Showing posts with label news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label news. Show all posts

Sunday, 7 September 2008

Sarah Palin's racist comments.

"So Sambo beat the bitch!" - Sarah Palin on Barack Obama’s win over Hillary Clinton
Category: News and Politics

[Found on the interwebs. I was going to interject with my own comments but I found I didn't really have anything constructive to add. Brought to you, with many thanks, from "Paradise"]

http://thepoliticalcurmudgeon.blogspot.com/

Alaskans Speak (In A Frightened Whisper): Palin Is "Racist, Sexist, Vindictive And Mean."

"So Sambo beat the bitch!"

This is how Republican Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin described Barack Obama's win over Hillary Clinton to political colleagues in a restaurant a few days after Obama locked up the Democratic Party presidential nomination.

According to Lucille, the waitress serving her table at the time and who asked that her last name not be used, Gov. Palin was eating lunch with five or six people when the subject of the Democrat's primary battle came up. The governor, seemingly not caring that people at nearby tables would likely hear her, uttered the slur and then laughed loudly as her meal mates joined in appreciatively.

"It was kind of disgusting," Lucille, who is part Aboriginal, said in a phone interview after admitting that she is frightened of being discovered telling folks in the "lower 48" about life near the North Pole.

Then, almost with a sigh, she added, "But that's just Alaska."

Racial and ethnic slurs may be "just Alaska" and, clearly, they are common, everyday chatter for Palin.

Besides insulting Obama with a Step-N'-Fetch-It, "darkie musical" swipe, people who know her say she refers regularly to Alaska's aboriginal people as "Artic Arabs" – how efficient, lumping two apparently undesirable groups into one ugly description – as well as the more colourful "mukluks" along with the totally unimaginative "fucking Eskimo's," according to a number of Alaskans and Wasillians interviewed for this article.

But being openly racist is only the tip of the Palin iceberg. According to Alaskans interviewed for this article, she is also vindictive and mean. We're talking Rove mean and Nixon vindictive.

No wonder the vast sea of white, cheering faces at the Republican Convention went wild for Sarah: They adore the type, it's in their genetic code. So much for McCain's pledge of a "high road" campaign; Palin is incapable of being part of one.

< –––– >

It's not easy getting people in the 49th state to speak critically about Palin – especially people in Wasilla, where she was mayor. For one thing, with every journalist in the world calling, phone lines into Alaska have been mostly jammed since Friday; as often as not, a recording told me that "all circuits are busy" or numbers just wouldn't ring. I should think a state that's been made richer than God by oil could afford telephone lines and cell towers for everyone.

On a more practical level, many people in Alaska, and particularly Wasilla, are reluctant to speak or be quoted by name because they're afraid of her as well as the state Republican Party machine. Apparently, the power elite are as mean as the winters.

"The GOP is kind of like organized crime up here," an insurance agent in Anchorage who knows the Palin family, explained. "It's corrupt and arrogant. They're all rich because they do private sweetheart deals with the oil companies, and they can destroy anyone. And they will, if they have to.

"Once Palin became mayor," he continued, "She became part of that inner circle."

Like most other people interviewed, he didn't want his name used out of fear of retribution. Maybe it's the long winter nights where you don't see the sun for months that makes people feel as if they're under constant danger from "the authorities." As I interviewed residents it began sounding as if living in Alaska controlled by the state Republican Party is like living in the old Soviet Union: See nothing that's happening, say nothing offensive, and the political commissars leave you alone. But speak out and you get disappeared into a gulag north of the Arctic Circle for who-knows-how-long.

Alright, that's an exaggeration brought on by my getting too little sleep and building too much anger as I worked this article. But there's ample evidence of Palin's vindictive willingness to destroy people she sees as opponents. Just ask the Wasilla town administrator she hired before firing him because he rebelled against the way Palin demanded he do his job, or the town librarian who refused to hold the book burning Walpurgisnach Mayor Palin demanded.

Ironically, Palin was pushed into hiring the administrator by the party poo-bah's who helped get her elected after she got herself into trouble over a number of precipitous firings which gave rise to a recall campaign.

"People who fought her attempt to oust the librarian are on her enemies list to this day," states Anne Kilkenny, a Wasilla resident and one of the few Alaskans willing to speak on-the-record, for attribution, about Palin. In fact, Kilkenny actually circulated an e-mail letter about Palin that was verified and printed by The Nation.

