The Pardu

The Pardu
Watchful eyes and ears feed the brain, thus nourishing the brain cells.
Showing posts with label Attorney General Eric Holder. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Attorney General Eric Holder. Show all posts

Monday, July 21, 2014

Morris Dees, SPLC Founder Joins Atty, Holder On Racial Animus And President Obama

After Attorney General Eric Holder's ABC News interview on July 13, 2014, Sarah Palin and other GOP conservative talking heads accused the AG of "Playing the Race Card." 



Since Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan (years later) the GOP has carved out a geo/political region across a southern swath of the United States with an undeniably effective "Southern Strategy."

Southern strategy - Wikipedia

While the GOP "base" map looks more like the image below, rest assured the GOP has a voting bloc strangle hold on the states depicted above via Wiki.

A political party with 82% white membership with subgroups like conservative libertarians (reported demographic of 70 plus percent white members) has a dedicated voter niche. The GOP can claim fiscal conservatism and the moral high-ground (very much unfounded), but the glue that holds it all together resides in matters of race.

He claims not to have said "black people" while claiming a misstated and garbled "BLAH" people.  Yet, his audience resoundingly applauded his words signaling aggregate knowledge of a species called "BLAH" people (maybe only a denizen species in Iowa). There is not denying recognition of Santorum's "dog whistle."  

Rush Limbaugh has stated angst against Obama and Holder is not due to race. He posits the more vocal are anti-democrat. Fortunately, Limbaugh speaks to a dedicated group of sycophant listeners. His listeners may even find a place in their gray matter to accept Limbaugh platitudes. We offer a vastly different picture.
Excerpt

THE TOP TEN RACIST RUSH LIMBAUGH QUOTES

1. “Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?”
Source
No, but I’ve noticed that all racist bigots think like Rush Limbaugh. Comparing a respected black politician and minister to common criminals is Jim Crow racism. Maybe all black people look alike to him, but I’ve never seen a picture of a wanted criminal that looks like Jesse Jackson. A serial killer that looks like Rush Limbaugh on the other hand.
John Wayne Gacy
Talking heads on the Right consistently adopt deflective strategy against AG Holder, but the strategy fails once their rhetoric moves beyond their sycophants followers. I place much more faith in one who surely knows the vast cloaked world of racism, antisemitism, homophobia and gender bias. Once, I move past Tim Wise's educational anti-racism lectures and books, I quickly move  to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). In fact, the SPLC is my one stop source of information related to US  covert and overt racism. Morris Dees, SPLC Founder, recently wrote in support of Holder's comments on race in America and direct animus towards President Obama and himself. 

HomeThe Southern Poverty Law Center 
Right-wing pundits are jumping all over Attorney General Eric Holder for daring to suggest on Sunday that “racial animus” plays a role in the “level of vehemence” that’s been directed at President Obama. They’re denouncing him for “playing the race card” and “stoking racial divisions.”
Who do they think they’re fooling?
The rhetoric is what’s hateful. Calling people out for it is not.
The racism Holder described has been obvious since the 2008 campaign, when Obama was portrayed as someone who was not a “real American” – a Muslim, a Kenyan, a communist, even a terrorist sympathizer.
Since then, an entire movement has been built around the thoroughly discredited notion that the president’s birth certificate is a fake. And that’s just the beginning.
Newt Gingrich has called Obama the “food stamp president” and referred to his “Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior.”
Rush Limbaugh has said Obama – and Oprah Winfrey, too, by the way – have reached the pinnacle of their professions only because they’re black. He added this week that “so-called conservative media types” praised Holder’s nomination only because he’s black.
Glenn Beck has said the president, whose mother was white, has a “deep-seated hatred for white people, or white culture.”
Conservative hero and former rock star Ted Nugent, who was invited to campaign with the GOP nominee for Texas governor, called the president a “subhuman mongrel.”
Confederate flag was waved in front of the White House during last year’s “Million Vet March.”
U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina screamed “You lie!” during the president’s address to Congress in September 2009. When has that happened to a president before?
All manner of overtly racist posters have been seen at Tea Party rallies, including one depicting the president as a “witch doctor.”  
We’ve repeatedly seen stories about conservative politicians sharing racist jokes  And, we’ve seen an explosive growth of radical-right groups, including armed militias, since Obama was elected, and repeated threats that violence is needed to “take our country back” from the “tyranny” of Obama. This is part of a backlash to the growing diversity in our country, as symbolized by the presence of a black man in the White House.
I grew up in rural Alabama during the Jim Crow years and lived through the civil rights movement, when white supremacists did everything they could, including committing violent atrocities, to turn back the tide of progress. And I’ve stared across the courtroom at some of America’s most vicious hatemongers – men like neo-Nazi Frazier Glenn Cross, who recently killed three people and once targeted me. I know racism when I see it.
No one, of course, is suggesting that merely disagreeing with Obama is evidence of racism. That’s clearly not true.
But we have a political party and a right-wing media machine that pander incessantly to the racist reactionaries in our society, often through code words. It’s been going on since Nixon implemented his “Southern strategy” of appealing to white resentment in the wake of the civil rights movement.
I wish it weren’t so. But it is simply undeniable. We should call it what it is.
StumbleUpon

