The Soul of Trevon Resides in Fortuna CA

The local newspaper announced to the general public on Tuesday, April 17, 2012 that Maxwell Soeth and Sgt. Charles Ellebrecht were the Fortuna police officers that shot and killed Jacob Robert Newmaker March 16, 2012. Newmaker had done nothing but try to stop them from beating him with their batons after tracking him down on a nothing accusation. In this case these guys initiated a violent arrest and then justify killing him for trying to stop them from beating him.

What's the difference between what Maxwell Soeth and Sgt. Charles Ellebrecht did and what George Zimmerman did killing Trevon Martin?

The situation is exactly the same, with a couple of minor exceptions. That being, George Zimmerman was supposedly a self-appointed security guard working to protect his neighborhood and these guys were police officers licenced by the city to protect their neighborhood. The killing of Robert Newmaker was justified because he was merely holding a police baton and Trevon Martin was killed for “standing his ground.” Neither one had done anything but ask to be left alone. So, why are they dead?

Personally, the biomorphic people of Fortuna deserve these kinds of police walking their streets protecting their children and property. In fact, I'd say the people in Garberville, or more accurately Southern Humboldt, roundly deserve their demonstrated breed of police as does Eureka and the rest of Humboldt County. When the killing of innocent people is “appropriate” for simply NOT immediately complying with some police officer's command or order I'd say a whole lot of people got their priorities skewed. Apparently, the only thing that is life-threatening are these cops legitimate right to be there in the first place. When they have the right, defacto or not, to put their right to pack a gun and a badge over the individual human lives of their fellow citizens, then I'd say the whole society is morally corrupt and deserve what they get.

--Joe

PS. Notice any local blog discussion on this issue? The District Attorney Paul Gallegos seems to believe there is NO conflict of interest in the police investigating or judging their own. Maybe Humboldt County could use another William Ferroggiaro.

Why Kym Kemp Is A Collaborator

Kym Kemp continues to repeat and publish her primal beliefs, in this case recite the police and news media propaganda justifying the blatant murder of Aaron Bassler. Bassler was gunned down like a mongrel dog by three police officers hiding in ambush. The commenter, Nick Wilson, says that Bassler was identified by someone that knew him when he supposedly shot Jere Melo at a distance. That person's word or more factually, that person's unsubstantiated word was, the only basis used to gun down Bassler like a dog. Be sure to read Wilson's complete comment.

The Rule of Law demands, actually requires much more than someone's simple belief that another is guilty of some crime justifying summary execution. In that regard, Kym Kemp is a collaborator because she works in collaboration with the Mendocino County Sheriff and all others that justify, promote and defend the blatant murder of an accused person. This reality shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone when you consider her stand on the growing, manufacturing and selling of marijuana and the criminals that do engage in such activities.

So, if you support the Rule of Men, I guess you know what that makes you?

Why write this post? Here's why:

"It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds" - Samuel Adams

--Joe

Silence is Consensus

There is an interesting phenomenon called the “Silent Treatment.” What amounts to perfunctory consensus rejection, or so most believe. It's practiced on blog commentary all the time.

The Free Dictionary defines the:

silent treatment
n. Informal
Maintenance of aloof silence toward another as an expression of one's anger or disapproval

Mostly the “silent treatment” means that you do not exist, therefore you do not need to be recognized as legitimate and accepted as a co-equal. The problem is, you DO exist and when these kinds of people give you the "silent treatment" they expose themselves as weak and illegitimate people. The circle closes when they become what they would have others be.

Silence, in this context, has another meaning too: Consensus or agreement. In the following context as laid out below in my article, Pounding Sand –Kym Kemp Style you'll notice NO comments disagreeing with any observation in that article. That means there is a “consensus agreement.” – which works for me.

Just a noted observation since changing formats and affiliations the old Readheaded Blackbelt had a certain character that is now lost. Now all you get are press releases that are mostly unanswered propaganda. Oh! well, to each his own.