For good measure, Palin booted the Wasilla police chief from office because, she told a local newspaper, he "intimidated" her.

< –––– >

Sarah Palin drew early attention from state GOP apparatchiks when, during her first mayoral campaign, she ran on an anti-abortion platform. Normally, political parties do not get involved in Alaskan municipal elections because they are non-partisan. But once word of her extreme fringe evangelical views made its way to Juneau, the state capitol, state Republicans tossed some money behind her campaign.

Once in office, Palin set out to build a machine that chewed up anyone who got in her way. The good, Godly Christian turns out to be anything but.

"She's doesn't like different opinions and she refuses to compromise," Kilkenny notes. "When she was Mayor, she fought ideas that weren't hers. Worse, ideas weren't evaluated on their merits but on the basis of who proposed them."

Sound familiar? Palin may well be Dick Cheney's reincarnate.

Something else has a familiar Republican ring to it: Her tax policies, and a "refund surpluses but borrow for the future" attitude.

According to Kilkenny and others in Wasilla as well as Juneau, Palin reduced progressive property taxes for businesses while mayor and increased a regressive sales tax which even hits necessities such as food. The tax cuts she promoted in her St. Paul speech actually benefited large corporate property owners far more than they benefited residents. Indeed, Kilkenny insists that many Wasilla home owners actually saw their tax bill skyrocket to make up for the shortfall. Two other Wasillian's with whom I spoke said property taxes on their modest, three bedroom homes rose during the Palin regime.

To an outsider, it would seem hard to do, but an oil-rich town with zero debt on the day she was inaugurated mayor was left saddled with $22-million of debt by the time she moved away to become governor – especially since nothing was spent on things such as improving the city's infrastructure or building a much-needed sewage treatment plant. So what did Mayor Palin spend the taxpayer's money on, if not fixing streets and scrubbing sewage?

For starters, she modelled her office. Several times over, as a matter of fact.

Then Palin spent $1-million on an unnecessary, new park that no one other than the contractors and Palin seemed to want. Next, Sarah doled out more than $15-million of taxpayer money for a sports complex that she shoved through even though the city did not own clear title to the land; now, seven years later, the matter is still in litigation and lawyer fees are said to be close to at least half of the original estimated price of the facility.

She also worked hard to get voters approval of a $5.5-million bond proposal for roads that could have been built without borrowing. Anchorage may not be the center of the financial universe but, like good Republicans everywhere, Sarah Palin knows how to please Alaskan bankers and bond dealers.

For good measure, she turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores and disconnected parking lots.

< –––– >

En route to the governor's igloo, Palin managed to land what Anne Kilkenny says is the plumb political appointment in the state: Chair of Alaska's Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (OGCC), a $122,400 per year patronage slot with no real authority to do anything other than hold meetings. She took the job despite having no background in energy issues and, as it turned out, not liking the work.

"She hated the job," an OGCC staff member who is not authorized to speak with the news media told me. "She hated the hours and she hated what little work there was to do. But she couldn't figure out a way to get out of the thing without offending Gov. Murkowski" and the state Republican Party regulars, some of whom were pissed off they didn't get appointed.

But ever the opportunist, Palin quickly concocted a way. First, she waged a campaign with the local news media claiming that the position was overpaid and should be abolished – despite the fact that she lobbied Murkowski hard to get it. Then, mounting what she saw as a white horse, Palin raised a cloud of dust by resigning from the OGCC and riding away with an undeserved reputation as a "reformer."

But when a local reporter dared to suggest that the reformer Empress has no clothes, Palin tried to get her fired.

"She came at me like I was trying to steal her kids," said the targeted reporter, who now works for an oil company in Anchorage. "I heard she had a wild temper and vicious mean streak but it's nothing like you can imagine until she turns it on you."

Not surprising since some of her high school classmates still openly call her "Sarah Barracuda," Kilkenny insists.

Still, as a Republican Party hack Palin managed to get herself elected running under the false flag of a "reformer."

And what did she bring to the job? No legislative experience other than a city council of a village of 5,000 people, which is smaller than some high schools in Chicago. Little hands-on supervisory or managerial experience; after all, she needed to hire a city administrator to run Wasilla. No executive experience, except for almost being recalled as mayor. A philosophy of setting public policy based on one word: No.

