Wednesday, December 30, 2009

What's Wrong With This Picture?

The following list of newspaper articles came from the Times-Standard starting Christmas day page A3 with the pictures about the "Miracle on Wabash" that "warms hearts, bodies." Where "scores of people enjoyed free food, clothing and toys from local businesses, churches and nonprofits at an unused church on Wabash Avenue in Eureka on Christmas Eve. The volunteer-run community celebration also featured face painting and live music."

Saturday, December 26, 2009: County predicts minor revenue loss with decreasing property taxes
and the "My Word" by, Richard Twiddy: Slow down and clarify the issues. Really scarry times when they can just ram through these kinds of increases and changes. No gift of peace here!

Next we've got the newspapers Editorial in the same issue: Walking the walk about Michael Winkler – Arcata City Councilman and the front-page article, Waste not ... written about THE Michael Winkler, "Arcata council member keeps his garbage to a minimum."

Then let's jump a day or two to today, Tuesday December 29 to the front-page article, Cough it up ... with it's brilliant, but relevant comment by Fortuna Police Chief Kris Kitna, “We'd have to be more selective on who we put in jail.” Which suggests, WHAT? That they are NOT selective?
On Sunday, December 27, 2009 the T-S page A5, headlines the Opinion "My Word" by Sylvia De Rooy, Are we losing what matters in Humboldt? Where she's whining about Caltran's opening up the highway, Big Box stores because the “cost of them is too high.” Now compare this to the pictures about the "Miracle on Wabash" and then you tell me what really matters in Humboldt, the people that only think of themselves, specially during these Christmas holidays or those that think of their neighbor?

At the bottom of the page is Amy Goodmans's article, Climate discord: From Hopenhagen to Nopenhagen where she concludes by saying, “Many feel that Obama's disruption of the process in Copenhagen may have fatally derailed 20 years of climate talks. But Pica (Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth) has it right. The Copenhagen climate summit failed to reach a fair, ambitious and binding agreement, but it inspired a new generation of activists to join what has emerged as a mature, sophisticated global movement for climate justice.” I'm not so sure the nay-sayers wouldn't call them "a new generation of extremists" and target them as terrorists.

And then on Tuesday, December 29, 2009 we get the meaningless, but “thoughtful and sensitive” words of the newspapers city editor James Faulk, The post-Christmas let-down? “So I guess there's no real solution. Just call it the post-Christmas let-down. It is what it is, I guess.” Coupled with more meaningless words of a Crescent City lawyer, Jon Alexander, “The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars, but in ourselves.”

Joe says, “I would would guess, too”!

Whereas the banks are no longer making home equity loans (T-S Pg. A6, Saturday, Dec. 26, 2009) and with the value of homes and property going into the tank and now limiting the tax base, we're looking at less resource for government stuff. (My sophisticated word "stuff" for government expenditures, costs, give-aways and the like.) In the above article, "County predicts minor revenue loss with decreasing property taxes," they, Philip Smith-Haynes County Administrative Officer, “said he would be discussing the decrease with each department as well as with the Board of Supervisors during the mid-year budget report.” Does anyone believe for a moment that "they" will actually talk about cutting costs to reflect the actual tax base? The question is probably redundant in the face of our changing climate situation that no one wants to deal with in a positive way. That little situation will answer all our problems.

If the above sampling is any indicator, I'd say there's a lot wrong with that picture. There can be no peace gift when your sole purpose or reason for existence is to dominate and exploit the recourses of the poor.

Thursday, December 17, 2009

Karuk's Run Amuck

(updated below)

Wouldn't the world be a whole lot more peaceful and profitable if there were a few less "activists" getting in the way?

"Activists" are always "blocking" something. If it's not doors, it's roads. When they're not blocking something they're ranting and raving, or camping in trees, on street corners, occupying banks, universities, but mostly they're just getting the crap kicked out of them and wasting their time and energy in lockups for all their troubles.

The Times-Standard newspaper for Thursday, December 17, 2009, greets everyone with the frontpage headline: Karuk activists block logging road - "Claim breached promises ..."

The US Federal Government "breached promises"? Don't these Indian people ever learn?

Just look at the history of "breached promises." When do they start making binding "agreements"? As long as these kinds of important matters are resolved on a personal level, all that's ever going to happen is another betrayal. Just look at what's happened to the world in the last year and a half. The greatest "hope" for mankind and their Earth since Jesus Christ appeared over 2000 years ago has done nothing but breach promises while all the time enabling and facilitating the greatest looting EVER of the American Working and Small Business Classes. Mr. Obama preaches peace and wages war. He talks reform, prosperity, jobs and help to stop the foreclosure looting and gives away trillions of worthless paper dollars to the rich, enables the health-care industry continue their looting of the American people, and torpedoes the UN Climate Conference. Breached promises equals betrayal.

So, what's their excuse? Why, it's the "incompetence" argument of course. The problem wasn't a personal betray. What makes those Karuk's think they're so important? It was just a simple "oversight." This is what the Six Rivers Supervisor Tyrone Kelley calls being "sensitive to the tribes."

Equally incompetent is Karuk Eco-cultural Resources Specialist Bill Tripp who admittedly "participated in good faith in the forest Service's collaborative process." For one thing, he did not "collaborate" with "the U.S. Forest Service." He collaborated with Tyrone Kelley and other individual persons. These promise-breakers have names. If what Tripp says it true, then THEIR actions violate federal law. Don't you think it's time to make those flesh and blood people actually responsible for violating the law, accountable? The least you could do is make that criminal bum irrelevant and stop cooperating with him. But then, that would require some form of competence and maybe even a little self-worth, wouldn't it?

I wonder who is being sensitive to all those contract workers? When you consider their medical insurance and mortgage payments needs, those jobs become might important. Specially when you line them up with "sensitivity" over the commercial use of "sacred forests" and their "spiritual trails."

When you consider the consequences and importance of this operation, you would think anyone with even a modicum of integrity would "work through the issues" before putting it to the "tribes" and force them into a confrontational "activists" stand. That would have been the peaceful way to proceed. Now all anyone can see are a bunch of extremist "activist" blocking poor working people from trying to make an honest living and maybe keep from losing their homes.

If those forest lands are as valuable as the Karuk Tribe says they are, then it's time for them to stand and act like that value. Deal with what is, not what you want. Expecting someone to keep their word when that person is without integrity is just plain stupid. More than that, it is what justifies their right to violate your trust and break promises.

UPDATE:  Some third person, "Six Rivers Forest," according to John Driscoll writing for the Times-Standard Wednesday, December 23, 2009, gave the "Karuk activists" a Christmas present: "Six Rivers Forest halts operations until it can meet with Karuk Tribe." Whatever that meeting is good for is questionable when only one side is looking for "good faith" and "commitment." Be interesting to know how the "Karuk Tribe" plans on getting any "good faith" or "commitment" when they keep working in the third person.


Friday, November 13, 2009

Discourse on the Method

I came across this item in the Wikipedia the other day and thought it was well worth posting on the Joe Blow Report too.

How to think correctly

"Good sense is mankind's most equitably divided endowment. . .the differences of opinion are not due to difference in intelligence, but merely to the fact that we use different approaches and consider different things. For it is not enough to have a good mind: one must use it well."

In the "building metaphor" laid forth by Descartes, opinions and our own thoughts are the ground upon which our later perceptions are built. Descartes remarks on the sedentary nature of ideas and opinions, saying “I firmly believed that in this way I should much better succeed in the conduct of my life, than if I built only upon old foundations, and leaned upon principles which, in my youth, I had taken upon trust.” In other words, the core principle is that one must seek not only to build on old foundations of knowledge, but should look for other fertile land to build knowledge upon.

