Showing posts with label Civil Rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Civil Rights. Show all posts

Hawaii judge halts Trump travel ban

SUBHEAD: Judge says executive order was issued with a purpose to disfavor a particular religion.

By Rui Kanyena on 16 March 2017 for Civil Beat-
(http://www.civilbeat.org/2017/03/hawaii-judge-to-rule-on-challenge-to-travel-ban-before-it-takes-effect/?mc_cid=e810ff9805&mc_eid=28610da3ab)


Image above:  U.S. District Court Judge Derrick Watson in front of the US Federal Court in Honolulu, Hawaii speaks to media about his ruling on Trump travel ban. From original article.

In a case of legal deja vu, President Donald Trump’s new executive order on immigration suffered a major setback Wednesday, when a federal judge in Honolulu issued a temporary restraining order to keep the travel ban from taking effect nationwide.

n a 43-page opinion, U.S. District Court Judge Derrick Watson ruled that Hawaii met the “burden of establishing a strong likelihood of success on the merits” of its claims against the travel ban — which suspends refugee resettlements and temporarily halts the issuance of new visas to citizens of six Muslim-majority countries.

“A reasonable, objective observer — enlightened by the specific historical context, contemporaneous public statements and specific sequence of events leading to its issuance — would conclude that the executive order was issued with a purpose to disfavor a particular religion, in spite of its stated, religiously neutral purpose,” Watson wrote.

Watson’s ruling was a resounding victory for Hawaii, which mounted the first legal challenge against the new order on grounds that it unconstitutionally targets Muslims and discriminates based on national origin.

Hawaii Attorney General Doug Chin, who first sued the Trump administration in February to challenge the original travel ban, hailed the ruling.

“This is what the checks-and-balances system is all about,” Chin said. “The president might make certain decisions, but the way our government works, we also need to be able to take our own stance to check and balance out that whole process.”

Watson’s ruling was also the second major setback for Trump, who has long argued that the travel ban is necessary for national security.

Trump’s original travel ban, issued January 27th, triggered a flurry of legal challenges across the country and ended in a defeat at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, whose three-judge panel unanimously upheld an injunction issued in Seattle.

Speaking at a rally in Nashville, Tennessee, Trump called Watson’s ruling “an unprecedented judicial overreach” and noted that it came from a judge within the “much-overturned 9th Circuit Court.”

To the cheers of supporters in a campaign-style setting, Trump vowed that “we’re going to fight this terrible ruling” and eventually prevail at the U.S. Supreme Court.

“The danger’s clear; the law is clear,” Trump said, adding, “The best way to stop radical Islamic terrorists … is to stop them from entering the country in the first place.”


Image above: Hawaii Attorney General Doug Chin (center) discusses the decision by U.S. District Court Judge Derrick Watson to block the travel ban with Gov. David Ige and other local lawmakers. From original article.

Religious Discrimination

In his ruling, Watson directed much of his attention at assessing whether the new order, like the original travel ban, is a “Muslim ban” dressed up in legal garb — in violation of the First Amendment’s establishment clause.

At a hearing Wednesday, acting U.S. Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall argued that Trump was simply exercising his broad authority to address national security concerns.

Wall also told Watson that the travel ban had been revised to address the concerns raised by 9th Circuit Court, noting that it applies only to visa applicants who have yet to travel to the U.S., removes a provision that singled out Syrian refugees for an indefinite ban and no longer gives preferential treatment to the refugee claims of religious minorities.

But Watson was having none of it.

Watson ruled that, despite the revisions, the new order still amounts to religious discrimination — a step toward the “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States” that Trump promised on the campaign trail.

Watson chided the Trump administration, in particular, for suggesting that, since the travel ban doesn’t apply to all Muslim-majority countries, it has no “religious animus.”

“The illogic of the government’s contention is palpable,” Watson wrote. “The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed. The court declines to relegate its establishment clause analysis to a purely mathematical exercise.”

Last-Minute Challenges

Watson’s ruling came on a day in which two other judges held hearings to decide whether to issue an injunction against the travel ban.

Six hours before Watson’s hearing, U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang in Greenbelt, Maryland, heard oral arguments on a lawsuit brought by refugee aid groups but declined to issue a ruling from the bench.

Chuang indicated that his ruling, when it does come, might not be nationwide in scope.

In Seattle, U.S. District Judge James Robart, who blocked the original travel ban, held a hearing to consider the claims of four Washington residents who are concerned that the new order will bar their relatives from entering the U.S. But he has yet to issue a ruling.

Meanwhile, Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson cheered Hawaii’s success.

“A win for Hawaii is a win for all of us,” Ferguson said. “Trump is piling up defeat after defeat after defeat. And we’ll all be here working to make sure his streak continues.”

Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum, who was in Honolulu to attend the meeting of the Conference of Western Attorneys General, said Watson’s ruling reflected Hawaii’s aloha spirit.

“We’re so happy to stand together today with your state with this very, very significant victory for inclusivety and for saying loud and clear against discrimination,” said Rosenblum, who, along with attorneys general from 13 states and the District of Columbia, filed an amicus brief in Hawaii’s lawsuit.

Hakim Ouansafi, president the Muslim Association of Hawaii, said Watson’s ruling will protect “all the families affected by this Muslim ban.”

“They say precious things come in small packages and, in this case, great things for America and the world came from this small state of ours,” Ouansafi said. “Very proud of the great work (Attorney General) Doug Chin and his team did and hope that President Trump can concentrate on truly protecting this country as opposed to concentrating on fulfilling an unconstitutional and un-American campaign pledge.”


.

Homeland Security goes rogue

SUBHEAD: Federal court order restricting Trump's ban on "Muslim" immigration being ignored by DHS.

By M. Hanrahan & P McCausland  on 29 January 2017 for NBC News -
(http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-immigration-ban-still-place-despite-court-ruling-says-dhs-n713696)


Image above: Protest in Seattle against Trump immigration ban. From original article.

Hours after a federal judge issued a stay on President Donald Trump's executive order temporarily restricting entry to the U.S. from seven Muslim-majority countries, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and a senior White House adviser issued robust responses, emphasizing that the order remains in force.

In a statement issued in the early hours of Sunday, the Department said: "President Trump's Executive Orders remain in place — prohibited travel will remain prohibited, and the U.S. government retains its right to revoke visas at any time if required for national security or public safety."

It added that the department will "continue to enforce all of President Trump's Executive Orders in a manner that ensures the safety and security of the American people."

In addition, Stephen Miller, a senior adviser to the White House, told the Associated Press that nothing in the judge's order "in anyway impedes or prevents the implementation of the president's executive order which remains in full, complete and total effect."

The responses came just hours after federal Judge Ann Donnelly of the Eastern District of New York granted an emergency stay on parts of the order late Saturday. Her ruling came in response to a lawsuit brought by the ACLU on behalf of two Iraqi refugees who had been detained at New York's John F. Kennedy airport.

The stay will prevent the government from deporting citizens from the affected countries that had already arrived in the U.S.The ACLU estimated that around 200 people would be affected by the ruling.

For travelers outside of the U.S. however, even those with valid visas, the ruling will not change the restrictions imposed on them by the order.

Who is affected by Trump's executive order?
  • Citizens of seven Muslim-majority nations - Iraq, Iran, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya and Yemen will be prohibited from entering the U.S. for 90 days.
  • Green card holders from any of those countries currently outside of the U.S. will need to report to a local U.S. consulate for "extra vetting," and admitted or rejected on a case-by-case basis, according to administration officials.
  • Refugees seeking asylum in the U.S.: All refugees will be banned from entering the country for 120 days. Refugees from Syria will be banned indefinitely.
  • Anyone with U.S. citizenship will not be affected.
A DHS spokesperson on Saturday told the Associated Press that foreign-born U.S. residents who could have been barred from re-entering the United States under Trump's immigration order have been allowed back into the country.

The official said all green card holders from the seven countries who sought to enter the U.S. Saturday were granted special permission.

Not all aspiring immigrants have been so lucky, however. Since the order has been in force, stories have been emerging about families and individuals aiming to rejoin their loved ones being refused entry to the U.S.

While a dozen travelers were being held at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport on Saturday after they arrived, many more across the world were told they would not be able to board connecting flights to their destination in the U.S.