Tuesday, May 20, 2014

Fox News "White Privilege"; If You Thought We Pile-on. Question Is Why Do You Watch Fox News?


We won't comment on this piece as we published a piece about an hour earlier that will suffice.  So, did you think about and question why you watch Fox News? Did you like the answer?

Another question. Do you think Fox is working to unseat Limbaugh as GOP "Race Central?"

Hannity guest: Eric Holder and ‘myth’ of racism are ‘crippling for blacks’ (via Raw Story )
On Monday, a Fox News panel headed by Sean Hannity attacked commencement speeches made by Attorney General Eric Holder and First Lady Michelle Obama in which both public figures said that the country can do more to eliminate racism and create a more…

StumbleUpon

Thursday, May 1, 2014

Sarah Palin: ID Bracelets? Does She Talk To TheTooth Fairy?


I know, why bother to go here? 

Well, if we do not you go here, we may hear this garbage from someone without opportunity to declare it false. You already knew it was false. Of course, but the gullible fool who repeated the drivel may not share your scope of knowledge and inclination to question Palin's "stuff." 

Palin is a major carnival barker. She knows uttering such babble enhances potential for garnering six figure speaking fees and she delivers. One has to appeal to and give to their audience. Well, Palin's utterances fall on ears that welcome the drivel. A fact that speaks volumes about her audience.
The prejudices of ignorance are more easily removed than the prejudices of interest; the first are all blindly adopted, the second willfully preferred.
George Bancroft

Palin

Says Attorney General Eric Holder recently revealed "this idea to have government have gun owners wear special bracelets that would identify you as a gun owner."

Sarah Palin on Saturday, April 26th, 2014 in speech to the NRA convention

Sarah Palin: Eric Holder wants gun owners to wear ID bracelets

"Waterboarding is how we baptize terrorists" was not the only questionable thing Sarah Palin said during her recent speech to National Rifle Association enthusiasts.
In stirring up concerns about gun rights, the former Alaska governor and 2008 vice presidential nominee turned conservative rabble-rouser misrepresented comments from Attorney General Eric Holder about investments in smart-gun technology.
"Every day we are seeing more and more efforts to strip away our Second Amendment rights," Palin told the corwd. "They are trying," she said, before leading into her about Holder.
"Recently, he reveals this idea to have government have gun owners wear bracelets, special bracelets, that would identify you as a gun owner," Palin said. "Well, hey, Holder, you don't want to go there, buddy."
There is more to the story than Holder wanting gun owners to wear identifying bracelets.
Holder’s comments on gun bracelets
Holder uttered the words "guns" and "bracelet" before a House appropriations subcommittee on April 4, 2014, as he testified about his agency’s 2015 budget request. U.S. Rep. Andy Harris, R-Md., asked Holder about requested grants to "encourage development of innovative gun safety technology." Holder explained the grant request stems from a White House-driven meeting amid talk of gun regulation reforms.
"We talked about how guns can be made more safe by making them either through fingerprint identification, the gun talks to a bracelet or something that you might wear, how guns can be used only by the person who is lawfully in possession of the weapon.