The Discourse on the Method is one of the most influential works in the history of modern science. It is a method which gives a solid platform from which all modern natural sciences could evolve.
Morals, and Maxims accepted while conducting Method
The following three maxims were adopted by Descartes so that he could effectively function in the "real world" while experimenting with his method of radical doubt. They formed a rudimentary belief system from which to act before he developed a new system based on the truths he discovered using his method.
  1. Obey the laws and customs of my country and religion
  2. Be as firm and resolute in my actions as I was able
  3. Endeavor always to conquer myself rather than fortune, and change my desires rather than the order of the world, and in general, accustom myself to the persuasion that, except our own thoughts, there is nothing absolutely in our power; so that when we have done our best in things external to us, all wherein we fail of success is to be held, as regards us, absolutely impossible.
Descartes uses the analogy of tearing down the house to its foundation in order to build a secure edifice (He even extends the analogy to move next door into a house of morality, while his own house is being rebuilt). The foundation he reveals appears to have three parts.

Radical doubt and morals, something in short supply today!

Saturday, October 31, 2009

Taser Torture or Monster Bash?

More is definitely better. This is the Taser X3. "On Friday, Taser International held a demo day at the Alameda Sheriff's Office Regional Training Center in Dublin, Calif., to show off some of the latest in electronic control devices." So says ZDNet Photo Galleries.

Upgrade to semi-automatic!

The Taser X3, the newest device with multishot technology, goes beyond the single-shot capabilities of first-generation tasers and provides the ability to deploy a second and third cartridge immediately. Also, it can simultaneously zap three bad guys at once.

If you click the link above this is what you will read:

The X3 is a revolutionary new multi-shot ECD that can engage multiple targets, display Warning Arcs™ while loaded, and deliver a calibrated Neuro Muscular Incapacitation (NMI) pulse that results in improved safety characteristics. While the X3 offers enhanced firepower over existing ECDs, it also represents a quantum leap in sensor and computation power – making it by far the most intelligent hand-held force option ever developed.

Doesn't that just stop your heart? NO? Well what do you think about this long-range solution called the XREP? That means, Extended Range Electronic Projectile.  How would you like to get shot with a 12 gauge shotgun and then get electrocuted. If that doesn't stop you heart I don't what will.
Taser International says its XREP (Extended Range Electronic Projectile) is the most technologically advanced projectile ever deployed from a 12-gauge pump-action shotgun. The self-contained, wireless electronic control device fires accurately up to 100 feet and attaches itself to the target before deploying its charge.

This is nifty!
 The energy from the impact of an XREP breaks a series of fracture pins, which release the main chassis of the XREP projectile. After impact, the casing falls away and six Cholla electrodes automatically deploy to deliver Neuromuscular Incapacitation over a greater area of the body.

 How about The Taser Shockwave system that utilizes the frightening-sounding Taser X26 Neuromuscular Incapacitation technology?

Now this get our attention! According to these people "Shockwave is the first generation of a technology called Remote Area Denial (TRAD). The Shockwave unit seen here can be locked together, forming an even larger bank for stand-off capability. It's triggered via a 100-meter firing wire, so you can set it up and wait in the bushes for your target."

"Sit in the bushes"? Are they hunting deer or pigeons? How would you like to get hammered by a couple or three Taser X26 right out of the blue?

Make you think about wandering around in the bushes where they're growing pot doesn't it? Or how about what's involved joining in on some worthwhile demonstration that's protected by the US Constitution?

Thursday, October 22, 2009

S'All BLAH and no HA!

CIA Invests in Software Firm Monitoring Blogs, Twitter
according to Wired reporter Noah Shachtman. He says, "America’s spy agencies want to read your blog posts, keep track of your Twitter updates—even check out your book reviews on Amazon."

Is that all they want to do? Just monitor what's going on in the US blogoshpere?

"... But, you know, the way Visible works is it kind of grabs all the blogs and all the tweets out there, then it sorts for certain key words, it sorts for a sentiment about whether things are positive or negative, and then it also sorts based on which bloggers and which tweeters are really important or not. And you can sort of see over time how a conversation develops. Technology then allows companies or the government to respond directly within a blog or within a Facebook page to those people. So, who knows? The commenter—the next commenter on your blog might be the CIA."
They want to get directly involved with their propaganda and disinformation. So, when that "Anonymous" person posts crap to your blog...

Or, comes along behind and takes issue with you...

It could be the CIA! Or maybe it's just S'All Blah and no Ha trying to confuse your poor sorry overworked, stressed and simple-minded efforts to figure out what the real geniuses are trying to say.

Just look for this picture and you'll see a good example what we're talking about. You'll see a true genius at work!

Some people think that posting comments and asking questions that stimulates thinking or exposes an obvious hypocritical lie is tantamount to beating their children or coming-on to their spouse. Some take an abrupt exception. This stuff these people post is way to slick and sophisticated to fall into that trap. The good lookin' gal on the left isn't the only one that's got everyone fooled either. There's some slick guys out here that will make your head ache too. That's why they've all got to be CIA.

All kidding aside, the real story here is not that they, our Government, is monitoring what we are all saying about ourselves, but that they are investing millions of dollars into schools, universities, businesses, local and state governments and agencies. Some of this is done all on the Q.T. -- some not. One way or another, the government just slips in and takes over. They eliminate competition, compromise integrity and reward corruption.  If you don't play ball you get the boot.


Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Guilty As Accused

Guilty AS Accused!

I wouldn't matter what this guy did, HE'S GUILTY!

If you don't believe me, just look at him. It doesn't matter what happens in court, this man's appearance prejudices the whole proceedings and the judge is responsible for allowing it.

This is guilty until proven innocent.

This is the picture on the front page of Tuesday, October 20, 2009, Times-Standard newspaper's: "Not guilty pleas entered in presidential threat case." Their title for this picture is: "20091020__local_threatener_jf_GALLERY" -- Our "Local Threatener"!

Just another case of "GUILT on SUSPICION." Why are they even bothering with a trial. Normally, they just  take those kind of guys out somewhere and make them disappear. Maybe, President Obama needs the "PR" to prove his boys are really tough on crazy old white men.


Thursday, October 15, 2009

Humpty Dumpty Broken

That's us.

That reality was never so evident than when I listened to William Black explain what's going on this morning; it literally made the hair on the back of my neck stand up.

As Foreclosures Hit All-Time High, Wall Street on Pace to Hand Out Record $140B in Employee Bonuses by William Black can be read and viewed on Democracy Now.

William Black -- "a web of fraud, in which they are getting as much as they can before the place goes to hell in a handbasket again."

If you don't know who "Humpty Dumpty" is there is a good explanation on Wikipedia.

You can read and view the complete interview here.


Sunday, October 11, 2009

Polite Is So Boring!

That's what Susan Seaman says her 15-year-old son taught her in the Sunday, October 11, 2009, Times-Standard article, "Business Sense." That's what my 17-year-old grandson told me when he was 15 years old too. He then proceeds to demonstrate that belief by the loud and outlandish clothes he wears. At least he doesn't have tattooed on the back of his head the words, "Piss Off."

Her commentary on "opinions" is what interested us. The consequences, intended or unintended from expressing "mostly worthless opinions" has a lot to do with a person's credibility. Her closing comment says it rather well:
"And, I told him, if you really want to make your opinion known to the world through the mass media, you never know -- in a society where loud and rude is becoming commonplace, a polite, well-considered comment may be utterly shocking."
That way you won't waste your time or energy trying to "say you're sorry" when you most certainly are not.
[Photo Source]

Friday, October 9, 2009

Duplicity and Betrayal Will Not Save America

As an avid follower of Glenn Greenwald, I just had to bring this post to the Report. Bullies and criminals seem to think, if not believe, that just because they get away with their crimes that somehow they are not criminals. History, if nothing else, should teach us that there is always a day of reckoning. But, then that's why the criminals all want to "look forward, not back," isn't it?

The only way America redeem itself before God, the Universe and man, despite the Swede's beliefs to the contrary, was for President Obama to enforce the Law -- ALL LAWS. Now it's too late. He's made himself part and party to all the crimes and criminals that's gone before him. And it only took him 9 months.