Amir Rashidi, an Iranian immigrant who lives in Seattle, told NBC News that his mother — who had become an American citizen — sponsored his sister's family to come to the United States. They had all obtained green cards, a process that can take years.

All but one arrived safely in Seattle. Rashidi's niece, 27-year-old Mahsa Fazmali, was slated to arrive on Friday, but then Trump signed the executive order.

Fazmali flew without a problem from Tehran to Dubai, and she had even found her seat on her flight to the Emerald City.

"She was on the plane sitting on her seat," her uncle said.

But then her name was called over the PA system and she was ordered to deplane with her belongings. According to Rashidi, airport officials could not explain why her green card would not allow her to travel to the United States.

She and the other immigrants who were looking for answers only learned of the travel ban from a nearby television turned to the news. Fazmali then flew back to Tehran.

Related: Officials Say Visas Were Being Revoked Prior to Trump's Executive Order


By Tyler Durden on 29 January 2017 for Zero Hedge -
(http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-29/homeland-security-states-it-will-continue-enforce-trumps-travel-ban)

Following a tumultuous night, in which late on Saturday evening a Brooklyn Federal Judge issued a partial ban on Trump's immigration order, on Sunday morning the Department of Homeland Security issued a statement saying it planned on continuing to “enforce all of the president’s executive orders in a manner that ensures the safety and security of the American people.”

The DHS said the court order would not affect the overall implementation of the White House order and the court order affected a small number of travelers who were inconvenienced by security procedures upon their return, Fox News first reported.

“The president’s executive orders remain in place—prohibited travel will remain prohibited, and the U.S. government retains its right to revoke visas at any time if required for national security or public safety,” the statement said.

However, the DHS also added it would "comply with judicial orders" not to deport detained travelers affected by President Donald Trump's order.

In a separate report from the NY Post, the ACLU was said to be getting “multiple reports” that federal customs agents are siding with President Trump — and willfully ignoring a Brooklyn federal judge’s demand that travelers from seven Muslim countries not be deported from the nation’s airports.

“The court’s order could not be clearer… they need to comply with the order,” Omar Jadwat, director of the ACLU’s Immigrants Rights project, told The Post late Saturday. “It’s enough to be a serious concern,” Jadwat said of the reports.

Stephen Miller, a senior adviser to the White House, said, "Nothing in the Brooklyn judge's order in anyway impedes or prevents the implementation of the president's executive order which remains in full, complete and total effect."

As reported before, just before 9pm on Saturday, U.S. District Judge Ann Donnelly in New York issued an emergency order temporarily barring the U.S. from deporting people from nations subject to President Donald Trump's travel ban, saying travelers who had been detained had a strong argument that their legal rights had been violated.

The stay was ordered after lawyers for the ACLU filed a court petition on behalf of people from seven predominantly Muslim nations who were detained at airports across the country as the ban took effect.

Homeland Security said the order affects a small amount of people traveling internationally. The DHS said the order was the “first step towards reestablishing control over America's borders and national security.”

Prior to the ruling, Trump’s travel ban sparked protests around the country at several international airports. Demonstrators ranged from a few dozen people to thousands. Protests are scheduled to continue on Sunday at least seven cities: Orlando, Boston, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Seattle, Washington and Chicago, mostly at airports.

Under Trump's order, it had appeared that an unknown number of foreign-born U.S. residents now traveling outside the U.S. could be stuck overseas for at least 90 days even though they held permanent residency "green cards" or other visas.  

However, an official with the DHS said Saturday night that no green-card holders from the seven countries cited in Trump's order had been prevented from entering the U.S. Trump also billed his sweeping executive order as a necessary step to stop "radical Islamic terrorists" from coming to the U.S.

It included a 90-day ban on travel to the U.S. by citizens of Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia or Yemen and a 120-day suspension of the U.S. refugee program.

Early on Sunday, Trump in his first official statement since the Brooklyn Court ruling stayed his ground and tweeted that "our country needs strong borders and extreme vetting, NOW. Look what is happening all over Europe and, indeed, the world - a horrible mess!

The DHS said in the statement that they “will faithfully execute the immigration laws, and we will treat all of those we encounter humanely and with professionalism.” They also added that they plan to ensure the safety of the American people by making sure those entering the U.S. pose no threat.
The full DHS statement is below:
Department Of Homeland Security Response To Recent Litigation

The Department of Homeland Security will continue to enforce all of President Trump’s Executive Orders in a manner that ensures the safety and security of the American people. President Trump’s Executive Orders remain in place—prohibited travel will remain prohibited, and the U.S. government retains its right to revoke visas at any time if required for national security or public safety. President Trump’s Executive Order affects a minor portion of international travelers, and is a first step towards reestablishing control over America's borders and national security.

Approximately 80 million international travelers enter the United States every year. Yesterday, less than one percent of the more than 325,000 international air travelers who arrive every day were inconvenienced while enhanced security measures were implemented. These individuals went through enhanced security screenings and are being processed for entry to the United States, consistent with our immigration laws and judicial orders.

The Department of Homeland Security will faithfully execute the immigration laws, and we will treat all of those we encounter humanely and with professionalism. No foreign national in a foreign land, without ties to the United States, has any unfettered right to demand entry into the United States or to demand immigration benefits in the United States. 

The Department of Homeland Security will comply with judicial orders; faithfully enforce our immigration laws, and implement President Trump’s Executive Orders to ensure that those entering the United States do not pose a threat to our country or the American people.

.

See film "Answering the Call"

SUBHEAD: Kauai Alliance for Peace and Social Justice hosts activist and filmmaker John Witeck.

By Sandy Herndon on 21 December 2016 for Island Breath -
(http://islandbreath.blogspot.com/2016/12/see-answering-call.html)


Image above: A young John Witeck and friend at the University of Hawaii in the 1960's. Still frame from trailer below.

WHAT:
Watch "Answering the Call" , a film about his experiences with Civil Rights suppression in Selma AL in  and a Q & A about his current work in Hawaii.  The evenings events will open with civil rights era social justice songs by Blu Dux and Friends. The events are free.

WHEN: 
January 15th  2017 From  3:00 pm to 6:00 pm

WHERE:
Lihue Neighborhood Center, 3353 Eono Street
Lihue, Kauai, Hawaii 96766

WHY:
As relevant today as it was in the '60's, suppression of people's voting and other civil rights continues to be a source of dishonor to our "Democratic Society". This film and the Q & A afterward, offers an opportunity to better understand our role in taking back our power.

SPONSOR: 
Kauai Alliance for Peace and Social Justice hosts activist film maker John Witeck.

CONTACT:
If you need further information
Sandy Herndon
phone: 808-320-3878
email: 2da1wahine@gmail.com


Image above: Current John Witeck in an interview from the movie "Answering the Call". Still frame from trailer below.

BACKGROUND:
John Witeck was called to Selma, in 1963 by Dr. Martin Luther King to promote voter registration of suppressed African Americans. He will speak at Lihue Neighborhood Center on Sunday Jan. 15 at 3PM. The documentary film "Answering the Call" portraying Mr. Witeck's sometimes chilling experiences in Selma will be shown.

Mr. Witeck was inspired to become involved in the greater movement for social change. In 1967 he enrolled in the East-West Center graduate program on O`ahu, and heeding Dr. King's words became a draft resister and anti-war activist. He joined in local causes, among them the Hawaiians' struggle against evictions in Kalama Valley and elsewhere.

He is a founder of University of Hawaii Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), the Labor Community Alliance and Hawaii Peoples Fund. Mr. Witeck served as Business Agent for United Public Workers for 25 years, and he is a retiree of HEA Bargaining Unit Thirteen.Today he instructs at Honolulu Community College and is vice president of Hoa` O Makaha (Makaha Farm).


Video above: Trailer for "Answering the Call". From (https://youtu.be/GSyD8tlIz28).

.

WikiLeaks' Assange on US Election

SUBHEAD: Irrespective of the election outcome, the real victor is the US public which is better informed.

By Julian Assange on 8 November 2016 for WikiLeaks  -
(https://wikileaks.org/Assange-Statement-on-the-US-Election.html)


Image above: Julian Assange and WikiLeaks logo in an overly "optimistic" article about Podesta Email impact on election. From (http://www.usapoliticstoday.com/julian-assange-reveals-that-hillarys-campaign-is-over-in-october-once-he-expose-this/julian-assange-and-wikileaks/).