And what has she done since winning the job?

According to Kilkenny, nothing. Well, nothing other than suggesting the state's multi-multi-million dollar, oil-generated surplus be distributed to residents and finance future state needs by borrowing money. Gee, doesn't that sound precisely what George Bush did with the surplus he inherited from Bill Clinton in 2001 and we all know in what great shape Bush's economic policies left the nation.

It may explain why, when asked by reporters including me what she thought about Palin being picked to be McCain's running mate, her mother-in-law replied with a sardonic, "What has Sarah done to qualify her to be vice president?" Of course, when the woman – said by many I spoke with to be well-respected in Wasilla – was running to succeed Palin as mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her so that may explain the family tension.

As Governor, Palin gave the legislature no direction and budget guidelines, according to the chair of a legislative committee. But then she staged a huge grandstand play of line-item vetoing countless projects, calling them pork. "They were restored because of public outcry and legislative action," the aide said. "She vetoed them mostly because she had no idea what they were or why they were important."

But it was enough to get the McCain, who is mostly unobservant of the world around him anyway, to think Palin has a reputation as being "anti-pork".

In fact, Juneau observers note that Palin kept her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork ladled out by indicted Sen. Ted Stevens. She only opposed the "bridge to nowhere" after it became clear that it would be politically unwise to keep supporting it, these same insiders assert. Then, Palin fell back on her old habits and publicly humiliated him for pork-barrel politics.

As for being "ready on day one" to be commander in chief, despite the repeated public claims she's made, the Alaska National Guard commander said that, "she has made no command decisions, other than sending some troops to help fight a few brush fires and march in parades at county fairs."

< –––– >

"Palin is a conniving, manipulative, asshole," someone who thinks these are positive traits in a governor told me, summing up Palin's tenure in Alaska state and local politics.

"She's a bigot, a racist and a liar," is the more blunt assessment of Arnold Gerstheimer who lived in Alaska until two years ago and is now a businessman in Idaho.

"Juneau is a small town, everybody knows everyone else," he adds. "These stories about what she calls blacks and Eskimos, well, anyone not white and good looking actually, were around long before she became a glint in John McCain's rheumy eyes. Why do I know they're true? Because everyone who isn't aboriginal or Indian in Alaska talks that way."

"Sambo beat the bitch" may be everyday language up in the bush. Whether it – and the outlook, politics and worldview Palin reflects when she says such things in public – should be part of a presidential campaign is another thing altogether. The comment says as much about McCain as it does about Palin, and it says a lot of things about Americans who overlook such statements (as well as her record) and vote anyway for McCain.

--
Paradise Gray
One Hood
Http://www.1hood.org
Http://www.myspace.com/paradisegray

Thursday, 28 August 2008

Advice for protesters of Scientology - How to protect yourself.

For those that protest Scientology, it can be a frightening experience. They tend to have a lot of muscle on hand, both muscularly and litigiously.

Confronting these people can seem confusing and frightening and this post aims to help as a reference to what you can do.

At the point where I hit "publish post" for the first time, this will not be a complete entry. I will be adding to this entry over time as an ever-evolving reference.

Hopefully, with this in hand, you will be better prepared for what they'll try and do to you.

The Contents of this article include: -

1 - Common Arguments against Protester's Activities.
2 - General Advice
3 - Pamphlets for handing out


Note - Where I have referenced news articles, I have opted to mirror them as over time they tend to be taken down from the original source.

1 - OK, first the basics. Expected confrontation types...

This will be a list of expected objections which will likely be perpetrated by Scientologists at your protest. They come in no particular order, being added as I find I need to.

----------------------------

Calling Scientology a "Cult." - News Article Here
In May 2008, a young boy faced prosecution for calling Scientology a cult. He had taken part in a peaceful protest, made no threads and had been brought up on that charge alone.

The officer told him that it was down to Section 5 of the Public Order Act; which I have duplicated below.