He didn't do it all by himself; he a lots of help. What do we call these enablers? Oh, yeah! Democrats and Republicans.

Here is Genn's Thursday, October 8, 2009, post: "A historian's account of Democrats and Bush-era war crimes" -- Read it and weep.

The American Prospect's Adam Serwer notes that, yesterday, Sen. Joe Lieberman successfully inserted into the Homeland Security appropriations bill an amendment -- supported by the Obama White House -- to provide an exemption from the Freedom of Information Act's mandates by authorizing the Defense Secretary to suppress long-concealed photographs of detainee abuse.


Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Legal Extortion – Fine on Suspicion

[Update below]

“Assessed immediately” and “held accountable” Police Chief Garr Nielsen says. You can read the latest “guilty by suspicion” from Allison White for The Times-Standard in the Friday, October 2, 2009, edition: “EPD to fine DUI drivers for emergency response.”

This is as clear-cut an example as you can get of how the government perverts the law and uses their taser-wielding enforcers to extort money. It starts by picking some part of our socially-rejected underclass, in this case supposedly drunk drivers, and singling them out for special treatment. Then authorize any unfortunate encounter with any of these “enforcers” as a suspicious situation, thus making the reject a suspect and now it's open season. Oh! There's a minor regulation supposedly regulating what can and can't be done, but the general outcome has proven they are mostly ignored.

Notice how it's all justified by saying the small fee, $350 is authorized by CA State Law. Just make sure you are in Eureka and the EPD is handling your “emergency response.” Get the CA Highway Patrol involved and you could be paying $12,000!

It's the perversion of the law that is astounding. Eureka City Attorney Sheryl Schaffner says that this fee collection on suspicion is “civil and not criminal.” That's why the “threshold for evidence is not as great.” And takes the cake, “The stakes are also different. Civil consequences are generally money; it not going to cost you your liberty.” Really? We'd like to know just exactly how she defines “liberty.” I guess it's okay with her to walk around naked, homeless and starving – just don't get thrown in jail.

More importantly, how is it that the individual police officer now has the authority and legal right to be accuser, prosecutor, judge and jury in civil matters bypassing all the safeguards the “law” is supposed to provide? Notice how she hedged answering how the “suspect” gets their money back when found “not guilty” of anything. She said, “it is unclear how someone would contest the fee, but there is usually an administrative appeal process through the EPD.” The EPD is going to admit they took the money when they did not have the legal right and then give it back? Not likely. That's what proves the extortion.

Here's the definition of "extortion":

The 'Lectric Law Library's Lexicon
EXTORTION - The use, or the express or implicit threat of the use, of violence or other criminal means to cause harm to person, reputation, or property as a means to obtain property from someone else with his consent. USC 18

The Hobbs Act defines "extortion" as "the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right." 18 U.S.C. S 1951(b)(2).

Don't get us wrong, here. We believe drunk drivers as well as all criminals, either admitted or judged and convicted by a just court should be held accountable. That's why we have judges. They are to dispense punishment whether physical loss of freedom, financial or both in accordance with the law when the law justifies such punishment. Not put it off on the police to enforce some vague civil law, that according to them, won't fill the “general fund” coffers. What it won't do is get a serious backlash for fines sufficient to deter drunk driving should the general populace that drinks and drives realize their jeopardy.

But then how can you not justify this kind of knee-jerk, “the end justifies the means,” way of trying to deal with the lawlessness that pervades our streets? It starts out with “money.” What's next? A summary beating or multiple taserings because the suspect is disobedient and uncivil? More importantly, whose next? The homeless?

[Photo source - Brian Fairrington, Cagle Cartoons]

UPDATE :: Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Here is this opening portion of the "Taser Policy" posted at Civil Liberties Monitoring Project:

When properly applied in accordance with this policy, the Taser is considered a non-deadly control device which is intended to temporarily incapacitate a violent or potentially violent individual without causing serious injury. It is anticipated that the appropriate use of such a device will result in fewer serious injuries to officers and suspects.
Notice the words emphasized: "control device" "incapacitate" WHO? "violent or POTENTIALLY violent" WHO? "suspects" -- Suspicious individuals with a "potential" for "violence." Does that include the potential for verbal violence? Or are they talking about simple non-cooperation?

Be interesting to know what the EPD guidelines are. Couldn't find them posted on the Internet.


Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Is President Obama Too Intelligent for America?

Did America elect a President that is too intelligent for them?

After the last President, Republican and viscerally stupid, maybe America wanted more than just a change in color - race?

David Axelrod on Morning Joe this morning said that the Health Insurance legislation was a complicated matter that even President Bill Clinton had difficulty explaining. Perhaps it's "complicated" because they're trying to sell America on a "bill-of-good" while trying to get them to believe something else. Later I was listening to Dylan Ratigan on Morning Meeting interview Tom Harking, Democrat from Indiana and he laid it all out -- exactly what everyone is going to get -- the SHAFT!

Nothing too complicated in what he had to say.

Later I came across this bit of wisdom from Chris Floyd that explains the reason for the complications:
Years ago, during the run-up to the first Gulf War, I wrote a short piece about the sea of propaganda that was flooding the country, and the difficulty of cutting through to the blood-and-iron reality behind it all. This is the whole of that piece:

I think we are living in a world of lies: lies that don't even know they are lies, because they are the children and grandchildren of lies.

One of the hardest things about doing stories like the ones honored here tonight is that the reality of our world is buried under so many layers of official deception and well-cultivated public ignorance about our history and our political system. Even if you break through somehow, momentarily, and hold up a fragment of the truth, most people have no context for dealing with it. It's like a bolt from the blue, they can't process the information. And so the sea of lies closes over us again, and again, and again.

But I don't know what else we can do, except to keep on telling as much of the truth as we can find, to anyone who will listen: reclaiming reality, fragment by fragment, one person at a time.

It's an endless task -- maybe a hopeless task -- but the alternative is a surrender to the worst elements in our society -- and in ourselves.

In that regard, the Joe Blow Report, aside from the stated reasons, and we're sure to those that read his observations here and elsewhere realize that the Report is dedicated to the "intelligent," the "thinking" and the "reasoning" reasonable person.

That is why the moronic, stupid, imbecilic assaults and attacks against the object are dealt with and defined for what they are. Furthermore, it should also be said that to do justice where justice is do - President George Bush WAS NOT STUPID!

He was, in our estimation, probably borderline genius. He did what President Obama hasn't yet, and I might add Joe Blow, learned to do. Simplify, simplify and simplify matters so that anyone can understand.

As you can see, the news-fast is over . . .

[Picture source]


Monday, August 31, 2009

My "News-Fast"

Fasting is primarily the act of willingly abstaining from some or all food, drink, or both, for a period of time. In Joe's case it was news - news in all forms.

Ten years ago Joe got acquainted with Dr. Andrew Weil's book, “8 Weeks to Optimum Health.” One of his recommendations for week two was a “one-day news fast.” Well, he decided to take a one-month news fast and liked it so well he went for another two weeks. When the Times-Standard newspaper came in, he just took the first section and filed it and went right to Section B. On Sundays he made sure to file Section D right alongside Section A. The absolute last thing he wanted to see was Dave Stancliff's beaming face advertising his worthless opinions. He can't decide what is more intolerable, propaganda and biased news or moronic, infantile opinions. Perhaps, it's the fact that such crap gets published, printed and shown to the World, as if it has some merit.

Does Dr. Weil's program work? It does if you follow it religiously.

So, that's our next project. How to effect a news fast once a week on this blog. But, in the meantime . . .

If you're going to break your news fast, this is as good a place to start as any, with Glenn Greenwald's Sunday, August 30, 3009, It's time to embrace American royalty.