"It’s those kinds of things that I think we want to try to explore so that we can make sure that people have the ability to enjoy their Second Amendment rights, while at the same time decreasing the misuse of weapons that lead to the kinds of things that we see on a daily basis, you know, where people, kids especially, are struck down by ..."
Harris cut him off, saying "sure, no one wants that to occur," and moved on.

Holder’s comment about new gun technology was picked up a few days later in an April 7 Washington Free Beacon story under the headline, "Holder: We Want to Explore Gun Tracking Bracelets." From there, it was picked up by Fox NewsInfoWarsTownhall.com and the National Rifle Association, among others. In each case, the coverage focused on the idea of "gun tracking bracelets."

But the technology doesn’t track gun owners, and it doesn’t always require a bracelet.
Smart guns and the Department of Justice
Holder had smart guns on his mind because of President Barack Obama and reforms he sought after the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings.
Obama directed Holder, via one of 23 executive orders, to release a report on gun safety technology "and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies." As he mentioned in his testimony, the department’s National Institute of Justice released a report in June 2013 assessing the marketplace, and Holder chaired a meeting with industry leaders and experts at the White House.

Smart guns are also called "owner-authorized guns," "childproof guns" and "personalized guns." Basically, these are firearms made with electronic chips and sensors that can discern an authorized user from an unauthorized user. The gun will fire if it recognizes the owner and won’t if the owner is not recognized.

Some high-tech models include a fingerprint reader that works kind of like the one in new iPhones (or James Bond’s personalized gun in Skyfall). Other models include the capability to read a radio signal from a transmitter embedded into a bracelet, ring, watch or pin worn by the gun owner, or even a chip implanted in the hand.

"If that is within a certain programmed distance to the gun, the gun mechanically makes itself operable," said Stephen Teret, a smart-gun proponent, professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and director of the Center for Law and the Public’s Health. "If it’s not within a certain distance, the gun won't work."

So the short signals emitted in smart-gun technology do not function like GPS on mobile phones and other devices. The lack of GPS technology would prevent the government from identifying and tracking gun owners, should the government try, said Mike Bazinet, spokesman for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a firearm and ammunition trade group. Bazinet noted that doesn't mean the group isn't concerned about that prospect.

The technology could require a bracelet. It could also require a watch, a ring, a pin, or even just a fingerprint, experts say.
The point is there is no plan to identify gun owners with a "scarlet letter" bracelet.
Origins and controversies
Teret says the earliest smart gun was developed by Smith & Wesson in the 1880s. The manufacturer added a metal lever to the back of its handguns, requiring a person to press the the lever and the trigger at the same time to fire the weapon. A child’s hand would be too small to do that, thus preventing accidental injuries and deaths.

Manufacturers started thinking about incorporating electronics into guns in the early 1990s to make them safer. The concept had support from the Bill Clinton administration, lost steam during the George W. Bush years, and then re-emerged after the Newtown, Conn., school shootings under Obama, Teret said.

International companies, such as Armatix in Germany and TriggerSmart in Ireland, are ahead of the curve, thanks in part to less political resistance, Teret said. But there is technology emerging in the United States. Utah-based Kodiak Industries is offering the Intelligun, a fingerprint-locking system installed onto a 1911-style, .45 caliber pistol, for $399.

This year, a California gun retailer told the Washington Post he planned to sell the Armatix iP1 .22 caliber pistol, an $1,800 product that works with a black stopwatch and PIN code that emits radio signals to the gun when worn by the right user. It was supposed to be the first smart gun sold in the United States, but the owner and Armatix representative received backlash from gun rights activists, and the plans were scrapped.

