democrats.

Assemblyman to plead guilty to fraud, quit Albany: report

Looks like a clean hit.
Queens Assemblyman William Scarborough will plead guilty to a felony charge in federal court next month and step down from office, the Albany Times Union reported Tuesday.
Scarborough denounced The Post for conducting a “hit job” in 2012 for reporting he was in New York City on at least one day, March 17, 2011, when he claimed a $165 “per diem” expense payment for being in Albany.
But in 10 days, Scarborough will plead guilty in US District Court in Binghamton to submitting $40,000 worth of fraudulent travel vouchers between January 2009 and December 2012, according to the newspaper.
The feds easily made the case against the 20-year legislator by scouring cellphone tower transmissions to determine Scarborough’s whereabouts — which his attorney had fought unsuccessfully as inadmissible in court.
Prosecutors said the more glaring example of Scarborough’s cheating came on May 11, 2011, when he used his credit card in Atlanta while attending his daughter’s college graduation and also filed a “per diem” expense for being in Albany that day.
Scarborough is expected to step down from his Jamaica Assembly seat, which he has held for two decades, as part of his plea.
Scarborough’s attorney, E. Stewart Jones, said Tuesday he would not comment on the case and has instructed his client to keep quiet.
“It’s dangerous to comment on pleas until they’re actually done,” he said. Calls made to Scarborough were not immediately returned.