UPDATE :: Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Anyone know this guy? His name is Wallace Shawn and he has an interesting take on the news media and all of us "unabotrusives." Reading from his new book, "Essays" -- Enjoy:

So, I suppose, my role in life is to be a recovering centrist from the privileged class, so this passage reflects that, I suppose. This is just a piece of an essay. You’ll have to guess what it comes from and where it goes. It just is in the middle.

“One evening last week, a friend and I went to a somewhat inexpensive restaurant, and the waiter who served us was in such a state of agitation or anxiety about God knows what that he didn’t even look at us. And so I was thinking about the fact that in more expensive restaurants, the staff is usually trained to focus their attention on the pleasure of the diners, not on their own problems. In fact, the waiters in more expensive restaurants are invited to be friendly, amusing, to make funny remarks about their lives and to let us diners get to know them a little. But in the most expensive restaurants, the really fancy ones, we don’t get to know the waiters. The waiters in those restaurants just do their work with such discretion that they’re barely noticed. And people compliment them by saying that they’re unobtrusive.

“And actually that’s quite a good word for all those people whom we don’t know and don’t think about much but whose lives we actually dominate: ‘the unobtrusive.’ And the interesting thing I’ve noticed is that in those very expensive restaurants, we don’t talk to the waiters, but we enjoy their presence enormously. We want them there, these silent waiters, the—‘unobtrusives.’

“It’s obviously a characteristic of human beings that we like to feel superior to others. But our problem is that we’re not superior. We like the sensation of being served by others and feeling superior to them, but if we’re forced to get to know the people who serve us, we quickly see that they’re in fact just like us. And then we become uncomfortable—uncomfortable and scared, because if we can see that we’re just the same, well, they might too, and if they did, they might become terribly angry, because why should they be serving us? So that’s why we prefer not to talk to waiters.

“A king feels the very same way, I’d have to imagine. He doesn’t really want to get to know his subjects, but he nonetheless enjoys the fact that he has them. The subjects are in the background of his life. They’re in the background of his life, and yet they provide the meaning of his life. Without his subjects, he wouldn’t be king.

“It’s become second nature to all of us to use the quiet crushing of these unobtrusives as a sort of almost inevitable background music to our daily lives. Like those people who grow bizarrely nervous if they don’t have a recording of something or other quietly playing on their sound system at dinnertime, we’ve become dependent over the course of decades on hearing the faint murmur of cries and groans as we eat, shop, and live.”

And while the essay really is talking about how, as Americans, we, even those of us who march in the streets in favor of peace and speak against imperialism, even we, perhaps consciously or unconsciously, enjoy being members of a powerful country that can crush other people. So that’s a lot of what the book is about, a little bit of an attempt at self-examination.

And to conclude:

“My feeling of superiority, and the sense of well-being that comes from that, increases with the number of poor people on the planet whose lives are dominated by me or my proxies and whom I nonetheless can completely ignore. I like to be reminded of those poor people, those unobtrusives, and then I like to be reminded of my lack of interest in them. For example, while I eat my breakfast each morning, I absolutely love to read my morning newspaper, because in the first few pages the newspaper tells me how my country treated all the unobtrusives on the day before—deaths, beatings, torture, what have you—and then, as I keep turning the pages, the newspaper reminds me how unimportant the unobtrusives are to me, and it tries to tempt me in its articles on shirts to consider different shirts that I might want to wear, and then it goes on, as I turn the pages, to try to coax me into sampling different forms of cooking, and then to experience different plays or films, different types of vacations…”

In other words, the stories in the newspaper about Afghanistan are partly true and partly false, but they’re presented in a context that basically makes me feel alright about treating the people there as non-equals, which obviously we do if we send an unmanned drone and we are thinking of killing some person who we think is an enemy and we kill fifteen members of his family. We wouldn’t do that to people who we thought were our equals. For example, friends. Even if there was someone that we despised or who wanted to kill us in the middle of their family, we wouldn’t kill the whole family. We just wouldn’t. And the New York Times helps me to take that as totally normal.

That's something worth thinking about when you read you Times-Standard or whatever every morning.



Sunday, July 19, 2009

Anonymous Joe

. . . and The Cyber Bullies

Yeah! That's me behind that lovable face.

Who is the "me"? For all you know, Joe Blow can and could be anybody. Actually, he's not really hiding. So, why not just identify him? Or, is it them? Who knows?

Joe Blow is NOT anonymous, either. Joe Blow is an Internet identity that when seen is instantly recognized and understood to represent a certain personality with well-established characteristics. He's no different than Elmo, or Kermit with a little bit of Miss Piggy thrown in. All anyone really needs to know about Joe Blow is posted for all to see:

"Number One Nobody! Born in Eureka, (Fifth generation) raised in Humboldt County. World traveled and life educated. American refugee. Lives forever."

The Joe Blow Report's purpose for existence is also clearly posted for all to see:

"This report is about fair and honest observations and not about opinions."

The governing principle driving that purpose is also posted:

"Everything Is About Something Different"

Joe Blow is here to ferret-out the "hidden agenda." This is the reason the Joe Blow Report exists. If possible, to find the hidden, the covert, the subterfuge, the deception, the scheme, to show the truth behind the lie. Ultimately, to expose the liar; the "wolf in sheep's clothing." To quote an old saying: Neither Joe Blow, the Joe Blow Report nor its writer(s) have an "ax to grind." That means: "Have a dispute to take up with someone or, to have an ulterior motive/ to have private ends to serve."

Joe Blow knows there are risks involved in such an endeavor, but that is not why he or she, (or is it they?), write behind the pseudonym, Joe Blow. Joe Blow is and always was a "NOBODY"! To objectively write "observations" he must remain a "NOBODY." To become "somebody" is to interject personality with the logical worthless opinions that accompany that person(s). For Joe Blow to lose his state of obscurity would destroy his Report.

Bullies, we all know, exist by sucking off of other people they believe are only there to serve their wants and needs. Anyone that doesn't conform to that bully's opinions is a direct threat to that bully's existence. They live only to control and will sink to whatever depths of deprivation necessary to achieve that goal. The transparent reality of a successful bully is to threaten violent assault on their victim's person, property, family or whatever they think is important to evoke an emotional response; either anger or fear. Their whole game is to get you to give them the legitimate right to bully and control you. If they can get you to become emotional, if they can get you to recognize them in some way, you inadvertently give them that right and are, therefore, vulnerable to defeat and control.

Joe Blow clearly understood the risks of promoting such a Weblog. That is why he clearly posted the Report's purpose under:

More About Joe Blow

Please be aware that the Joe Blow Report speaks for itself. You may or may not agree, but just remember, that is your issue. The Report is offered as a free gift to whomever desires to read it. Please accept it as such. The Report respects the rights of all individuals to be who and what they are. All the same there are consequences for what each individual does and does not do. If the Report stimulates a little thinking, it has fulfilled it's purpose.

Joe Blow fully understands that whatever is posted on the Internet or printed in newspapers or spoken on television or on the radio bears the responsibility for being PUBLIC property, albeit sometimes copyrighted. Let's hope that those Joe observes and reports about understand that as well. In other words, if you do not want to read or hear about someone's observations, keep quiet! Or if you're going to stand up on a soapbox in a public place and spout off you'd better be ready for a rotten egg or two.

Diatribe personally attacking the messenger, is not welcome.

No where in the recorded history of these Reports does Joe Blow single-out any individual, group, business, political organization, religious organization, sexual orientation, nationality, government, country or any of the many other diverse peoples whose sole reason for existence is to promote or denigrate other people or issues for special and personal assault. To produce credible observations Joe Blow must remain neutral -- no personal, political, religious or any other bias.

These Weblog Reports are dedicated to thinking people. If the bigoted racist, the stupid, inane, moronic, paranoid, vacuous bully, or the ideologue believer that's locked into the Dark Ages, is offended by this, then so be it. They need to grow up and get a life.