5 Harassment, alarm or distress
(1) A person is guilty of an offence if he—

(a) uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or

(b) displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting,
within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby.
(2) An offence under this section may be committed in a public or a private place, except that no offence is committed where the words or behaviour are used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation is displayed, by a person inside a dwelling and the other person is also inside that or another dwelling.
(3) It is a defence for the accused to prove—

(a) that he had no reason to believe that there was any person within hearing or sight who was likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress, or

(b) that he was inside a dwelling and had no reason to believe that the words or behaviour used, or the writing, sign or other visible representation displayed, would be heard or seen by a person outside that or any other dwelling, or

(c) that his conduct was reasonable.
(4) A constable may arrest a person without warrant if—

(a) he engages in offensive conduct which [a] constable warns him to stop, and

(b) he engages in further offensive conduct immediately or shortly after the warning.
(5) In subsection (4) “offensive conduct” means conduct the constable reasonably suspects to constitute an offence under this section, and the conduct mentioned in paragraph (a) and the further conduct need not be of the same nature.
(6) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.
NOTES

Initial Commencement

To be appointed
To be appointed: see s 41(1).
Appointment

Appointment: 1 April 1987: see SI 1987/198, art 2, Schedule.
Amendment

Sub-s (4): word in square brackets in para (a) substituted by the Public Order (Amendment) Act 1996, s 1.

Now, pay attention to the part where it says that it is a defence if: "his conduct was reasonable."

It was. The Merriam-Webster online dictionary lists five different definitions of the word "cult."[13]

1. Formal religious veneration
2. A system of religious beliefs and ritual; also: its body of adherents;
3. A religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also: its body of adherents;
4. A system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator;
5. Great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book).

Scientology qualifies as all five of these definitions.

Which means that any person has reasonable grounds to call Scientology a Cult. It's official...it IS one.

The youth's case was dropped and he was declared innocent. The boy won by citing
1984 judgment given by Mr. Justice Latey in the Family Division of the High Court of Justice of Her Majesty's Courts of Justice of England and Wales, in which Latey called Scientology a "cult" and said it was "corrupt, sinister and dangerous". In the actual 1984 judgment made by Judge Latey, he stated: "Scientology is both immoral and socially obnoxious. [...] In my judgement it is corrupt, sinister and dangerous. [...] It is dangerous because it is out to capture people, especially children and impressionable young people, and indoctrinate and brainwash them so that they become the unquestioning captives and tools of the cult, withdrawn from ordinary thought, living and relationships with others."

Damning words and this provides you all with a precedent. Cite the result of the May 2008 court case and the 1984 ruling of Justice Latey.

----------------------------

"You don't have permission to protest/film here!"

In the US and in the UK, you usually have to give notice of a public demonstration. So long as you've done that, you're good to go. As long as you remain on public property, you're safe. You're also granted Freedom of Expression under human rights laws.

As for filming? You're allowed to film anything in public so long as you are on public property and it is in the public interest. What is public interest and where does this fit in to the law?

In general under the law of the United Kingdom one cannot prevent photography of private property from a public place, and in general the right to take photographs on private land upon which permission has been obtained is similarly unrestricted. However a landowner is permitted to impose any conditions they wish upon entry to a property, such as forbidding or restricting photography. Two public locations in the UK, Trafalgar Square and Parliament Square have a specific provision against photography for commercial purposes, as do Royal Parks (as private land).

Photography of individuals is unrestricted where the subject has a reasonable expectation of being photographed, such as on the street or at a tourist attraction. Photography without consent of someone in a place where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy, could be considered to be against the European convention on human rights, however in general there is no right to privacy under UK law, and photograph of individuals may be used for any purposes. In addition persistent or aggressive photography of a single individual may come under the legal definition of harassment.

OFCOM have also weighed in with this ruling on the actual broadcasting of such footage: -

The Ofcom broadcasting code requires any infringement of privacy to be 'warranted'. Public interest is one justification, where it outweighs the right to privacy. Surreptitious filming is warranted if:

* there is prima facie evidence of a story in the public interest;
* there are reasonable grounds to suspect that further evidence could be obtained; and
* it is necessary to the credibility and authenticity of the programme.

If footage involves 'vulnerable people' then consent must be obtained unless 'it is warranted to proceed without consent' and an 'appropriate and timely' opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing or incompetence is offered.

So what counts as "Public Interest" exactly? Well, there have been two definitions by teo different organisations.