In recent months, WikiLeaks and I personally have come under enormous pressure to stop publishing what the Clinton campaign says about itself to itself. That pressure has come from the campaign’s allies, including the Obama administration, and from liberals who are anxious about who will be elected US President.

On the eve of the election, it is important to restate why we have published what we have.

The right to receive and impart true information is the guiding principle of WikiLeaks – an organization that has a staff and organizational mission far beyond myself. Our organization defends the public’s right to be informed.

This is why, irrespective of the outcome of the 2016 US Presidential election, the real victor is the US public which is better informed as a result of our work.

The US public has thoroughly engaged with WikiLeaks’ election related publications which number more than one hundred thousand documents. Millions of Americans have pored over the leaks and passed on their citations to each other and to us. It is an open model of journalism that gatekeepers are uncomfortable with, but which is perfectly harmonious with the First Amendment.

We publish material given to us if it is of political, diplomatic, historical or ethical importance and which has not been published elsewhere. When we have material that fulfills this criteria, we publish.

We had information that fit our editorial criteria which related to the Sanders and Clinton campaign (DNC Leaks) and the Clinton political campaign and Foundation (Podesta Emails).

No one disputes the public importance of these publications. It would be unconscionable for WikiLeaks to withhold such an archive from the public during an election.

At the same time, we cannot publish what we do not have. To date, we have not received information on Donald Trump’s campaign, or Jill Stein’s campaign, or Gary Johnson’s campaign or any of the other candidates that fufills our stated editorial criteria.

As a result of publishing Clinton’s cables and indexing her emails we are seen as domain experts on Clinton archives. So it is natural that Clinton sources come to us.

We publish as fast as our resources will allow and as fast as the public can absorb it.
That is our commitment to ourselves, to our sources, and to the public.

This is not due to a personal desire to influence the outcome of the election. The Democratic and Republican candidates have both expressed hostility towards whistleblowers.

I spoke at the launch of the campaign for Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate, because her platform addresses the need to protect them.

This is an issue that is close to my heart because of the Obama administration’s inhuman and degrading treatment of one of our alleged sources, Chelsea Manning. But WikiLeaks publications are not an attempt to get Jill Stein elected or to take revenge over Ms Manning’s treatment either.

Publishing is what we do. To withhold the publication of such information until after the election would have been to favour one of the candidates above the public’s right to know.

This is after all what happened when the New York Times withheld evidence of illegal mass surveillance of the US population for a year until after the 2004 election, denying the public a critical understanding of the incumbent president George W Bush, which probably secured his reelection.

The current editor of the New York Times has distanced himself from that decision and rightly so.
The US public defends free speech more passionately, but the First Amendment only truly lives through its repeated exercise.

The First Amendment explicitly prevents the executive from attempting to restrict anyone’s ability to speak and publish freely. The First Amendment does not privilege old media, with its corporate advertisers and dependencies on incumbent power factions, over WikiLeaks’ model of scientific journalism or an individual’s decision to inform their friends on social media.

The First Amendment unapologetically nurtures the democratization of knowledge. With the Internet, it has reached its full potential.

Yet, some weeks ago, in a tactic reminiscent of Senator McCarthy and the red scare, Wikileaks, Green Party candidate Stein, Glenn Greenwald and Clinton’s main opponent were painted with a broad, red brush.

The Clinton campaign, when they were not spreading obvious untruths, pointed to unnamed sources or to speculative and vague statements from the intelligence community to suggest a nefarious allegiance with Russia. The campaign was unable to invoke evidence about our publications—because none exists.

In the end, those who have attempted to malign our groundbreaking work over the past four months seek to inhibit public understanding perhaps because it is embarrassing to them – a reason for censorship the First Amendment cannot tolerate. Only unsuccessfully do they try to claim that our publications are inaccurate.

WikiLeaks’ decade-long pristine record for authentication remains. Our key publications this round have even been proven through the cryptographic signatures of the companies they passed through, such as Google. It is not every day you can mathematically prove that your publications are perfect but this day is one of them.

We have endured intense criticism, primarily from Clinton supporters, for our publications. Many long-term supporters have been frustrated because we have not addressed this criticism in a systematic way or responded to a number of false narratives about Wikileaks’ motivation or sources.

Ultimately, however, if WL reacted to every false claim, we would have to divert resources from our primary work.

WikiLeaks, like all publishers, is ultimately accountable to its funders. Those funders are you. Our resources are entirely made up of contributions from the public and our book sales. This allows us to be principled, independent and free in a way no other influential media organization is.

But it also means that we do not have the resources of CNN, MSNBC or the Clinton campaign to constantly rebuff criticism.

Yet if the press obeys considerations above informing the public, we are no longer talking about a free press, and we are no longer talking about an informed public.

Wikileaks remains committed to publishing information that informs the public, even if many, especially those in power, would prefer not to see it. WikiLeaks must publish. It must publish and be damned.

.

Amy Goodman 'riot' charge dropped

SUBHEAD: Vindication for press freedom as charges dropped against journalist Amy Goodman

By Deirdre Fulton on 17 October 2016 for Common Dreams -
(http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/10/17/vindication-press-freedom-charges-dropped-against-journalist-amy-goodman)


Image above: Journalist Amy Goodman addressed supporters and the media after news on Monday that charges against her were dismissed. Screenshot from video in original article.

"By filing the charges in the first place,the state's attorney was attempting to stop journalism"
- Amy Goodwin

In a vindication for press freedom and land protectors fighting against the Dakota Access Pipeline, North Dakota has dismissed the "riot" charges against Democracy Now! journalist Amy Goodman, issued after she reported on pipeline company security guards physically assaulting nonviolent, mostly Indigenous land protectors in September.

"The judge's decision...is a great vindication of the First Amendment and...native people on the frontlines," Goodman told a crowd of supporters in Mandan, North Dakota on Monday, across the street from the courthouse.

By filing the charges in the first place, she said, "the state's attorney was attempting to stop journalism." Goodman elaborated in a statement:
This is a complete vindication of my right as a journalist to cover the attack on the protesters, and of the public's right to know what is happening with the Dakota Access pipeline. We will continue to report on this epic struggle of Native Americans and their non-Native allies taking on the fossil fuel industry and an increasingly militarized police in this time when climate change threatens the planet.
Delphine Halgand, U.S. director for Reporters Without Borders (RSF), said Monday afternoon: "We are relieved that the charges against Amy Goodman have been dismissed, but they never should have been filed in the first place. It is unacceptable that a journalist's right to cover a story of major public interest was threatened by North Dakota authorities.”

The decision was widely celebrated on social media, where journalists and activists alike had decried the attack on democracy.

Still, Goodman noted that other activists and journalists are facing charges for their part in the ongoing resistance.

To that end, press advocacy group Free Press delivered nearly 25,000 petitions to the office of the North Dakota state's attorney demanding that authorities drop all charges against Goodman and anyone else covering the protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline project.

"Threatening to throw journalists in jail is a blatant attempt to silence the Indigenous coalition that's protesting the construction of the pipeline on tribal lands," said Free Press campaign director Mike Rispoli. "This is a no-brainer—journalism is not a crime. The public has a right to know about protests like these. All charges must be dropped and local authorities reprimanded for violating rights that are essential to a free and functioning democracy."

Similarly, Food and Water Watch on Monday demanded the U.S. Department of Justice investigate the arrests of both Goodman and filmmaker Deia Schlosberg, who faces up to 45 years in prison for documenting a solidarity protest last week.

Cracking down on Goodman, Schlosberg, and other journalists "constitutes nothing less than a war on journalism and a victory for fossil fuel interests that have banked on the pipeline," the organization's executive director, Wenonah Hauter, said in a statement.