That is how they expose the truth of themselves. Merely infer that what they say or write is lacking some sense of knowledgeable logic or that they ignorantly made a "simpleminded" mistake then sit back to see if it was a simple mistake or a malicious and deliberate deception. If it was a mistake or a simple error in judgment, people will usually acknowledge it, correct the problem and simply move on. However if they were deliberate and malicious, they get extremely angry, go ballistic and personally attack with all kinds of foul and malicious accusations. That is how they show everyone exactly who and what they are. They are thus judged by what they do and say and everyone is a witness to that judgment. At that point the Universal Law of Karma is enforced and these people receive exactly what they sowed.

Joe Blow's life endeavor is to practice the four governing principles of "The Four Agreements" as documented by Don Miguel Ruiz.

  1. Be Impeccable With Your Word
  2. Don't Take Anything Personally
  3. Don't Make Assumptions
  4. Always Do your Best

Sometimes bullies can be very intimidating, specially when they threaten your family, your property and livelihood, making a perfect application of these Agreements very difficult. It's in the trying that defines the character.

It is in this "trying" that the Joe Blow Report finds inspiration in a world of bullies, descending into chaos and the Dark Ages.

UPDATE :: Sunday, July 19, 2009

If you really want to know who Joe Blow aspires to be, why the Report exists, read what Glenn Greenwald says here: "Celebrating Cronkite while ignoring what he did" -- What he did was speak "truth" when the Thought Police wanted to have it all their way.


Sunday, July 12, 2009

As It Stands with the Times-Standard Newspaper

Again today the Times-Standard newspaper here in Eureka, CA pumps out Dave Stancliff's “As It Stands” column in their Sunday newspaper. Is this a marriage made in heaven or a marriage made in hell?

Dave Stancliff continues to use the web and it's blogosphere to personally assault and libel anyone he wants, anyone he thinks is fair game, and the staff at the Times-Standard, in particular Dave Kuta, Kimberly Wear and James Faulk, continue to support and endorse his kind of abysmal and reprehensible conduct. By continuing to publish his “As It Stands” column they, directly and tacitly endorse his demagogue and libelous hate-mongering personal assaults. Whether any or either of these individuals understands it or not, what he publicly says and does directly reflects upon the integrity, honesty and character of the Times-Standard newspaper as well as each of these individuals. More than that, however, it also reflects upon each and every person or business that supports that paper.

This Report endeavors to maintain its objectivity through the process of observations. Report commentary regarding Dave Stancliff and his “As It Stands” web and newspaper column has refrained from sinking into the mire of contending or even refuting his bane attacks. He says and does what he wants, no matter how foul and obscene, then thinks he can just walk away – no harm, no foul. To put it simply, we're just a bunch of “anonymous” extremists with a paranoid outlook on life, pumping out our “hate-filled blog” picking on poor, little “simpleminded” Dave. While that was tempting, people like him, proven time and again by his own hand, establish the basis for a far worse crime than personally attacking the observations of this blog writer. Those people responsible at the Times-Standard turn a blind eye at one of their own kind and refuse to hold him accountable for his public behavior while he represents them. This kind of conduct sets the precedent that allows for every sort of lawbreaker to walk free or at a minimum get a bit of a slap on the wrist for murder, torture, indefinite detention, and god only knows what else. Those kinds of criminal behavior are not limited to just national problems, but bleed right down to our community.

Recent example, the apparent libel spawned on the local blog, “Above The Law” reported here, “Employee of EPD files suit against coworkers,” by Allison White/The Times-Standard, Posted on: 07/01/2009. Here the suit alleges that a blog, its articles and blog commentary by visitors caused, “libel and intentional infliction of emotional distress has damaged her reputation and caused “mental anguish and emotional distress, including anxiety, anger, depression, irritability and loss of sleep.'” Worth noting is that the suit includes “anonymous” blog commentators that posted defamatory messages that caused the above malicious, intentional actions. Noteworthy is the fact that Dave Stancliff has a record of making defamatory comments on other peoples blogs.

The same newspaper article says, according to a law professor at U.C. Berkeley, “If messages are sent out over the Internet, it doesn't protect them from making defamatory statements.” He also said that just because “the comments were made by anonymous users shouldn't matter legally.” The Report contends that the same is true when made against so-called “anonymous” bloggers. -- Something this lawsuit should give everyone pause to consider.

Locally, and more importantly we assert, the problem is that the Times-Standard newspaper represents this community. Supporting the legitimacy of a Dave Stancliff says more about the people that run that newspaper and their respect and service for and to this community than anything else. We deserve better.


Monday, July 6, 2009

Newspaper -- Toilet Paper

Newspaper makes lousy toilet paper and toilet paper makes a lousy newspaper. Yet that's exactly what newspaper is -- and we've got toilet paper.

A functioning Democracy rests upon an informed voting public that, at the minimum has the capacity to think with an ability to separate the subject from the object and is endowed with some moral and ethical compass. Clearly, the 100 year (more or less) experiment to formulate "good citizens" rather than teach problem solving skills with the necessary tools for a decent sense of self that empowers one to use those tools has failed -- failed miserably. Or, did it?

For someone's point of world view beyond Joe Blow's observations, read the following:

The question:
What is your comment on the current mainstream media and how it shapes our perceptions and priorities?

The answer:
I don’t believe anything as changed. If it is one to change in the middle east as other parts of the world, I think one of the really significant and building areas of discussion- and data has been building for the last few years—is just the kind of information we get through the so- called mainstream. We have many alternative sources of information now, not least of all your own program. though I wouldn’t call that alternative.

But for most people, the primary source of their information is the mainstream. It is mainly television. Even the internet for all its subversiveness has still a very large component of the mainstream. And that means we’re getting still either its this singular message about wars, about the economy, about all those things that touch our lives. All we are getting is what I would call is a contrived silence, a censorship by a mission. I think this is almost the principal issue of today because without information, we cannot possibly begin to influence government. We cannot possibly begin to end the wars.

All of this, it seams to me, has come together in the presidency of Barack Obama who is almost a creation of this media world. He promised some things, although most of them were more for us, and has delivered virtually the opposite. He started his own war in Pakistan. We see the events in Iran and Honduras in quiet subtlety, but very directly influenced in the time-honored way by the Obama administration. And yet the Obama administration is still given this extraordinary benefit of the doubt by people, who in my view are influenced by the mainstream media. It is a time when I think, where either we are going to begin to understand how the media really works, or we’re going to let that opportunity pass. Its almost a historic opportunity the we understand that the perception of our world is utterly distorted, most of the time through what are seen as credible sources of information.

Read the rest of the interview with John Pilger.

A good example of this is Israel, Pilger says, "The way Israel is reported in the United States is media manipulation as almost as high art form."

But no one ever presses an Israeli leader. Netanyahu or Olmert or any of them. There are given, Israeli leaders were given a legitimacy during what was unconditionally a massacre in December-January of this year. And the sum of that was to suggest, number one, that there was a war between Israel and Gaza and there wasn’t. There was an assault on Gaza that was aimed at civilians, on a defenseless country, a helpless country, a trapped people. And the second impression was that, yes, Israel is a democracy. And we will discuss this on television with you, we will discuss the finer points.

The way Israel is reported in the United States is media manipulation as almost as high art form. When people like Netanyahu whose very utterances and his background would suggest somebody, I think safe to say not credible, but somebody of well, those of us who would say somebody would be a prima facie war criminal, is given this kind of legitimacy. Not even questioned, not even challenged about the events in this country and his own extreme utterances. ****

I think it is that legitimacy the mainstream media gives one side. And the sum of that, as far as Palestine is concerned is that there is no illegitimate occupation. There is no illegality. There is sum illegality as Obama referred to in his Cairo speech about the continuing building of settlements, but there is no suggestion that this is the longest, most brutal, illegal military occupation in our lifetime.
Why is any of this okay? Anyone read the Times-Standard for Tuesday, July 7, 2009? We've got a bankrupt creamery, a corrupt 20 year old county jailer, out of control homeless campfires spread around the Eureka area, and a convicted sex offender sentenced. On the inside we've got James Faulk's solution for humanities long-term survival - space travel. Included is an article by Byron York on Democrat double-speak on immigration. How appropriate!