Here’s what the iP1 looks like:
It’s not the development of smart guns that concerns the firearms industry, Bazinet said. It’s government’s embrace of them. A New Jersey law, the only one of its kind, requires after three years from the first smart gun being sold in the United States that all new guns sold in the state be built with this technology.

To Bazinet, smart guns won’t be ready for mass use until police forces are using them. His group has warned about defective guns and dead batteries while saying consumers should be able to buy them if they want.

Of course, none of this information changes the veracity of Palin’s comments about ID bracelets for gun owners. It just shows how wrong she was.

Emails to Palin’s political action committee were not returned.
Our ruling
According to Palin, Holder recently revealed "this idea to have government have gun owners wear bracelets, special bracelets, that would identify you as a gun owner."

That’s far from the truth.

Holder said he wants the federal government to explore gun safety measures, including smart-gun technology that would prevent weapons from being fired by anyone except their rightful owner.

The comment in question came as he explained why his agency is seeking federal money for grants to spur research into safer guns. He listed fingerprint identification and the gun talking "to a bracelet or something that you might wear" as tools that could prevent a gun owner’s firearm from being used by someone else. Some smart guns are powered by bracelets with embedded radio signal transmitters, but that’s just one way this could work.

The purpose of accessories worn in order to fire a smart gun is not to help the government track owners or identify them (again, Holder is pursuing no such policy). The goal of the emerging technology is to minimize shootings caused by suicides, children or stolen guns.

We rate Palin’s claim False.
StumbleUpon

Monday, June 3, 2013

DOJ, National Security, Media Issues And We Do Not Care!




Reposted from The Whirling Wind Dot Com

DOJ Media Probe – Why We Don’t Care.


doj media probe header DOJ Media Probe   Why We Dont Care.by Benjamin T. Moore, Jr.
trea·son (noun)
1. Violation of allegiance toward one’s country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one’s country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
koch brothers DOJ Media Probe   Why We Dont Care.
Charles and David Koch
It is very disheartening to realize that effectively, there is very little difference between the Koch brothers and those who own and run our media outlets. In both cases you have extremely wealthy people who have agendas and the means to pursue those agendas in a manner that excludes competing viewpoints. Yes, everyone has a voice. However, when you’ve got wealth, you have a megaphone that allows you to shout down competing positions.

cable news networks DOJ Media Probe   Why We Dont Care.We recently became aware that the Department of Justice obtained the phone records of reporters working for the Associated Press. If you had asked me to speculate on the odds of Fox News, Huffington Post and MSNBC all being in agreement on an issue, I’d of put those odds right about even with Hell freezing over. Imagine my surprise when I awoke one fine day to discover that all the News channels were in complete agreement on an issue.
attorney general eric holder DOJ Media Probe   Why We Dont Care.
Attorney General Eric Holder
Any issue that could make Fox News and MSNBC see eye to eye, simply demanded further investigation. Even more so as more and more media outlets began to pile on. As usual – for Fox – their target was Attorney General Eric Holder. I will admit, based on the reporting it was disturbing to think that the Federal Government would acquire the confidential work product of renowned news reporters… in secret!

Having been burned a time or two, I’ve learned to look prior to leaping based on some media outlet’s say so. What I discovered was shockingly simple. Contrary to the impressions being spread, there was good reason for what was done and it was in fact a matter of National Security.

There is a distinct difference between a “whistle blower” speaking in confidence to our “free press” and someone using the press to reveal “Top Secret” information. Information, that once revealed would weaken our nation, put at risk the lives of those who work with our assets on foreign soil and ultimately put at risk the lives of Americans right here at home.