See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: Amy Goodwin to face "Riot Charge" 10/16/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Shutdown of all tar sand pipelines 10/11/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Why Standing Rock is test for Oabama 10/8/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Why we are Singing for Water 10/8/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Labor's Dakota Access Pipeline Crisis 10/3/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Standing Firm for Standing Rock 10/3/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Contact bankers behind DAPL 9/29/16
Ea O Ka Aina: NoDAPL demo at Enbridge Inc 9/29/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Militarized Police raid NoDAPL 9/28/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Stop funding of Dakota Access Pipeline 9/27/16
Ea O Ka Aina: UN experts to US, "Stop DAPL Now!" 9/27/16
Ea O Ka Aina: No DAPL solidarity grows 9/21/16
Ea O Ka Aina: This is how we should be living 9/16/16
Ea O Ka Aina: 'Natural Capital' replacing 'Nature' 9/14/16
Ea O Ka Aina: The Big Difference at Standing Rock 9/13/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Jill Stein joins Standing Rock Sioux 9/10/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Pipeline temporarily halted 9/6/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Native Americans attacked with dogs 9/5/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Mni Wiconi! Water is Life! 9/3/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Sioux can stop the Pipeline 8/28/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Officials cut water to Sioux 8/23/16   

.

French burkini ban

SUBHEAD: Armed French police force woman to remove clothing on public beach. Have they lost their minds?

By Ben Quinn on 23 August 2016 for the Guardian -
(https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/24/french-police-make-woman-remove-burkini-on-nice-beach)


Image above: A ticket given to the woman by police, which said she was not ‘wearing an outfit respecting good morals and secularism’. Police forced her to remove some clothing. From original article.

Authorities in 15 towns have banned burkinis, citing public concern following recent terrorist attacks in France.

Photographs have emerged of armed French police confronting a woman on a beach and making her remove some of her clothing as part of a controversial ban on the burkini.

Authorities in several French towns have implemented bans on the burkini, which covers the body and head, citing concerns about religious clothing in the wake of recent terrorist killings in the country.

The images of police confronting the woman in Nice on Tuesday show at least four police officers standing over a woman who was resting on the shore at the town’s Promenade des Anglais, the scene of last month’s Bastille Day lorry attack.

After they arrive, she appears to remove a blue long-sleeved tunic, although one of the officers appears to take notes or issue an on-the-spot fine.

The photographs emerged as a mother of two also told on Tuesday how she had been fined on the beach in nearby Cannes wearing leggings, a tunic and a headscarf.

Her ticket, seen by French news agency AFP, read that she was not wearing “an outfit respecting good morals and secularism”.

“I was sitting on a beach with my family,” said the 34-year-old who gave only her first name, Siam. “I was wearing a classic headscarf. I had no intention of swimming.”

A witness to the scene, Mathilde Cousin, confirmed the incident. “The saddest thing was that people were shouting ‘go home’, some were applauding the police,” she said. “Her daughter was crying.”

Last week, Nice became the latest French resort to ban the burkini. Using language similar to the bans imposed earlier at other locations, the city barred clothing that “overtly manifests adherence to a religion at a time when France and places of worship are the target of terrorist attacks”.

The Nice ban refers specifically to the truck attack in the city on 14 July that claimed 86 lives, as well as the murder 12 days later of a Catholic priest near the northern city of Rouen.

The ban by several towns will come before France’s highest administrative court on Thursday following an appeal by the Human Rights League, a French NGO. It is challenging the decision by a lower court in Nice, which upheld a ban on the outfit by the town of Villeneuve-Loubet.

Villeneuve-Loubet, just west of Nice, was among the first of 15 towns to ban the burkini, triggering a fierce debate in France and elsewhere about the wearing of the full-body swimsuit, women’s rights and secularism.

A Corsican mayor has also banned burkinis, amid tensions on the island and violent clashes between villagers and three Muslim families. Skirmishes at a beach in the commune of Sisco earlier this month left four people injured and resulted in riot police being brought in to stop a crowd of 200 Corsicans marching into a housing estate with a high population of people of North African origin, shouting “this is our home”.

A police investigation is under way to determine the cause of the violent brawl, although there has been no confirmation from authorities as to whether anyone on the beach was wearing a burkini at the time.

Nevertheless the local Socialist mayor, Ange-Pierre Vivoni, banned the garments, describing the measure as necessary to “protect the population”.

The Nice tribunal ruled on Monday that the ban in Villeneuve-Loubet was “necessary, appropriate and proportionate” to prevent public disorder after a succession of jihadi attacks in France.

The burkini was “liable to offend the religious convictions or (religious) non-convictions of other users of the beach,” and “be felt as a defiance or a provocation exacerbating tensions felt by” the community, it added.

The ruling by the state council, France’s highest administrative court, will provide a legal precedent for towns to follow around the country.




French divided over burkini ban
SUBHEAD: France's burkini ban row divides government as court mulls legality.


By Angelique Christafis on 25 August 2016 for the Guardian -
(https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/25/frances-burkini-ban-row-divides-government-court-mulls-legality)

France’s prime minister, Manuel Valls, has clashed with his education minister amid growing divisions in the government over the controversial burkini bans on some beaches.

The education minister, Najat Vallaud-Belkacem, one of the Socialist government’s leading feminist voices, was highly critical of the growing number of burkini bans, which have provoked debate after women were stopped by police for wearing headscarves and long-sleeved clothing on the beach.

France’s highest court – the state council – began hearing arguments on Thursday from the Human Rights League and an anti-Islamophobia group, which are seeking to reverse a decision by the southern town of Villeneuve-Loubet, near Nice, to ban the full-body swimsuits.

Vallaud-Belkacem, who was born into a Muslim family in rural Morocco before moving to France aged four, told Europe 1 radio the proliferation of burkini bans was not welcome.

She said: “I think it’s a problem because it raises the question of our individual freedoms: how far will we go to check that an outfit is conforming to ‘good manners’?”

She warned that the bans had “let loose” verbal racism. The Socialist party had previously expressed outrage after a 34-year-old French woman was stopped by police on a beach in Cannes for sitting with her children wearing a headscarf and long trousers and was shouted at by a crowd to “go home”.

“My dream of society is a society where women are free and proud of their bodies,” said Vallaud-Belkacem. She warned that with tensions high after a series of terrorist attacks claimed by the Islamic State, “we shouldn’t add oil to the fire” by banning burkinis.

But moments after Vallaud-Belkacem spoke, her comments were flatly contradicted by Valls, who reiterated his support for mayors who have banned the garments. Asked if the decrees amounted to racism, Valls said: “No, that’s a bad interpretation.” He said the full-body swimwear represented “the enslavement of women”.

Valls has said he supports the mayors who have issued local short-term decrees against burkinis, while refusing their demands for nationwide legislation against them.
The state council’s ruling, due shortly, is likely to set a precedent for other towns that have banned the burkini.

The administrative court in Nice ruled on Monday that the Villeneuve-Loubet ban was necessary to prevent public disorder after the Bastille Day attack in Nice and the murder of a priest in Normandy.

 The London mayor, Sadiq Khan, condemned the ban on a visit to Paris on Thursday, his first overseas trip since taking office in May. “I’m quite firm on this. I don’t think anyone should tell women what they can and can’t wear. Full stop. It’s as simple as that.”

Khan’s counterpart in Paris, Anne Hidalgo, hosting London’s first Muslim mayor, called for an end to burkini “hysteria”, saying authorities should instead focus on improving social cohesion.

The former French president Nicolas Sarkozy weighed into the controversy on Wednesday when he called the full-body burkini swimsuit a “provocation” that supported radicalised Islam. He told a TV interviewer: “We don’t imprison women behind fabric.”

This was followed by a rebuke from the woman who created the burkini, the Australian designer Aheda Zanetti, who said Sarkozy had misunderstood what the swimwear represented.

“He needs to go to the beach and maybe ask, what is a burkini swimsuit?” Zanetti said. “Burkini is just a word that describes a full-cover swimsuit, and it doesn’t symbolise anything to do with Muslims. It’s about encouraging our kids and children to learn how to swim.”

The political row over burkinis has intensified after a woman in a headscarf was photographed on a beach in Nice removing a long-sleeved top while surrounded by armed police.

The city banned the burkini on its beaches last week, following about 15 seaside areas in south-east France where mayors had done the same.

The series of pictures, taken by a local French news photographer, showed a woman dressed in leggings, a long-sleeved tunic and headscarf being approached by four officers.

As the police stand around her, she removes her long-sleeved top, revealing a short-sleeved top underneath. It is unclear whether or not the woman was ordered to do so. In another image, a police officer appears to write out a fine.