Not to forget page A6, we got the headline, " ... the completion of border berm." Don't you just love the words they use for "steel-meshed fence and bright lighting"? Word manipulation, double-talk; double-speak propaganda à la the anonymous Associated Press.

Truth, honesty and integrity -- any part of someone's moral compass?

John Pilger writes on his web "": 'It is not enough for journalists to see themselves as mere messengers without understanding the hidden agendas of the message and myths that surround it.'

Words this Report strives to emulate, but not without paying a heavy price.

[Picture Source]


Friday, July 3, 2009

Anarchy in Humbug County – WHY?

The reason is, the people have spoken!

This was never more illustrated today than by this latest sick maneuver by some CHP officer and our illustrious District Attorney to legitimize murder. Or is the word a "killing"? It amounts to the same thing. Someone died at the hands of another. But, what else could they do?

We're talking about the latest in the saga of Allen Bear's “accused hitting and killing a cyclist last summer.” His name was Gregory Jennings. Read the article and NOTE: First, it's “Hoopa driver,” then is “Hoopa man,” and next it's “accused,” and “a cyclist.” To continue it is “reporting officer,” and “officer's opinion,” and we finally find out who the “cyclist” is half way through the article. This is the “Thought Police” at their best. Dehumanize, depersonalize and neuter the issue to abstract object entities and worthless opinions that devalues life.

Everyone can blame the California Highway Patrol and Paul Gallegos the District Attorney. God knows, the share responsibility. My question is, will any of them stand accountable? Doesn't seem likely, but the answer is – they and their families are already paying that price right along with everyone else that 'takes their lives in their hands' and ventures out on any city street, county road or state highway. These lawless anarchist assault us all.

The laws governing how we conduct ourselves when driving a motor vehicle are worthless. Not because the police DON'T enforce them. Well, mostly don't enforce them – apparently only when convenient. The laws are worthless because MOST drivers refuse to comply. The DEFACTO reality determines the law. When 90% of drivers treat stop signs as if they are non-existent the majority voter has redefined the law governing stop signs either non-existent or something else. THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN!

How then does the courts, the District Attorney or any police officer hold anyone accountable for failure to stop, let alone resulting deaths? They can't and they don't.

Allison White reports in the Times-Standard that: “Gross negligence, as defined in California statute, is an act done with such careless disregard for the safety of others' lives that it is likely to cause foreseeable injury.” The problem is with anarchy, when the majority vote, in this instance that stop signs don't mean stop and drive, or vote them as something ornamental, THEY MEET THIS STANDARD. What about the driver that consistently runs the Safety Corridor between Eureka and Arcata at 60 plus MPH? When one or two cars race by at that speed other drivers speedup to follow. By the time you get to the 65 MPH sign approaching Arcata everyone one of them is going 70 plus MPH. Every driver that deliberately and purposely drives this way or drives 35 MPH or better in a 25 MPH speed zone, rolls through a stop sign without even slowing down or only noticeably reduces speed because the turn requires it, is GROSSLY NEGLIGENT!

The sad truth is many of these lawless people I observe, driving without regard for life or property, have vehicles full of young children. What do they think they are teaching their children? To be safe on the streets and watch out for people like themselves? Hardly! And those that don't have children in their cars racing around like lunatics, how many of their children are playing Russian Roulette with people just like them?

Is it because life has no value? These people are more important than everyone else? Laws are only for the old and the stupid? These drivers are basically right-wing bullies? Left-wing socialist, pinko commies? Illegal aliens and foreigners that are ignorant of the law? Or American Indians that are citizens of sovereign nations and are exempt? Regardless! Anarchy or people that drive like Allan Bear are a loaded gun or a bomb, ready to explode.

Every driver that races through a stop sign is a driver trying to hurt or kill some innocent person. It's a no man's land out there and everyone is on his own. When the elected and appointed authorities don't do what decent, law-abiding people that believe in our system justice and civil order put them their to do, people do what people do – they live! That means when they see someone deliberately run a red light or a stop sign or any other gross negligent act and kill an innocent pedestrian, bike rider or mother and small children on their way to school, they take matters into their own hands and make that person accountable – the ultimate expression of ANARCHY.

[Image Source]


Friday, June 19, 2009

Wolves In Sheep's Clothing

As It Stands and the Times-Standard newspaper

Jesus said: "Beware of the false teachers--men who come to you in sheep's fleeces, but beneath that disguise they are ravenous wolves." So, how do you know a wolf in sheep's clothing when you see one? You look at their tracks and the crap they leave behind.

Jesus also said deceitful liars, people that make false lying accusations are murderers: "You are of your father the Devil, and you want to carry out your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning and has not stood in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he tells a lie, he speaks from his own nature, because he is a liar and the father of liars." In other words, according to Jesus Christ, liars are the Devil's spawn.

Hate speech is defined in the Wikipedia as follows: "Hate speech is a term for speech intended to offend a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, ideology, social class, occupation, appearance (height, weight, hair color, etc.), mental capacity, and any other distinction that might be considered by some as a liability." Of further interest is the purpose hate speech is used: "Critics have claimed that the term "Hate Speech" is a modern example of Newspeak, used to silence critics of social policies that have been poorly implemented in a rush to appear politically correct." "As It Stands" defines the Joe Blow Report, in particular, the writer or writers, he's somewhat confused, as paranoid, hostile, hate-filled, extremist, cowards and blow-hards personally threatening him.

Notice the how Wikipedia describes paranoia:
Paranoia is a thought process characterized by excessive anxiety or fear, often to the point of irrationality and delusion. Paranoid thinking typically includes persecutory beliefs concerning a perceived threat towards oneself. In the original Greek, παράνοια (paranoia) simply means madness (para = outside; nous = mind). Historically, this characterization was used to describe any delusional state. (Emphasis added)
"Persecutory beliefs concerning a perceived threat towards oneself" defines Dave Stancliff perfectly. To publicly denigrate someone the way Dave Stancliff has, accredited and substantiated by the Times-Standard is beyond "simpleminded." It's just plain STUPID. And that was my point. Why would anyone want to threaten this guy? He's made an absolute fool out of himself without any help from me.

Dave Stancliff, according to what's printed under his "As It Stands" column in the Times Standard is a "columnist" for that paper. They also say "he is a former newspaper editor and publisher." When you consider the staff and management's stand regarding Stancliff then it begins to make sense their love affair with him and why he can do no wrong. So, who are the REAL WOLVES in sheep's clothing?

After posting "Trolls versus The Thought Police" article Dave Stancliff came into our web and posted six comments. What he said speaks for itself -- everything is personal! Nothing about the central premise of our article. Only verbal abuse, foul lying accusations, insults, diatribe -- nothing worthy of someone writing weekly columns in the local newspaper. Everything that was exemplified in the article was born out by what Dave Stancliff wrote on our blog. All of that personal crap was easily erased, but why do that? It was the proof in the pudding; it proved and justified the original intent of the article.

That all changed when he went on his own blog and posted his accusations. There he accuses the writer of threatening him, commenting on our "little hate-filled blog," of being a "paranoid lot of losers," "thinly veiled threats warning him" are proof of "hate that is spewing out from The Joe Blow Report blog" -- NO examples of hate speech -- Only his accusations.

But, that wasn't good enough! On June 15, 2009, apparently in response to our article "Conspiricy of Silence" he posted another personal attack on his As It Stands web. To show the racism and hate-speech we added the word "kike" in bold text.
Monday, June 15, 2009

Joe Blow (conspiracy) Report staff bawl like babies!

Well readers, this is what I have to contend with sometimes. "Kike" Extremists tend to attack anything that doesn't fit their world view. There's a "Kike" group at the Joe Blow Report blog that decided to attack me on May 31st and who posted a hate-filled rant about a column I did on trolls (of all the ironies!) This is a "Kike" group that has the mind-set of a steel trap.