The following quote came from Glenn Greenwald's latest article: State-dominated media and Iran

NOTE: The definition of "collaborator."
That led me to this observation: “this is what establishment-serving journalists in Washington mean when they boast that they, but not their critics, engage in so-called ‘real reporting’; it means: calling up Serious People in Washington and uncritically repeating what they say.”
http://www.salon.com/2012/04/05/state_dominated_media_and_iran/singleton/

[Picture Source]

--Joe

Why I Write

When my wife and I listened to Adrienne Rich, who passed away Tuesday, March 27, 2012, read her poem What Kind of Times AreThese, my wife said, “There. That is why you write; because people still listen.” That's the simple truth.

What Kind of Times Are These – a poem by Adrienne Rich

ADRIENNE RICH: 

There’s a place between two stands of trees where the grass grows uphill
and the old revolutionary road breaks off into shadows
near a meeting-house abandoned by the persecuted
who disappeared into those shadows.

I’ve walked there picking mushrooms at the edge of dread, but don’t be fooled
this isn’t a Russian poem, this is not somewhere else but here,
our country moving closer to its own truth and dread,
its own ways of making people disappear.

I won’t tell you where the place is, the dark mesh of the woods
meeting the unmarked strip of light—
ghost-ridden crossroads, leafmold paradise:
I know already who wants to buy it, sell it, make it disappear.

And I won’t tell you where it is, so why do I tell you
anything? Because you still listen, because in times like these
to have you listen at all, it’s necessary
to talk about trees.

(Many thanks to Adrienne Rich and Democracy Now)
Photograph:Bettmann/Corbis.

--Joe

Pounding Sand - Kym Kemp Style

This is the Kym Kemp of the Redheaded Blackbelt blog - a co-conspirator of and with Hank Sims of the Lost Coast Outpost blog. This post is NOT about Kym Kemp per se, some personal vendetta, blog or comment censorship as much as it is about what it means to be a responsible ADULT.

You can find the definition of what it means to "pound sand" here or as defined here the second variation: "A variant meaning is to suffer or to act in a pointless manner" – the titled meaning used for this posting.

I recently had an interesting and sort of profitable email conversation with Kym. (Probably more profitable for me than her, but what the heck?) I figured she'd be, or at least the incentive would be there for her to be more honest in our efforts to communicate. We were talking about “after-the-fact” blog censorship – arbitrary blocking and deleting comments in the public comments section based upon individual ignorance, bias and personal prejudice – a form of racism*. I thought about what she said in that conversation and about what she did NOT say. I tried to answer her concerns about talking to her like a "small child." That and while she said I usually talk over everyone's head, my comments somehow become nothing more than unacceptable "negative," "ugly taunts. Apparently, according to her, I was unable speak to her like a mature adult. There is a time to be a whinny little baby and then there is the time to grow up and become an adult. Adults understand that most children live in the moment where life's realities are defined by how everything affects and profits them. Adults, on the other hand, know that life encompasses much, much more than living an animal existence. In the process I happened to read her comments posted on her affiliate blog. Also posted below. (A place I never make comments just to avoid this kind of a double-edged trap.)

Then it occurred to me, when she had accused me of treating her like a small child, why. What she said and what she wanted me to give her the right to do, was exactly the same conversation I'd had with my own daughter when she was moving out of adolescence. She wanted to be an adult and wanted her mother and me to treat her like an adult, but without any responsibility or accountability. She naively believed that being an adult meant that she had the right to come and go, do and say whatever she felt like WITHOUT any personal accountability. Of course, we all know that the world does not work like that, even though they all believe it does. Being an adult meant that you were free from any rules or laws. Enforcement of any rules or laws amounted to nothing more than a wannabe adult making "ugly taunts." That's when our relationship got dicey – for awhile. Even so, during this time she had a protected environment to grow and become a more mature person – her stated goal. So, what does that say about Kym? 