The Nice mayor’s office denied that the woman had been forced to remove clothing, telling Agence France-Presse that she was showing police the swimsuit she was wearing under her tunic.

Nice’s deputy mayor, Christian Estrosi, from Sarkozy’s Les Républicains party, said a municipal police team had “acted perfectly to make sure that [the] decree was respected”. He threatened legal action against anyone disseminating pictures of municipal police. Twenty-four women have been stopped by police in the city since the burkini ban came into force.


The woman in Cannes, a former flight attendant from Toulouse who gave her name only as Siam, said she was wearing clothes and a headscarf when she was approached by police who wrote on her ticket that her clothes did not conform with “good manners” or French secularism.

“I wasn’t in a burkini, I wasn’t in a burqa, I wasn’t naked, so I considered my clothing was appropriate,” she said.

The various mayoral decrees do not explicitly use the word burkini; instead they ban “beachwear which ostentatiously displays religious affiliation”, citing reasons such as the need to protect public order, hygiene or French laws on secularism.

The state council’s ruling, due at 3pm (1pm GMT) on Friday, is likely to set a precedent for other towns that have introduced bans.
.

Robot runs over young boy

SUBHEAD: A 300 pound 5'-5" tall security robot runs over child in California shopping mall.

By Steven Hoffer on 13 July 2016 for Huffington Post -
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/security-robot-toddler_us_57863670e4b03fc3ee4e8f3a?section=)


Image above: Security robot stands 5'-5" and weighs 300lbs. if it does not like the way you look it will alert local human authorities. Don't tell me the manufacturer is not working on a weaponized version. From original article.

A young boy was knocked down and run over by a 5-foot-tall, 300-pound security robot at a California mall on Thursday.

Sixteen-month-old Harwin Cheng suffered a swollen foot and several scrapes in the scary encounter at the Stanford Shopping Center in Palo Alto.

“The robot hit my son’s head and he fell down — facing down on the floor — and the robot did not stop and it kept moving forward,” Harwin’s mom, Tiffany Teng, told ABC 7.

Teng said that the robot would have run over her son’s other foot had her husband not pulled the boy away.

The security robots are made by a company called Knightscope, located in Mountain View. The K5 version uses lasers, thermal imaging sensors, 360 video, air quality sensors, a microphone and various other technologies to deter and detect criminal activities. In the event of suspicious activity, the robot alerts local human authorities.

Stacy Dean Stephens, Knightscope vice president of marketing and sales, told NBC Bay Area that the company does not think the robots are dangerous.

This is a horrific accident, but we believe the technology and the machines are incredibly safe and we will continue to do our best to make sure that they are,” Stephens said.

The Stanford Shopping Center has used the technology for about a year. Representatives also told the NBC station that the shopping center is investigating the incident and will dock all of its security robots until further notice.

See also:
Ea O Ka Aina: Dallas use of killer "robot" alarming 7/8/16
Ea O Ka Aina: Weaponized drones in America 8/29/15
Ea O Ka Aina: Residents ban traffic cameras 12/29/14
Ea O Ka Aina: Remotely Piloted Corporate War 2/23/12
Ea O Ka Aina: Google's self driving car crashes 8/5/11
Ea O Ka Aina: Globalized Free Fire Zone 6/24/10

.

The Police Among Us

SUBHEAD: In light of recent events involving violence between police and the citizens they "serve and protect".

By Juan Wilson on 11 June 2016 for Island Breath -
(http://islandbreath.blogspot.com/2016/07/the-police-among-us.html)


Image above:The Kauai Police Department Incident Command Center is a recently acquired armored truck with sophisticated communications equipment for command and control. The men in uniform are part of the Guam Civilian Support Team being briefed on an "incident" during the multi-agency preparedness exercise at the Vidinha Stadium parking lot.  From (http://thegardenisland.com/news/local/keeping-kauai-prepared/article_03a943f0-57b4-5a01-820c-cd368a1299eb.html).

The recent horrors of violence between the police and black citizens seems to be building. Newark and Detroit burned in 1967 while the Doors song "Light my Fire" was #1 on the charts. In 1968  people were beaten outside and inside the Democratic Convention in Chicago. We are not where we were then but that is slim comfort as we look forward to nasty political conventions in Cleveland and Philadelphia this month and many more police confrontations with Black Lives Matter.

My wife and I have witnessed exemplary police work under trying circumstances, and interviewed people with horror stories to tell. We are humans. However, policies matter and training our police forces for military combat, riot control, and protecting corporations who do us real harm will only end tragically. 

In 2007-8 IslandBreath.org had a column in Garden Island News titled "Ho'okahi Kauai".  Normally the column was scheduled to appear every other Saturday in the Forum of Kauai Garden Island News editorial page. These TGI articles were derived from IslandBreath.org stories. The TGI final printed version may have varied from its source, as TGI retained the right to correct and edit the submitted articles.

The following two articles published in 2008 about the Kauai Police department policies.

We were worried at the time about alienation, isolation and militarization of the police. that trend has continued as we have been in a state of perpetual war and have had to deal with the people we put through that nightmarish process.

After the first article was published I was told by the late Adam Harjou, then editor of TGI, that if I wrote another article about the Kauai Police Department that the column would be dropped. I had not planned to do another, but I did.

Under pressure from persons in Kauai Police Department and on the Kauai Police Commission because of the views expressed in the following two columns the Island Breath column was dropped from the paper.

Such things go on.



TGI Article #30: The Police Mission
By Juan Wilson on 15 May 2008 for Island Breath -
(http://www.islandbreath.org/2008Year/20-TGI_column/0820-30KauaiPoliceMission.html)


Image above: An unarmed English Bobby. Street peace officer protecting the innocent. From original article.

The Vision Thing
" If you don't understand your mission, you're going to lose your way."
- Chief Perry, Kauai Police Department

In the May 7th issue of "Kauai People" Joan Conrow interviewed Darryl Perry, the recently appointed Chief of the Kauai Police Department (KPD). She writes:

"Perry is essentially overhauling the entire department, starting with reassessing all its policies and procedures and familiarizing employees with the KPD's mission statement..."

A Mission is based on an overarching Vision of the purpose of the enterprise. If Chief Perry is intent on a major overhaul of the KPD, we need to know his Vision and how well it conforms the current KPD Mission. It may be that both need adjustment to achieve a positive change for Kauai.

Living on an isolated tropical island does not mean we don't need police. But, we do not have to emulate the militarized police of big cities on the mainland.

Certainly, the brave men and women of the KPD are not afraid to be without a loaded gun while they sip coffee or have a plate lunch with us. Heck, we civilians are not wearing guns. I'm sure the police would get more respect and cooperation from the public if they didn't either.

Our police should be experts in mediation, and consensus building, not crowd control and counter-terrorism. I certainly don't mind us buying our finest some cool gear, just let it be stuff they can use every day to make our lives better.

Let's move the officers out of their bloated gas-guzzlers and into some sporty electric golf carts. Let's buy them bicycles - good ones. We could do with a few horse-mounted police too. I would recommend the police be equipped top-of-the-line GPS systems, smart phones, and digital recording devices. High tech – not highly lethal.

Integrity, Compassion and Aloha
In the overhaul of our police department, we should consider adding "Integrity", "Compassion" and the "Spirit of Aloha" to Mission Statement. If we take them seriously and in context, specific words do matter. In trying to better understand the mission of the KPD, I found it enlightening to do a comparison with other Hawaiian police departments.

The KPD mission statement follows the pattern of police departments of Honolulu (HPD) and Maui (MPD) with its dedication to the principles of Respect, Service and Fairness. But, I was surprised, that among the principles specified, the KPD does not include Integrity (listed first by HPD and MPD) or Compassion (listed second by MPD).

Perhaps more significantly, a review of the mission statements for all Hawaiian police departments reveals that Kauai's is the only one that does not include the ideal of "The Spirit of Aloha".

The Mission is the Message
The Big Island Police Department has the briefest Mission Statement in the state;

"The employees of the Hawaii Police Department are committed to preserving the Spirit of Aloha. We will work cooperatively with the community to enforce the laws, preserve peace, and provide a safe environment."