Now they (these Kikes) have their crying towels (it took them two weeks to think of a reply) out and are blubbering to all that will read their raving. I'm not going to be intimidated by a bunch of "Kike" cowards who are whining about a conspiracy between me and the Times-Standard to attack trolls! Good grief! Get a life you blowhards.

I don't know who you think you are, but I do know that you seek to impose your will upon others by reading your past posts. Now you think you can silence me by making outrageous accusations and trying to get the newspaper to drop my column. Guess again "Kike" gang. You'll never be able to silence me. You best bet is to change your soiled diapers and to find someone else to pick on!

What he wrote under his column "As It Stands" is as offensive as modified by us for clarity as noted above in bold and is exactly why he wrote it, to offend. The purpose of accusing someone of being a "troll" is to shut them up. That's what all racist, extremist hate-mongers do. Today, the law defines such as "Psycho Terrorists."

As noted in our article, "Conspiracy of Silence," we had notified the staff and management at the Times-Standard newspaper of Dave Stancliff's web posting about us. Because his web is titled "As It Stands" and his newspaper column has the same name, the Times-Standard has a vested interest in what he says and does. The newspaper management approve his columns and that gives him credibility and legitimacy. What he wrote on his web, attacks the Time-Standard's credibility and legitimacy equally. We waited to see if their relationship was a marriage made in heaven. When no one at the newspaper responded, we posted the article and sent another more extensive email. You can read that email and Ms. Wear's reply here. This time Ms. Wear answered and then ran the "As It Stands" column Sunday, June 21, 2009. We heard the both of them loud and clear. Lets see if the local businesses want to be associated with this kind of sick racist behavior. The Basij are alive a well in Eureka, California!

[Photo] [Some interesting background on the Basij on Democracy Now today]

UPDATE: Tuesday, June 23, 2009

When I wrote “Trolls versus The Thought Police” I had spent months observing commentary by Dave Stancliff on other local blogs I frequented. I had a fairly good idea his motivation for the article; I'd seen him in action. On the face of it, so-called “Online Trolls” are a good mark to disrespect and disrepute. Whenever someone says something of which others do not agree, the first thing they do is try to shut the person or persons up by changing the subject to the object. Frankly regarding Stancliff, as far as I was concerned he could yak away all he wanted. He had his blog and newspaper columns and even I would occasionally read what he had to say. It was his knee-jerk reaction to justifying accusations that I took exception to, specially to being published as if there was some legitimate reason. Not to say Online Trolls do not exist, they do. Dave Stancliff's posted comments on my blog are a good example; he is self-defining. That was not my issue in writing the article. My issue was how easy it is to make false accusations against someone, in this case an Online Troll, in other cases an Online Terrorist or just your neighbor. The consequences in our society are overwhelming.

It was my contention that he was arguing ostensibly for the same right President George Bush, his government administration and his supporters had made justifying the permanent detention of people based only upon, what turned out to be in many cases, coerced, false lying accusations. How this atrocity, designed to extract counterfeit witnesses and produce phony testimony to justify a “War On Terror,” is codified by Andy Worthington. He is a British journalist and historian and the author of “The Guantánamo Files: The Stories of the 774 Detainees in America”s Illegal Prison." In his interview this morning on Democracy Now he explains exactly how falsely accused, innocent men were held prisoner for nearly a decade when the Bush government and the military knew, all along, they were totally innocent. You can read or listen to his interview, Judge Orders Release of Guantanamo Prisoner After Seven Years, Saying Government Position “Defies Common Sense” here.

We all know that, to a large extent, the news media sold out the American people for the “government” line. Dave Stancliff's demagogic tirades and baseless accusations are racist, hate-speech for sure, but they pale in significance compared to the Times-Standards approval of his conduct. Without much help from the Joe Blow Report, well not much anyway, he did a real number on his own credibility – his big worry – his legitimacy as a newspaper columnist. In the end, however, he's doing a number on the newspaper's, at least the staff and management, objective credibility. It's what's called “biting the hand that feeds you.”


Monday, June 15, 2009

Conspiracy of Silence

On Sunday, May 31, 2009 Dave Stancliff wrote in the Times-Standard newspaper in his column called “As It Stands” the article titled: “Trolls Exposed: What kind of troll is disrupting your online community?” Like everything in life, not everything is as it seems. Dave Stancliff has a presence on Internet Blogs and over time we've observed his commentary. Did he have an ulterior motive in writing that article? Who knew. How about the Times-Standard staff, did they agree with his premise? Who knew?

Well, we wrote about our observations here on this Blog. The tendency to vilify the writer, attack the messenger, when the subject being discussed touches a little too close to the truth, has led to some serious conditions, not only in America, and subject right here in Humboldt County, but around the World. We pointed out that Stancliff's approach to this subject was rather simplistic and in its totality largely responsible for causing the loss of media credibility and factual reporting. In that, we alluded, one person's efforts to illicit thought or thoughtful consideration was another person's “troll.”

Dave Stancliff's assault in his column was upon the person he tagged or simply claimed was a “troll.” In that, he assaulted their personal credibility, and suggested that they be starved to death -- ignored. In that he assaulted their legitimate right to exist in whatever manner they chose to present themselves. We witnessed a good example of this form of discrimination and bigotry with the active assault some months back by a gang of local blogger thugs on Steve Lewis. This is same tactic the United States in league and complicit with the United Nations has done to North Korea for more than 50 years simply because they refuse to recognize the North Korean people's right to sustain a totalitarian government. What's our point? Dave Stancliff didn't assault “trolls” he assaulted people, people he merely accused of being “trolls.” His definition of "trolls" detailed nearly everyone that posts and comments online and allowed him and his kind the freedom to accuse just about anyone at any time. What made this matter doubly serious is that he is published by the newspaper and writes under the same title: “AS IT STANDS.” As It Stands could just as easily be written, “As It IS.” Why is that important? The name itself speaks to a permanent, factual and truthful reality based upon his personal credibility and legitimacy to do so propagated by the Times-Standard newspaper. He's somebody in this community! And the Times-Standard backs that up by publishing him under his brand, “As It Stands.”

If there ever was some question about the Report's integrity regarding our observations, Dave Stancliff by his unsolicited demagogic tirade on our blog and his slanderous hate speech posting on his blog, “As It Stands” removed all doubt. As bad as that is, that fact that the Times-Standard continues to run his columns makes this issue far more serious. Whatever he writes under the name “As It Stands” is sanctioned and approved by the Staff and Management of the Times-Standard newspaper. Therefore the bigotry, prejudice and hate speech written by Dave Stancliff is legitimized by the Times-Standard. Consequently, we sent, in behalf of the Joe Blow Report, the following email to three people at the Times-Standard, Dave Kuta Publisher, Kimberly Wear Managing Editor and James Faulk City Editor:

Dear Mr. Kuta,

I would like to bring to your attention the latest blog commentary about me and my online blog, the Joe Blow Report, by Dave Stancliff. As far the the Report is concerned normal blog commentary and article postings are laissez-faire. They bring with them limited legitimacy and credibility as compared to published media. Whatever Mr. Stancliff writes for your newspaper, you approve. You can relegate what he says to "opinion," yet I contend ultimately you or someone representing your newspaper approves, therefore you stand behind what he says as if you said it yourself.