Kym's problem, the one she refuses to accept, is that she is exactly what she still is, an adolescent. I say that, because just like my daughter, she refuses to accept responsibility for her stipulated lifestyle beliefs. She believes that 50 years of an ingrained criminal culture involving large amounts of tax-free easy money, lying, stealing, money laundering, corruption and murder has or had NO morally detrimental or harmful effects on the social structure or the integrity of the individual, family and community, including the business community. Not only does Kym believe this nonsense, but she's constantly trying to justify and legitimize why the individual has the moral, ethical and legal right to trash social and societal rules, norms and laws at will - at the individuals sole discretion. (I posted the above referenced relevant comments below.) Notice her comment: “Just because people are willing to break stupid laws doesn't mean they are willing to be immoral.” This judgmental statement, in and of itself, "stupid laws," defines the morality, or rather, amorality of the speaker. It is that judgement repudiating the majority right to define and enforce rules of the road; LAW, that is "immoral." Here the mantra is the defacto enforcement of the Rule of Men replacing the Rule of Law. I believe, therefore I am truth, right and justice – LAW.

To me, her statement is morally repugnant and highly offensive. Why? Because of the untold numbers of the murdered dead, rotting in those hills who scream out something altogether different. These people,  so-called innocent "plant growers" – pot growers et al. and business community alike, whether they intended to become or ever wanted to become, are all part and party to the deaths of these “innocent plant growers.” Growing that “plant” and “breaking stupid laws,” as she so naively puts it, is not only immoral, but is the self-centered, self-righteous arrogance of the “corrupt to the gut” amoral.

a·mor·al [http://www.thefreedictionary.com/amoral ] 

  1. Not admitting of moral distinctions or judgments; neither moral nor immoral.
  2. Lacking moral sensibility; not caring about right and wrong.

There is an easy way to illustrate and bring home what and how these people, not only the growers, but all the local businesses and untold numbers of non-grower "growers" that have exploited this corrupt, immoral and depraved criminal enterprise, enforce their personal, opinion based beliefs and judgments on a day to day basis. Notice that on her blog and that of Hank Sims you will NOT find any rules or guidelines for making comments on their blog. Here is an example of what I mean along with MY Comment Guidelines, located first paragraph top left. Again, reinforced under Pages: Comment Etiquette below. They simply expect you to divine or submit like a little puppy to their unspoken demands and personal prejudices. Since I'm not a mind reader that created a bit of problem when being judged by bigotry, bias and racist prejudices – not to mention childish ignorance and bullying stupidity. They, and others, divine the right to judge everyone as you go. They post NO rules of the road so that everyone knows without doubt what is and is not expected. They not only want to be judge, jury and executioner, they expect everyone commenting on their blog to give them that right. How this corrupt way bleeds over into society was graphically demonstrated when the Fortuna police asserted this right by killing Jacob Newmaker March 16, 2012. I've written fairly extensively how this police killing is the result of enforcing the Rule of Men. See below Self Defense Is a Bitch and Resist AND Die - Why?

Then there is the OTHER SIDE – The Dark Side. Where the totally innocent person or family that wants absolutely nothing to do with the corruption and it's handmaidens, the criminal elite that get drawn into a serious life and death struggle to survive. Two good examples of this are the Saturday, March 24, 2012 Times-Standard account of "Victim recounts harrowing home invasion, torture" and the Arcata Police home invasion by deception of a 64 year old Barbara Sage by "about a dozen officers with guns drawn." You can read about that in today's Times-Standard here: Arcata woman sues city, police over potless pot search; suit alleges unlawful search, rough treatment hastened husband's death.