Perhaps I am reading too much into the KPD Mission, but I keep finding it emphasized by Chief Perry. On the homepage of the KPD website, Perry writes;

"The Kauai Police Department’s mission statement is the foundation of who we are and what we are about... On our island-home we marvel at the beauty that surrounds us and we take pride in keeping Kauai a safe and peaceful community. But we also understand that there are social issues that require law enforcement presence..."

Does this imply that beyond maintaining the peace and safety on Kauai, there is another agenda related to "social issues"? What are they? I hope it's not suppressing Hawaiian sovereignty groups; providing speculators security for unwanted development; enforcing the return of the Superferry; or protecting the pesticide spraying of GMO corporations on the westside.


Image above: LAPD SWAT training Hamilton County CA police with new equipment. From original article.

Police - Military - Business
There are trends in American society that are distorting and blending the roles of police , military and business. This role morphing has eroded our civil rights. Some obviously dangerous examples are:

Business as Military:
The Blackwater USA Corporation is a mercenary army that has played a key role in special operations in Iraq. It provides (shoot first, ask no questions) security for the U.S. State Department in Baghdad. They are currently building a fortress headquarters in California near the Mexican border.

Military as Business:
The Hawaii Superferry (HSF) is on the surface a money losing civilian ferry operation. Below the surface it is a program of experimental ship building, designed to meet the needs of inter-branch military logistics in the Pacific with a Joint High Speed Vessel - JHSV. The program is funded by civilian state and federal dollars and is operated by a board of ex-military professionals. Billions are at stake.

Police as Business:
The Superferry operates with no EIS as the result of a business conspiracy. The KPD was provided as its security detail, even though our County Council had passed a resolution recommending the EIS be completed before the ferry come to Kauai. By order of Governor Lingle, the KPD was then brought under the Unified Command and used to arrest demonstrators defying the Superferry.

Business as Police:
The Correctional Corporation of America (CCA) operates a private prison system with over 75,000 "residents". They have been accused of lobbying for longer mandatory prison sentences as punishment for minor crimes like marijuana use. Almost one-in-one-hundred Americans are in prison.

Police as Military:
Special Weapons Assault Teams (S.W.A.T.) are in almost every town in America. These police want to be equipped with cool black outfits, assault rifles, kevlar vests and armored Hummers... and they're getting them.

Military as Police:
All we need say are the words "Guantanamo" or "Abu Graib"

The various mixes of Police-Military-Business result in the protection of corporate profits, control of civilian populations and expansion of military domination. We have a name for this - it is called a Police State. That is a situation in which the police are not on your side. There is no room for that in this, the Aloha State.

Old Proverbs
"If brute force is not working, you're not using enough of it."
This is the modus operandi of those that rely on lethal force for their authority. It is my opinion that during normal shifts, our police should not wear guns. Lethal and near lethal devices should be locked away in the patrol vehicle, for use when a psychopath shows up and gets rowdy.

"It is the duty of police to Protect & Serve"
Even when police "protect" us, it is rare that brute force is required. Most often is "service" that we need - interpreting the law; mediating strife; coordinating events; handling emergencies. That is the relationship we need most.

"Where's a cop when you need one?"

In tough times the best answer to that continues to be;

"On your side."



TGI #31: KPD Patrol Policy

By Juan Wilson on 7 June 2008 for Island Breath -

(http://www.islandbreath.org/2008Year/20-TGI_column/0820-31KPDpatrolling.html)


Image above:A 1950 Pontiac patrol cruiser with gumball flasher and sheriff's medallion. From original article and (http://alfa-img.com/show/antique-police.html).

Police Car Patrols
In the 1970s the Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment was scientific and thorough (see www.policefoundation.org). What it concluded was surprising, suggesting that routine preventive patrol in marked police cars has little value in preventing crime or making citizens feel safe. That is a startling result and has been underreported.

Almost universally, the use of the radio-patrol car is considered the backbone of police work. Billions of dollars are spent each year to have police officers patrolling the streets in marked police cars in order to deter people committing crimes. In the end, these patrols mostly focus on fining the public for infractions of driving rules.

Harvard-trained sociologist Peter Moskos became a policeman in Baltimore’s roughest neighborhood - the Eastern District. He documented his experience in his book "Cop in the Hood". Moskos says;
"The Kansas City Preventative Patrol Experiment showed that cars don’t matter. Cops only need to be in cars to backup other police officers. Almost everything else could be done by foot and bike. And yet the Kansas City study changed nothing... Culturally, police like patrol cruisers and it’s almost impossible to get police out of cars."
If primarily relying on patrol cars is an ineffective way to prevent crime we might be doing something fundamentally wrong.

Moreover, the standard high-speed police cruiser may be an inappropriate vehicle for patrolling Kauai. As far as high-speed pursuit goes; the FBI law Enforcement Bulletin (July 2002) indicates that:
"Police pursuits are dangerous. Available data indicate that the number of pursuits continues to increase, as well as the number of pursuit-related injuries and deaths. A traffic accident constitutes the most common terminating event in a pursuit."
Police Chief Magazine reports that Hillsboro, Oregon (population 79,000) has a good police pursuit policy that allows officers to abandon chases without consulting their superiors.

"In two recent cases the decision to terminate potentially dangerous pursuits was made by the original officer as soon as the officer was aware that the suspect was going to flee. In both cases, the suspect quickly abandoned his dangerous driving and dumped the vehicle. In both cases, Hillsboro officers were able to take the suspect into custody swiftly."
What is the reason for a high-speed chase on a small isolated island? In the vast majority of cases, is there anyplace for the "bad guy" to go? We need to know if a few economic all-wheel-drive five-door fuel-efficient compacts might better serve our community.


image above: A 1950's nighttime police foot patrol on a Detroit downtown street. From original article.

Alternative Patrols
The book Community Policing: "A Policing Strategy for the 21st Century", by Michael Palmiotto discusses police patrol experiments like those Flint, Michigan; and Newark, New Jersey. These experiments were a careful studies of re-introduced foot patrols in high crime areas.

Interestingly, like the use of patrol cars, the use of foot patrols seemed to have little effect on area crime statistics. However, residents in foot patrols areas had less fear of crime, improved feelings of community safety and better opinions about the police.

These studies have given legitimacy to community policing outside of the patrol car and showed that foot patrols establish citizen-police cooperation in solving crime and disorder. Maybe we are looking at the wrong goals regarding police efforts.

The Lawrence Journal World in Kansas reported on 6/2/08:
Foot patrols also are getting a new emphasis at the Kansas University Public Safety Office because of fuel costs. Earlier this year, the department purchased two $5,000 Segways. The two-wheeled, battery-powered, one-man transporters increase officer visibility and are useful for monitoring crowds as well as moving around campus, Maj. Chris Keary said. They also help cut gasoline costs.
“On an everyday basis, officers can use them to do their patrols instead of driving the car,” Keary said.

KU security officers, who handle much of the campus building security duties, use an electric car.

The $12,000 vehicle purchased last year looks like a small truck with a bubble canopy. It has worked well, especially because security officers have more area to cover as West Campus continues to grow.

KMOV-NBC Channel 4 TV reported on 5/1/08:
"Monday, the city council will vote on a new tool for police officers to fight crime. The city of Pine Lawn, Kansas, hopes the unique crime fighting tool you might see on a golf course pays off for officers. Chief Ricky Collins and the city's mayor want to put several officers in golf carts. The goal is to improve relationships between officers and residents."
WMAR-ABC Channel 2 TV reported on 5/27/08:
"In a small town in Bremen, Ohio, deputies are trading in their squad cars for golf carts as gasoline prices continue to rise. The sheriffs say the golf carts have also improved their relationship with the community."
I suggest that increasing alternative modes of police patrol such as foot patrol, bikes, segways, electric carts and horseback have benefits other than just better better face-to-face communication and fuel efficency. The result will be residents and visitors on Kauai sensing that the police are providing better service.

An additional bonus could be a more physically fit and happier police force. A police force better suited for the future and one that could be more attractive to potential rookies. Here on Kauai wouldn't many idealistic kids enjoy serving and protecting their island on horseback, and being paid a policeman's salary to do it?

See also:
Island Breath: Policing Paradise 4/4/08

.

Mexico City superhero

SUBHEAD: Clogged with traffic, the capital is hard for pedestrians. Enter Peatónito, wrestling for safer streets.