The Joe Blow Reports were designed to avoid the kind of personal diatribe and hate mongering that comes from assaulting the writer. Unfortunately, Mr. Stancliff was personally affronted by my observations regarding his Sunday, May 31, 2009 "As It Stands" article and the part that he played in writing it. He came into by blog and expressed that effrontery in graphic terms by formulating a false accusation to revile the integrity of me, backed up by days of ever more egregious personal accusations. The ensuing conversation, if that's what you want to call it, over the next days speaks for itself. What he wrote is easily erased and bears no ultimate threat as a consequence of some of the accusations he makes. That all changed, however, when he posted on his blog, As It Stands, accusations against me of operating a "hate-filled blog" and of being "paranoid," among other things, but more importantly of personally "threatening him." This goes way beyond the pale.
What was their response? They ran Dave Stancliff's column in the Sunday, June 14, 2009, issue of the Times-Standard. Anyone familiar with what's been going on here knows exactly what the staff and management of the Times-Standard thinks of the Joe Blow Report and everyone associated with it. Well, read what Dave Stancliff accuses us of being here. In that same Sunday newspaper on page A4 is the article, "'Lone Wolf' terrorists are harder to defeat." Who are these "terrorists"? They define three people as "an elderly man" in a museum, "a young man in Arkansas" and "another man opens fire in a Kansas church." -- All Americans! The article goes on to say:
"Each apparently was driven to act by beliefs considered by some as extreme." "It could be anyone. It could be the guy next door, living in the basement of his mother's place, on the Internet just building himself up with hate, building himself up to a boiling point and finally using what he's learned."
Now tell me that this is exactly what Dave Stancliff with all his published authority is saying about anyone associated with the Joe Blow Report?


Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Psycho Terrorists


The World and its people are facing an ever expanding and never ending War on Terrorism. That War is fought, according to some, against ideological, religious extremists, sometimes these are governments or regimes, but mostly against people. All it takes to be guilty of being a terrorist is for someone to make the accusation. These people are held in a cage indefinitely, some for nearly a decade, psychologically, emotionally and physically tortured. Even when ordered by the Courts they continue to hold them. Most astounding in all of this is that these lawless criminals do all of this with impunity.

There are many forms of terrorism. To name a few, there are Civil Disorders, Political Terrorism, Non-Political Terrorism, Quasi-Terrorism, Limited Political Terrorism, Official or State Terrorism, and Structural Terrorism. There is Democratic and domestic terrorism, Islamic Terrorism. Add to this: Christian Terrorism, Communist Terrorism, Counter-terrorism, Cyber-terrorism, Domestic terrorist (United States), Eco-terrorism, Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism, Islamic Terrorism Jewish Terrorism, Narcoterrorism, the Patriot Act and that's just from Wikipedia.

Add to this list the latest from the Huffington Post: Christian Fundamentalist Terrorism -- Shanny Moore concludes her article by saying:

The "war on terror" needs to include domestic religious, fundamentalist terrorists.
You can add to that list Socio and Psycho Terrorism.

It's time for people to recognized terrorism for what it is in all of its insidious forms. Terrorists, by their very nature, exist in the dark. They hide behind good and decent people and appear normal, average and common. They talk the good talk, they put on a good facade. In truth, however, they are the worst of the worst; they are traitors in the fullest meaning of the word. They are deviant, lying, murderous cowards. They butcher innocent women and children to get at the men. They attack people where they live without remorse or conscience.

A good definition of Social Terrorism by Louis Komzsik in his book of the same name is:
Social terrorism is a subversive activity in which a small segment of the society, in order to gain or retain control, arrogates its philosophy onto the majority of the society, while completely disregarding the good of the society as a whole.
Socio Terrorists are a new breed. They attack society at its most fundamental framework and legitimate reasons for existence. They preach freedom, but practice discrimination, prejudice, bigotry and terrorize by lies, false accusations, slander and all kinds of innuendo. They demand the right to protection of law, but at heart they are lawless anarchists that assault the law in every way possible.

In many ways Socio Terrorism is like Psycho Terrorism and Psycho Terrorism is like Psychological Warfare.
The U.S. Department of Defense defines psychological warfare (PSYWAR) as: "The planned use of propaganda and other psychological actions having the primary purpose of influencing the opinions, emotions, attitudes, and behavior of hostile foreign groups in such a way as to support the achievement of national objectives."

During World War II the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff defined psychological warfare more broadly stating "Psychological warfare employs any weapon to influence the mind of the enemy. The weapons are psychological only in the effect they produce and not because of the weapons themselves." (Emphasis added) [Wikipedia]
Frankly, this article on Psycho Terrorists is mandated by what resulted from the Report article titled, “Trolls and the Thought Police” based upon the Time-Standard newspaper article written by Dave Stancliff in his Sunday, May 31, 2009, “As It Stands” column. When he was unsuccessful bullying us into doing what he wanted, he personally attacked and vilified us on his Blog. You can read what he accused us of being and of doing here. It seems there is a certain class of people in this country that have the right to say these kinds of things and worse in public, on the TV, in Internet Blogs, Newspapers and magazines whereas if this was someone from the Ku Klux Klan, some Nazi militia talking about the Jews or one of any other radical extremist Believer they'd be arrested and thrown in jail in a heartbeat for hate crimes under old laws and terrorism under the Patriot Act.

Yet, they are not. The question is, why not?

That very question was asked by Dr. Warren Hern in his Democracy Now interview today. In fact, he makes the very point of our observations discussed in the Report about “Trolls and the Thought Police.” This is just one of his comments:
But I think that it’s—the glee expressed by the anti-abortion fanatics is just grotesque. It’s ghoulish. These people—this is a violent terrorist movement in this country, and the American people need to understand that there’s a great deal more at stake here than the activities of one doctor, of the services of one doctor. Of course, this is a great loss for women, but this means that we have a very highly organized, active, well-armed and well-funded terrorist movement in the country that opposes the basic premises of American society. These people are opposed to constitutional democracy. They’re opposed to the rule of law. They’re opposed to a democratic government, representative government. They’re opposed to basic personal freedom. They’re opposed to thought. And this is a tremendous step backwards. [Emphasis added]
Louis Komzsik says these terrorists, "in order to gain or retain control, arrogates its philosophy onto the majority of the society." Arrogate is an interesting word. It means, "to claim unwarrantably or presumptuously; assume or appropriate to oneself without right" the authority to make one's worthless opinions fact. This is done by repeating the same lies over and over until everyone accepts it as truth. In other words just "BS" propaganda. While Blog articles and commentary are a dime-a-dozen, the problem is when posted, they become or have the potential to become volatile.

Real terrorism is a lot closer to home in America than most of us would want to believe. Our article on the Thought Police touched a real nerve. As, perhaps, it should.

UPDATE: Thursday, June 11, 2009
A good article by Joan Walsh, "Can right-wing hate talk lead to murder?"
Some think it already has.

UPDATE: Monday, June 22, 2009
Racism, Hate Speech, Extremism, bigotry, worthless opinions and lies are self-defining. Whether or not the person or persons making these statements are racist, hate mongers, bigots, or worthless liars is probably a personal judgment. Or is it? When you see a duck do you say, "there goes a turkey"?

Dave Stancliff has posted two "As It Stands" blogs accusing me of "spewing hate" in my May 31, 2009, "Troll's versus Thought Police" article about one of his Time-Standard, "As It Stands" columns. You can read that article and make up your own mind. When you find that "hate" I'd like someone to point it out. Or you can read what he said and tell me if it's a turkey?

Monday, June 15, 2009

Joe Blow (conspiracy) Report staff bawl like babies!

Well readers, this is what I have to contend with sometimes. Extremists tend to attack anything that doesn't fit their world view. There's a group at the Joe Blow Report blog that decided to attack me on May 31st and who posted a hate-filled rant about a column I did on trolls (of all the ironies!) This is a group that has the mind-set of a steel trap.

Now they have their crying towels (it took them two weeks to think of a reply) out and are blubbering to all that will read their raving. I'm not going to be intimidated by a bunch of cowards who are whining about a conspiracy between me and the Times-Standard to attack trolls! Good grief! Get a life you blowhards.

I don't know who you think you are, but I do know that you seek to impose your will upon others by reading your past posts. Now you think you can silence me by making outrageous accusations and trying to get the newspaper to drop my column. Guess again gang. You'll never be able to silence me. You best bet is to change your soiled diapers and to find someone else to pick on