DOJ Media Probe

underwear bomber DOJ Media Probe   Why We Dont Care.
Underwear Bomber
Most of you will recall the “Underwear Bomber.” What most do not realize is how close he came to succeeding. Unlike the “Shoe Bomber” who paused to say his prayers first, allowing enough time for a vigilant Stewardess to “Cold Cock” him before he could put a match to the fuse of the bomb hidden in his shoes, the “Underwear Bomber” was successful in setting off his device. Fortunately for everyone on that plane, rather than detonate as planned, it simply burst into flame, burning severely some rather sensitive portions of his anatomy.
anwar al awlaki DOJ Media Probe   Why We Dont Care.The people we’re at war with, are not stupid. They analyse what went wrong, and seek to improve their devices for their next attempts. It turns out, we were fortunate enough to capture and get our hands on one of their new and improved devices. It was whisked to our labs over here for examination and analysis. The “intel” from that device would have given us a lot of information. How their bomb making techniques have improved. What chemicals they’re currently employing. How they’re triggering the new device and most importantly, whether or not our current security protocols and technology would be able to catch these new devices.

fbi crime lab quantico DOJ Media Probe   Why We Dont Care.
FBI Crime Lab
That information is only good so long as “They” don’t know we’re on to them. Nobody with the clearances to even know we had one of their devices, nobody with the clearances to analyze their device, should be spilling the beans to ANYBODY, let alone a reporter(s) working for an international news agency.

When the DOJ read the AP article in March of 2012 outlining the operation, stating that our CIA had seized the device and that it was being examined and analysed by the FBI, as you might imagine, there was an immediate investigation launched behind the scenes. This was information that had to of come from an inside source.
espionage DOJ Media Probe   Why We Dont Care.
We’re talking about espionage.
When people make honest mistakes, they do not seek to cover their tracks. Clearly whomever leaked the information was not an amateur nor was his or her leaking of the information accidental. If it had been, they would have discovered the person responsible and dealt with them. The “DOJ Media Probe” is mute testimony to the serious nature of this situation. They had to approach it from the media end and work backwards. Now they’ve got a double headed situation. If they’d walked through the front door of the Associated Press and made their request. The reporter may have tipped off his or her source that they were on to him. This may have provided time for the destruction of evidence and possible escape. They needed to know whom was in contact with the Associated Press. Someone who would also have had access to, or the security clearance high enough to have access to sensitive information at that level.

Yes, the DOJ Media Probe truly is a matter of national security. This has nothing to do with “Whistle Blowers” or weakening the First Amendment protections of our “Free Press.” This truly is a matter of National Security. It is important to note, the DOJ actually showed an amazing amount of restraint. They could have easily seized AP offices around the country, put everyone out, padlocked the doors and then combed through all of their files at their leisure. Instead, they did not even record the contents of the conversations of the AP reporters, they simply made a log of whom they were talking to.

Media Reaction

This entire scenario has given us a wonderful insight into what is wrong with our “for profit”News outlets. At one time they taught in journalism classes, the goal of any news report is to answer four questions:
  1. Who?
  2. What?
  3. When?
  4. Where?
A Journalist adds one more question, “Why?” No opinions, just the facts as you know them to be. The Newspapers did add Opinionated Editorials which we abbreviate as “Op-Eds.” These were entertaining and provided food for thought, but we understood these were the opinions of the writer and not necessarily based in fact. We weighed them as such and there was no attempt to pawn these off as “News.” They even had their own section in the Newspapers.

andy rooney DOJ Media Probe   Why We Dont Care.
The late, great Andy Rooney

Today we have opinion masquerading as news! Andy Rooney’s segment at the end of “60 Minutes” was an Op-Ed. He made no bones about it. Everyone understood that Andy was not reporting on the News. FOX News, MSNBC and CNN have more “Op-Ed” shows than they do actual News shows. When it comes to actual News, I’d give the edge to CNN. The other networks are basically all opinion unless there is an actual breaking story unfolding. Even then, most often they fill empty air with “talking heads” who proffer their opinions about what is unfolding. It’s all entertainment.