By Dulce Ramos on 8 November 2015 for the Guardian -
(http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/nov/09/unmasked-mexico-city-superhero-wrestling-pedestrian-rights)


Image above: Masked campaigner Peatónito pushes back a car that has strayed on to a pedestrian crossing in Mexico City. Photograph by Sean Smith. From original article.

The traffic light turns red at the corner of Avenida Juárez and Eje Central, the busiest pedestrian crossing in Mexico City, used by around 9,000 people every hour. Tonight, a driver stops his grey Peugeot exactly on the crossing where the masses are trying to pass. His car is now a steel barrier for those trying to reach the Palacio de Bellas Artes.

A masked man dressed in black makes his way through the river of people, walking purposefully towards the Peugeot. His black and white striped cape, reminiscent of a zebra crossing, flaps behind him. He goes to the car, flings his cape over his shoulder, and pushes the Peugeot backwards to make space.

“My name is Peatónito, and I fight for the rights of pedestrians,” he says, introducing himself. The driver smiles and reverses willingly and eventually the pair shake hands. With the pedestrian crossing again flowing as it should, Peatónito heads back to the pavement where he will wait until he is needed again. The traffic light turns green.

Since 2012, Mexico City has had a “superhero” defending its pedestrians: Peatónito, or Pedestrian Man. Three years after he first appeared on the streets, armed with a highway code and a white aerosol can to spray zebra crossings and pavements where none existed, Peatónito can take pride in the victories that he and his fellow transport rights activists have achieved.

Together, they fight for a safer, more efficient way for people to get around the capital – which has 5.5m vehicles in circulation – on foot.

The triumphs are tangible. This August, Mexico City’s government presented a new set of road traffic regulations with reduced speed limits on primary routes (that is, slower routes) from 70km/h to 50km/h. The reduced speed limit isn’t a mere whim on the part of the activists; it’s possible to measure how dangerous the streets of the capital are. In Mexico City, 52 accidents in every 1,000 are fatal. In the entire country, the rate is 39 deaths for every 1,000 accidents.

Another battle that has been fought and won is the implementation of “Vision Zero”, a series of public policies aimed at eradicating road traffic deaths, which activists worldwide have been backing for years. Their aims: an ethical focus to ensure that human life is prioritised; shared responsibility between those who design the roads and those who use them, and street safety and mechanisms for change.

The Netherlands, Sweden and the UK are among the pioneering countries to adopt Vision Zero (the first two just under 20 years ago). Then came US cities like Chicago, New York, Boston, San Francisco, and eight more. In Mexico, the initiative has been taken up – at least as a point of discussion – in Torreón, an industrial city in the state of Coahuila, and in Mexico City.

If today pedestrians are at the centre of Mexico City’s new road traffic regulations – having relegated cars from the top of the agenda – it is in large part the result of years of activism influencing the city’s policies on road traffic safety.

The dangers of walking

But why does Mexico City need a superhero like Peatónito? And how did the country’s first group of pedestrian rights activists emerge in the capital? If you consider that Mexico City combines the biggest concentration of cars, inadequate road infrastructure, and a total lack of road safety culture, it is not surprising that there are more deaths on the city’s streets than on any others in Mexico.

According to the National Council for the Prevention of Accidents, in 2013, 491 pedestrians died in road traffic accidents in Mexico City. This is equivalent to 6% of all the pedestrian deaths recorded that year in the country. In contrast, when we look at the number of fatalities among drivers and vehicle passengers, the figure is cut by half.

Only 265 of those killed in road traffic accidents in 2013 were behind the wheel or in the car at the time. Being a pedestrian in the world’s fourth most populous city is to risk one’s neck on a daily occurrence.

Despite the fact that in Mexico City, just three out of every 10 journeys are made by car, for decades the government has favoured investment in public works that favour car usage. Walking around the city may well be for the adventurous types, statistically speaking, but Mexico City is full of people who make their journeys on two feet: navigating cars, running after buses that don’t stop where they should, risking their lives on the public bicycle system.

Looking after all these people are the traffic police, but there is little they can do in a city of feverish drivers who will do anything to arrive at their destination on time.

Convincing Mexico’s inhabitants to use their cars less would not only reduce the number of traffic accidents, but would improve the functionality of the city by cutting, for example, the time it takes to commute across the metropolitan zone. Daily transport services in the form of ramshackle buses, driven recklessly, head to the centre crammed with passengers from the suburbs. The underground system, the Metro, has not been properly serviced in years and is also packed to dangerous extremes each morning.
Mexico City, like other cities in the world, doesn’t boast services such as “park and ride” or “incentive parking” – those car parks that allow commuters heading for city centres to leave their vehicles and transfer to public transport connections for part of the journey.
With a general outlook like this, it is little wonder that people opt to use their cars each day to get around, despite it taking up to two or three hours for them to reach their destination.
It’s for all these reasons that Peatónito swoops down onto the streets of Mexico City, backed by a network of activists intent on putting a stop to such problems and making the city more civilised and habitable.

Peatónito unmasked

The man behind Peatónito’s mask is Jorge Cáñez, a 29-old political scientist who works in a civic technology lab for the city government. Twice a week, he dresses as a superhero and takes to the streets to expose serious and minor traffic violations.

“In Mexico City, just moving from A to B is the most hazardous, complicated and inefficient thing imaginable,” says Peatónito, in a bar in the Roma district, one of the city’s most pedestrian-friendly areas, where cyclists and motorcyclists can move around in relative safety. He recalls how his activism began when he had to endure the daily torment of travelling by bus from his house to university.

“When I was a student, I told myself: ‘I’m not going to rest until I find out the reason why public transport from my house to university is so bad, and until I find a solution’.” Thus, 10 years ago, Cáñez began investigating how Mexico City’s public transportation policies are conceived. What he didn’t know was that he wasn’t alone.

In 2010, with the arrival in of the Metrobús, Mexico City’s first bus system in the style of busway or BRT (Bus rapid transit), the agenda around transportation began to be more visible. And yet, groups of urban cyclists had already spent more than 20 years trying to highlight the importance of developing a city that is more amenable to different modes of transport. In 2010, the collective “Walk, Build a City”, the first group of pedestrian rights activists in the country, began to make themselves known.
 
That year, on 21 March, members of the collective painted a pavement on a controversial highway that was built without the normal public bidding process and which damaged green areas.It seemed no one felt it important that the pedestrians should have a designated path, despite the fact they were forced to use that space if they wanted to take the bus.

It took those citizens longer to paint the pavement than for the government to remove it. “We promise to paint a better one,” officials said. And although it took some time, in the end they did designate a narrow strip along the bridge to pedestrians. It was the first of many victories for the pro-mobility activists.

‘The road can be a ring’

Was it necessary to create a character that resembled something out of a Lucha Libre fight to raise awareness about the risks to Mexico City’s pedestrians? Jorge Peatónito isn’t sure, but he believes creativity is a powerful weapon for activists.

“Lucha Libre is deep-rooted in Mexican life, but the idea [for Peatónito] came to me the day I took a few foreign friends along to see a fight. If we’ve had Superbarrio (another Mexican self-claimed superhero who fought causes on behalf of the city’s lower classes in the 1990s), why can’t we imagine the street as a wrestling ring?” This is how his activism acquired its comedy touch.

Humour aside, Peatónito is well aware that in real life superpowers don’t exist, and was himself involved in a car crash four months ago, when a car rammed his bicycle near the Tepito neighbourhood, an area of the city that is notorious for its gangs and black market. Fortunately, he was unhurt – traffic chaos is his kryptonite, he says.

Notwithstanding the risks of the job, Cáñez finds it rewarding and has no plans to abandon his superhero persona: “I do it all for the love of art, to do something for the city. Financially speaking, Peatónito hasn’t earned me more than the fee for a few talks and a couple of trips. That’s it. The best thing is the satisfaction of communicating a message in a powerful way.”

In 2010, with the arrival in of the Metrobús, Mexico City’s first bus system in the style of busway or BRT (Bus rapid transit), the agenda around transportation began to be more visible. And yet, groups of urban cyclists had already spent more than 20 years trying to highlight the importance of developing a city that is more amenable to different modes of transport. In 2010, the collective “Walk, Build a City”, the first group of pedestrian rights activists in the country, began to make themselves known.