Synonymous to the Rule of Men is its root cause: CORRUPTION. What does one rotten apple have in common with a barrel of good apples? A whole barrel full of rotten apples, that's what. Kym's moralizing and devaluing law is symptomatic of much more than an adolescent attitude and understanding. It is the sand pounding of her constant justification that, in view of the corrupt and depraved consequences, where rot is the norm, that is reprehensible and intolerable. It is the dead in these hills that do the judging. No matter how much sand pounding Kym does in support of this corruption and these criminals, the dead are still dead. You can't censor them.

--Joe

Resist AND Die – Why?

[UPDATE II :: March 30, 2012 :: Stand Your Ground and DIE – WHY?]


[UPDATE below - Court ruling offers new details on EPD excessive force case or so says Thadeus Greenson about the murder of Martin Cotton]

Violent exchange culminates in death of a felon – Thadeus Greenson's take on the police shooting of a 26 year old man for doing nothing, but being a felon.

[This is an UPDATE on the posting below: Self-Defense Is a Bitch]

A good explanation for WHY is contained in today's Wednesday, March 21, 2012, Times-Standard: Fortuna shooting investigation continues – Details surface in police deadly force incident, written by Thadeus Greenson.

[A “deadly force incident” means someone got shot and killed by the Fortuna police, okay?]

What kind of an “incident” occurred in Fortuna? According to Greenson, Fortuna Police Chief William Dobberstein said officers were dispatched to a woman's report of a “crazed person banging on the door and yelling and screaming in her front yard.” A scary situation, to be sure, BUT nothing life threatening happening. The question I ask is, did this guy actually commit a crime here? Anything to justify his death? When the police get there the “suspect” is gone.  Nothing more than a little door banging and some hollering from the front yard. But, then notice what happens. The police identify the guy and find out he's “had numerous prior contacts with” the Fortuna police. So now they know who the guy doing all the “door banging and hollering is, (their favorite trashy troublemaking scumbag) Jacob Newmaker.

What happens next? He's spotted by the police “about three-quarters of a mile from the residence where the 911 call originated. No serious threat to anyone there – he's running away. The police chase him on his bicycle, “right behind him with his lights and sirens going.” In the melee he crashes his bicycle and the “officer confront[s] him.” Notice what happens next. Clearly the officer knows he's got a scared and agitated guy trying to stay away. What followed? “An altercation.” What does the officer do to control the situation, where at this point nothing's been done that is life threatening or even a crime? This guy was clearly “confronted” by the police officer. The police officer caused whatever “altercation” that occurred. He used his Taser to “shock” and already agitated individual that "hurts like hell." This is exactly what this agitated person REALLY needed right then, “a pain compliance technique” that "hurts like hell" used on a clearly agitated, or even“highly motivated” suspect.

Was Jacob Robert Newmaker threatening anyone? NO. He was motivated to run, to try to get away from the threatening police officer causing him pain. And that's all they did was cause him MORE pain, “Dobberstein said the officers then tried to get Newmaker into handcuffs, using pepper spray and batons strikes to the legs to try to gain compliance.” “Gain compliance” is just a fancy way of saying, “do what you're told.” That's usually what rapist say to their victims too.  Once the victim complies and submits to the rape, the rapist is justified and exonerated from any crime or criminal act because to victim willingly yielded or went along; complied.

And this is the real problem that caused this man his life. The police clearly using “pain compliance techniques” to effectively torture a person into submitting or yielding – doing what they are ordered to do establishes the lack of legitimate authority to enforce the law and effect a safe and sane arrest. When this country was governed by people that enforced the law, police  officers simple effected the arrest and that was that. Now that they ARE the law they use torture devices to force compliance with their dictates. Resist or question their legitimacy and you most often end up dead.