Definition of the Public Interest (1)

Resolution 129 at the 2001 Annual Delegate Meeting of the National Union of Journalists

1. The Public interest includes
a) Detecting or exposing crime or a serious misdemeanor.
b) Protecting public health and safety.
c) Preventing the public from being misled by some statement or action of an individual or organisation.
d) Exposing misuse of public funds or other forms of corruption by public bodies.
e) Revealing potential conflicts of interest by those in positions of power and influence.
f) Exposing corporate greed.
g) Exposing hypocritical behaviour by those holding high office.
2. There is a public interest in the freedom of expression itself.
3. In cases involving children, journalists must demonstrate an exceptional public interest to over-ride the normally paramount interests of the child.


Definition of the Public Interest (2)

Editors' Code of Practice, 2004 - framed by the newspaper and periodical industry and ratified by the Press Complaints Commission on 28 April 2004

1. The public interest includes, but is not confined to:
i) Detecting or exposing crime or serious impropriety.
ii) Protecting public health and safety.
iii) Preventing the public from being misled by an action or statement of an individual or organisation.
2. There is a public interest in freedom of expression itself.
3. Whenever the public interest is invoked, the PCC will require editors to demonstrate fully how the public interest was served.
4. The PCC will consider the extent to which material is already in the public domain, or will become so.
5. In cases involving children under 16, editors must demonstrate an exceptional public interest to override the normally paramount interest of the child.

The full Editors code can be found on the PCC website http://www.pcc.org.uk/cop/cop.asp

----------------------------

"You're in contravention of the Racial and Religious Hatred Act of 2006!"

So long as you do not use threatening behaviour and language, you're not. According to the original law, anything which protesting any kind of religion could come under this law, but in an amendment by the House of Lords the legislation was limited to "A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening... if he intends thereby to stir up religious hatred".


This removed the abusive and insulting concept, and required the intention - and not just the possibility - of stirring up religious hatred.

So as long as you're peaceful about it, you're OK.

----------------------------

2 - General Advice


If you have written permission to protest at a particular location, why not get it blown up to the same size as your other placards? That way your right and permission to protest is as clear cut as your "OMGWTF a Cult!" cards
It may also be good practise to do the same for any legal precedent citations so that everything is nice and clear. And nothing is clearer than text the size of your own head...

Another good idea is to have pamphlets ready with your rights and all of the above on it.

Also, have a separate set of pamphlets or fliers with information on about the very thing you're protesting. It's no good simply shouting things at a protest. You need to win hearts and minds and you have to do that through informed debate. If anyone asks for information, have it on hand. If you don't you simply look ignorant and it harms the case.

On a related note...know your stuff.

If you look stupid, we all look stupid.

Be well behaved. If you do anything to make yourself look bad, it makes us all look bad and that ultimately harms our case.
I know the Scientologists use muscle to harm, harass and frighten us. Sadly they get away with it because they're stealthy and influential. You can't fight on their level so just keep it peaceful.

Don't mention Xenu to Scientologists!
I say this because lower level members don't actually believe in Xenu and the alien malarkey.
You may already know this but I will reiterate. Lower level members aren't told about Xenu until they've proven themselves and paid enough to get to the highest OT level. This is also because up until this point they will still have enough wits to doubt it when confronted with this story.
Only people who have become naive enough to "handle" it are told it and by this point they're willing to lie and do anything for the "church."

So either way members will deny it, some because they genuinely don't believe and others for more cynical reasons. Because the information is withheld from lower level members by higher ones, they can't openly admit the story. It's an unfortunate and ridiculous rut they've got themselves in to but trust me, you will not benefit from mentioning Xenu.

Besides, with their human rights violations and what-not you shouldn't need to. The Xenu thing makes them look funny...which makes them look harmless to the uninformed.


---------------------------------------

3 - Pamphlets

I've prepared a rudimentary flier which spells out the harshest facts about Scientology to be handed out at protests. They're designed to spell out the immediate danger to people that otherwise don't take Scientology seriously or don't care and it doesn't even need to mention their religious beliefs...and so dosn't.

I hope they help.

Flier 1 - .pub format.
Flier 1 - .png format.

This one is formatted as two A5 fliers on an A4 sheet. Cutting will be involved ^_^


---------

That's all I've got for the moment. If I've missed anything I urge you to let me know. I don't just want corrections, we all need them. We need this information to be accurate so feel free to weigh in and tell me when I screw up and I'll change or add stuff pronto.

I'm sorry if this so far seems a little UK centric. I'm researching and uncovering laws and citations as I go but I come across the UK-based stuff more, at the moment.

Well, that's all from me so far. See you on the other side.

HMR