Proof There Is Really Little Difference Between The Networks

The DOJ Media Probe has certainly provided proof that there is really no difference between the major Cable News outlets and many of the Printed and Electronic Media outlets. If any of them had gone back to the fundamentals of News Reporting and Journalism, the whole DOJ Media Probe wouldn’t have been much more than a 5 minute piece. Who? What? When? Where? Why?

The true story had nothing to do with the DOJ Media Probe. The true story was whether or not one of their own was complicit in treason? Isn’t it interesting that they all seem to be ignoring this angle of the story? It is this very uniformity in their approach that gives cause for pause and raises one’s suspicions. When News Agencies who have a track record of disagreeing on almost every issue they focus on, suddenly line up and fall in step? That’s not just unusual, that’s like waking up tomorrow to discover that the Sun is now rising in the West and setting in the East. You might want to seriously examine, what happened over night while you were sleeping.

Mind Control And Media Manipulation

mind control 01 DOJ Media Probe   Why We Dont Care.Most people never stop to realize that one of the most powerful tools of mind control and manipulation is the News Media! You turn on your television each evening and you’re not only being told what is important, but what you should think about it. The world is a big place. History is being made around the globe everyday. There simply is not enough time to cover everything. Thus, someone has to go through, pick, choose and aggregate what should or should not be covered. This is where the mischief begins.

No problem! We all agree this is necessary. However, have you ever wondered whom decides what is presented? What criteria do they use? Take the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting for instance. Absolutely tragic. The liberal media – MSNBC in particular – have used this tragedy as an excuse to run anti-gun pieces night after night after night. Almost each show on MSNBC devotes some portion of its time to beating the drum for gun control. It’s no longer news. Anybody who was interested or not, now knows everything that happened surrounding the shooting. Well, the official story at least.

mind control 02 DOJ Media Probe   Why We Dont Care.How many children died? Around 20? Presumably, it is out of concern for the children that MSNBC, night after night, like a broken record on a record player you cannot unplug, gives all it’s viewers their daily overdose of anti-gun medicine. Clearly they’re no longer reporting the news. They’re not even engaging in legitimate “opinionated editorials.” What they’re endeavouring to do is manipulate society and cause it to move in the direction that they have chosen. Incessant repetition is one of the main tools of brain washing.

Why do I call this, “attempted societal manipulation?” If MSNBC or for that matter, any of the Cable News Outlets were really concerned about children, they’d be discussing the nearly 20,000 children that die every single day because of starvation or treatable disease. Every day, 1,000 times more children die than were murdered in Sandy Hook Elementary school. Yet, not a peep from the liberal media. By way of analogy, it’s like someone on the Titanic complaining about a leaky faucet in their Stateroom.


Either you care about children or you do not. MSNBC’s hypocrisy knows no bounds or, what they’re actually doing is using their platform to advance an agenda. In this, they’re no different than the Koch brothers or other monied interests on the “Right” who use their wealth to buy elections and purchase politicians. The end objective is exactly the same.Subvert democracy and shape society to their liking. Perhaps it is because the nearly 20,000 children who are dying are not white? Maybe it’s because they weren’t shot with a semi-automatic rifle? Maybe somehow they’re less dead because they weren’t shot?

Why We Don’t Care About The DOJ Media Probe

I am happy to report that as of today, the American people have not completely succumbed to the mind control methods being employed against them. Based on the polling, we get it! The American people know that one of the primary functions of government is to provide for the safety and welfare of the American Citizens. When a News Agency begins to publish top secret information that could ultimately cause the deaths of innocent American Citizens, we not only expect our government agencies to take action, we demand that they do.

associated press DOJ Media Probe   Why We Dont Care.If anything, the Justice Department under Attorney General Eric Holder, may have shown too much restraint. By giving a “heads up” to the terrorist, the Associated Press may have caused the bomb makers to refine their methods and technologies such that their next attempts will meet with success. The blood of all the innocent victims of the next attacks, will be laid at the doors of the Associated Press.
StumbleUpon