The most compelling statement in this newspaper report is by Fortuna Police Lt. Matthew Eberhardt: “He was armed with a deadly weapon.” Greenson elaborates: “Newmaker was unarmed until he picked up the officer's baton, at which point he was considered armed and dangerous.” If this statement is true, then these police officers ARMED him and then used that situation to shoot him down like a dog. No different situation then what those two CHP officers did to Felix Omai in Garberville. They initiate a violent attack (what they call an arrest for some crime) then use their attack to justify why they made the attack or so-called arrest.
More importantly, look at yet another descrepency in Thadeus Greenson's reporting. Please note: “At this point, dobberstein said, the initial officer on scene attempted to use his baton to gain control of Newmaker's uncuffed hand, but the suspect was able to grab the weapon. (Note: “grab the weapon” the police officer was using on Newmaker) Quote Dobberstein: “Then, there was a tug-of-war for the baton, and he was able to wrestle it free.” Now note what Greenson says further along in the article: Newmaker was unarmed until he picked up the officer's baton, at which point he was considered armed and dangerous.” Did he wrestle the “weapon” or a “baton” from the officer or did he pick it up off the ground?

This idea that a baton is NOT a weapon in the hands of a “trained” police officer and therefore becomes something “less than a lethal weapon” does not pass the smell test. If a 9mm handgun is a lethal weapon regardless of who is holding it so is a baton. If the police are justified using deadly force against someone holding a baton then anyone legally defending themselves is justified using deadly force. This idea as expressed in Greenson's somewhat propagandized article continuing to soft-pedal another police killing that there is a difference depending upon who is holding the weapon is a classic example of how the Rule of men enforce their law to defend and protect their criminal conduct and special privilege.

Thadeus Greenson, to his credit, did produce a rather all encompassing article. Or, to his discredit slanted and biased the report in his normal fashion. Even so, the part he included from Robert Feliciano, a former training sergeant with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department who now serves as a qualified expert witness on police us of force is well worth reading and considering. I've included that excerpt at the end of this article.

What's the over reaching message in this, yet another tragedy? I'd start with the general premise issued by the Eureka Chief Murl Harpham when he said we need "tough cops." A general definition of his kind of tough cop was illustrated in the Joseph Cotten murder. Where once again the police crime of murder is passed off as a passé, non responsible act of "excessive force." Then I would go to the heart of how local police officers are trained and how that training engenders a racist, bully-type attitude that is demonstrated in their conduct. In the Robert Newmaker situation that probably starts with Fortuna Police Lt. Matthew Eberhardt. Bottom line, this guy, Jacob Newmaker was vulnerable, the police officers knew that and took full advantage, to this man's death.

---

[UPDATE II Link to The Joe Blow Report - Stand Your Ground and DIE – WHY?]

--Joe

UPDATE: Why Everyone Should Be Scared To Death

[UPDATE to Law and Order Finally Comes to Eureka]

Back in February I posted an article about three Eureka Police Officers currently on duty AFTER doing a stint of military duty in Afghanistan and captioned the article with, “This picture should scare the hell out of everyone living in Eureka, California.” Today I would also include Fortuna, CA too.

Democracy Now has the following interview with Neil Shea on: Afghan Massacre Sheds Light on Culture of Mania and Aggression in U.S. Troops in Afghanistan – I've watched a lot of Amy Goodman's Democracy Now shows, but this one had the most impact. This situation is a time-bomb about to go off. You can listen and watch in interview or go to Democracy Now and read the transcript.

Neil Shea, has reported on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq since 2006 for Stars and Stripes and The Christian Science Monitor, among other publications. His latest article in The American Scholar is called "Afghanistan: A Gathering Menace: Traveling with U.S. Troops Gives Insights into the Recent Massacre."

Couple this situation with what recently happened in Fortuna where the police used lethal force to shoot dead an apparently mentally disturbed person for simply thinking about using a police baton to strike an officer. This idea that everyone is going to just drop to the ground in total submission like a bitch in heat when a cop walks up and for whatever unknown reasons points his finger is the kind of thinking and behavior that comes from an occupying army seeking legitimacy that's stressed to the limit.

That's what can be said about the Murl Harpham "tough cop" philosophy. When people need help the most their sicknesses and weaknesses are victimized and exploited the most.

--Joe