That year, on 21 March, members of the collective painted a pavement on a controversial highway that was built without the normal public bidding process and which damaged green areas.It seemed no one felt it important that the pedestrians should have a designated path, despite the fact they were forced to use that space if they wanted to take the bus.

It took those citizens longer to paint the pavement than for the government to remove it. “We promise to paint a better one,” officials said. And although it took some time, in the end they did designate a narrow strip along the bridge to pedestrians. It was the first of many victories for the pro-mobility activists.

‘The road can be a ring’

Was it necessary to create a character that resembled something out of a Lucha Libre fight to raise awareness about the risks to Mexico City’s pedestrians? Jorge Peatónito isn’t sure, but he believes creativity is a powerful weapon for activists.

“Lucha Libre is deep-rooted in Mexican life, but the idea [for Peatónito] came to me the day I took a few foreign friends along to see a fight. If we’ve had Superbarrio (another Mexican self-claimed superhero who fought causes on behalf of the city’s lower classes in the 1990s), why can’t we imagine the street as a wrestling ring?” This is how his activism acquired its comedy touch.

Humour aside, Peatónito is well aware that in real life superpowers don’t exist, and was himself involved in a car crash four months ago, when a car rammed his bicycle near the Tepito neighbourhood, an area of the city that is notorious for its gangs and black market. Fortunately, he was unhurt – traffic chaos is his kryptonite, he says.

Notwithstanding the risks of the job, Cáñez finds it rewarding and has no plans to abandon his superhero persona:
“I do it all for the love of art, to do something for the city. Financially speaking, Peatónito hasn’t earned me more than the fee for a few talks and a couple of trips. That’s it. The best thing is the satisfaction of communicating a message in a powerful way.”

.

America wins battle - loses war

SUBHEAD: Our military is the greatest misappropriation of resources in the world.

By Juan Wilson on 8 April 2015 for Island Breath -
(http://islandbreath.blogspot.com/2015/04/america-wins-battle-loses-war.html)


Image above: NASA photograph of a now lifeless Martian surface. A recent analysis has revealed that Mars contains about as much water under the surface as Earth does, indicating a very water-rich history. From (http://news.softpedia.com/news/Mars-Contains-Vast-Amount-of-Water-Within-277307.shtml).

I was born at the end of World War II. The United States, with its vast oil supplies, unrivaled industrial capacity, and safe isolation from its enemies, was able to decisively end that war in 1945 with the use of nuclear weapons used against civilian populations.

The US was virtually undamaged physically from the war and became the world's "Peacekeeper", "Banker" and "Philanthropist" while defending the world from godless Communism. A key part of that strategy was the "Atoms for Peace" initiative. Or so they told us.

What really happened was America had a green light to financialize and industrialize the planet in our own image and for our own profit. And god forbid you got in the way of progress. Do you remember the 1960's motto "Progress is our most important product." 

If your as old as I am you might remember those words were delivered by Ronald Reagan as the spokesperson for the General Electric Company -  that's the company that spread nuclear power plants across the "free world" and produced the eternal disaster that is the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station for the Japanese.

How do you make a reluctant world kowtow to the will of GE, Westinghouse, Monsanto, DuPont, DOW, Ratheon, Boeing, Lockheed, Grumman, United Technologies, General Dynamics et al?

You point a gun at them!

I'm sure I don't have to tell you this, but America has become a war mongering player on the world stage. Since our last official declared war (World War II) that ended 70 years ago we have been in so many large and small conflicts that it would be hard to list or distinguish between them.

Wikipedia lists over 120 conflicts the US has been involved in the last six decades. See (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_military_operations#1945.E2.80.931949). That averages about two a year. Some, like our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, have gone on for decades. What are we working on now? War in Yemen and the Ukraine.

What's it cost?

The proposed US military budget (including veteran's benefits) for 2015 amounts to over 60% of all discretionary spending that includes:
  • Transportation
  • Science
  • Government
  • International Affairs
  • Energy
  • Environment
  • Social Security
  • Unemployment - Labor
  • Medicare - Health
  • Education 
  • Food - Agriculture
In fact, not one of these items rises to a tenth of our expenditures on the military.


Image above: Pie chart of US discretionary spending budget proposed for 2015. From (https://www.nationalpriorities.org/campaigns/military-spending-united-states/?gclid=CN6Go4Pk6cQCFZBgfgodeiQAig).

What's goes it get us?

Not much when you consider the reaction of two young Chechen brothers. They were able bring a large American metropolitan area to its knees with two pressure cooker bombs hidden in backpacks during a public event. Two years ago Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Anzorovich detonated home made devises at the finish of the Boston Marathon and killed three people, injuring over 250 others.

Subsequently the city was put under martial law enforced by US military and Homeland Security forces in conjunction with local and state police and emergency personnel. The constitutional rights of citizen's were abrogated until one surviving suspect was injured and arrested.

One lesson learned is that it doesn't take much for Americans to lose their freedoms if even one or two people act effectively. The terrorists won - again.

As horrific as the Boston Bombing was it pales with many violent scenes on America's streets during our history.

There is little to refute that the recent militarization of our local police after the World Trade Center attack on 9/11/2001 and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security has turned the muzzle of US weapons on American civilians.

That and the revelation of the NSA's massive illegal spying on US citizens brings one to the conclusion that Americans as well as much of the rest of the world is the enemy of the United States military-intelligence-industrial complex.

It's not new to find out that our own citizenry are the enemey.

The Battle of Blair Mountain was one of the largest civil uprisings in United States history and the largest armed rebellion since the American Civil War. For five days in late August and early September 1921, in Logan County, West Virginia, some 10,000 armed coal miners confronted 3,000 lawmen and strikebreakers, called the Logan Defenders,who were backed by coal mine operators during an attempt by the miners to unionize the southwestern West Virginia coalfields.

The battle ended after approximately one million rounds were fired, and the United States Army intervened by presidential order. See (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain).

Not to worry...

One thing that can be said for the US military is that after WWII it has been increasingly ineffective in getting the results it wants by achieving its goals. By that I mean that its major confrontations that include Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Iran, Nicaragua, Lebanon, Iraq, and Afghanistan have left our enemies stronger and us poorer.

If you want to know what defeat looks like just revisit the history of our panicked retreat 40 years from Saigon, South Vietnam, in April of 1975.

It was not too long after that that we started arming the the Mujahiddeen (along with the Saudi Osama Bin Laden) in Afghanistan with shoulder rocket launchers and techniques to take out the imperial Soviet military.

The Mujahiddeen ended in the Taliban taking over Afghanistan and making it a Muslim State that included executing women in soccer stadiums because they were wearing the wrong clothes. 

Lesson learned: Bin Laden organized Al Queda in Afghanistan and turned his attention to the imperial America in September of 2001. America has been fighting in Afghanistan ever since - and losing. Yes we pushed back on the Taliban and eventually killed Osama a decade later in Pakistan, but by that time Al Queda had metastasized throughout the Muslim world.

It has recently morphed into something even worse for the USA and the world - The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS)  has ushered in the sport of hacking off peoples heads on YouTube.

It seems that each iteration of "victory" for America in Afghanistan yields a worse situation -  Mujahiddeen > Taliban > Al Queda > ISIS. Can it get worse. You bet.

Right now the US military is backing the Saudis (sunni) as they bomb the Houthi (shia) in Yemen back to the Stone Age. One problem is that both sides of the conflict now have hundreds of millions of dollars in US weapons to use on each other (or us). Moreover, The Iranian (shia) navy is on the scene and as of two hours ago John Kerry (the haircut in search of a brain) warned Iran against backing the Yemen rebels, as Tehran seems defiant

So it goes. One thing is sure. America will be taken down another peg no matter what happens.

The rest of the world is working feverishly to get off the dollar and obligations to the USA before we go down in flames. And we do seem in a fever to go somewhere nasty.

The Good News
The world economy is stalling. Resource extraction is slowing as energy returned on energy expended is making it uneconomical to find new fossil fuels. Demand for industrialized products has been dropping as consumers are tapped out and losing interest in the game.

The financial bubbles leveraged on debt are about to burst. Before they do we should be allocating our military budget to mitigating the damage we have already caused to the planet.

If we play are cards right we might be able to get through this before we turn the Earth into Mars.

.