Archive for the ‘Bureaucracy’ Category
ABC NEWS, AIRLINE PASSENGER RIGHTS, AIRLINES, AIRTRAN, AMERICAN AIRLINES, AMERICAN CUSTOMER SATISFACTION INDEX, BUSINESS INSIDER, CBS NEWS, CNN, COMPLAINT LETTERS, CONSUMER RIGHTS, DAVE CARROLL, DELTA AIRLINES, FACEBOOK, ITUNES, JETBLUE AIRWAYS, KGB, LEISHA HAILEY, NBC NEWS, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, SOUTHWEST AIRLINES, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE PRINCE, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, UNITED BREAKS GUITARS, US AIRWAYS, YOUTUBE
2014 ELECTIONS, ABC NEWS, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, ANDREW JOHNSON, BARACK OBAMA, CBS NEWS, CIVIL WAR, CNN, EDWIN STANTON, FACEBOOK, ILLEGAL ALIENS, illegal immigration, IMPEACHMENT, JASON CHAFFETZ, MITCH MCCONNELL, NBC NEWS, RECONSTRUCTION, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. SENATE
ABC NEWS, CBS NEWS, CNN, FACEBOOK, FRATERNITIES, GEORGIA TECH, NBC NEWS, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, PHI KAPPA TAU, RAPE, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTONPOST, TWITTER, USA TODAY
Niccolo Machiavelli, the father of political science, never attended a university or enrolled in one of its fraternities.
And it’s obvious that members of the Phi Kappa Tau (PKT) fraternity at Georgia Tech never read Machiavelli’s advice on not incriminating yourself through your own writing.
In his masterwork, The Discourses, more than 500 years ago, Machiavelli warned:
I have heard many wise men say that you may talk freely with any one man about everything, for unless you have committed yourself in writing, the “Yes” of one man is worth as much as the “No” of another.
And therefore one should guard most carefully against writing, as against a dangerous rock, for nothing will convict you quicker than your own handwriting….
You may escape, then, from the accusation of a single individual, unless you are convicted by some writing or other pledge, which you should be careful never to give.
On October 30, two civil lawsuits were filed in an Atlanta court against the Phi Kappa Tau fraternity for fostering a “pro-rape” mentality among brothers at Georgia Tech.
The lawsuits claim this attitude went unchecked, and led to at least two sexual assaults. Each lawsuit was filed on behalf of an anonymous woman.
With Machiavelli’s counsel in mind, consider how juries in two civil lawsuits will soon consider the following lyrics of a “traditional song” of the fraternity.
Sung to the tune of “The Candy Man,” it goes:
GRAPHIC LANGUAGE BELOW!
Who can take two ice picks
Stick’em in her ears
Ride her like a Harley while he pokes her in the rear.
Who can take some acid
Pour it on her twat
Then watch the cunt muffin rot
Who can take a blender
Stick it in her cunt
Turn the sucker on and purrate (sic) her little twat.
Who can take a chainsaw
Saw the bitch in two
Take the top half and give the bottom half to you
According to the lawsuit, the minutes for a March 6, 2013 house meeting stated:
“Rape is good.”
“[Fraternity member] is down for rape.”
“Blacklight party this Friday! Watch out for rapebait.”
In October, 2013, a leaked email from the fraternity’s chairman brought PKT national–and unwanted–recognition. It outlined seven steps for hooking up with women: “Encounter, Engage, Escalate, Erection, Excavate, Ejaculate, Expunge.”
It then noted, “IF ANYTHING EVER FAILS, GO GET MORE ALCOHOL. I want to see everyone succeed at the next couple parties.”
The suits claim an unnamed PKT member in January raped an unnamed woman by following the description laid out in the “rapebait” email: He and other fraternity members “plied” her with a large amount of alcohol until she blacked out.
The same PKT brother followed the same protocol when he sexually assaulted another young woman, who was physically incapacitated from alcohol in November 2012 at a fraternity-sponsored event, according to the lawsuits.
In April, 2014, Georgia Tech’s chapter of PKT was disbanded for three years after the “rapebait” email surfaced.
Naturally, PKT has a response to the lawsuits. Its communication director, Tyler Wash, quickly issued a statement:
“The Fraternity is disappointed that the plaintiffs’ attorneys chose to exploit the hypersensitivity of today’s college environment toward sexual assault by drafting the complaints in a manner that sensationalizes completely inappropriate statements, while at the same time alleging that a Georgia Tech student committed criminal rapes of two different women.”
In short: Filing this lawsuit on behalf of two women who claim they were raped by fraternity members takes unfair advantage of the newly-heightened awareness of rape on college campuses.
The PKT national chapter, the local chapter and the chapter adviser are named as defendants in both lawsuits
Interestingly, the lawsuits haven’t been filed against the perpetrator. The student was pursued by the school and expelled.
Nor have the lawsuits been filed against Georgia Tech. Yet it’s well-known that colleges often fail to police the activities of campus fraternities, claiming these are private organizations that fall outside their jurisdiction.
While the upcoming trials will open a window on the darker side of campus fraternities, they will not end the victimization of women by members of such fraternities.
A 2007 study found that fraternity men were three times more likely to commit rape than other men on college campuses.
According to John Foubert, one of the authors of that study: “What we found was highly instructive. Before they got to college, fraternity men were no different from other male students. They committed the same number of incidents of sexual assaults before college.
“But here’s the difference. Guys who joined a fraternity then committed three times as many sexual assaults as those who didn’t join. It is reasonable to conclude that fraternities turn men into guys more likely to rape.
“Our study confirmed that fraternities provide the culture of male peer support for violence against women that permits bad attitudes to become treacherous behavior.”
BICYCLES, CHRIS BUCCHERE, CRITICAL MASS, FACEBOOK, GEORGE GASCON, LAW ENFORCEMENT, PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, SAN FRANCISCO, SAN FRANCISCO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, SAN FRANCISCO MAYOR'S OFFICE, SAN FRANCISCO POLICE DEPARTMENT, TWITTER
San Bruno resident Sutchi Hui, 71, was visiting San Francisco when Death found him-–just before 8 a.m. on March 29, 2012.
No doubt he felt safe before he died. After all, he was walking through a crosswalk in the affluent Castro District, one of the city’s safest areas.
And it was there that bicyclist Chris Bucchere plowed into him.
Bucchere, a software engineer, was also hospitalized for injuries in the crash. Later that day, he posted his thoughts about the accident to the Mission Cycling AM Riders Google group.
“I was already way too committed to stop. The light turned red as I was cruising through the middle of the intersection and then, almost instantly, the southern crosswalk on Market and Castro filled up with people coming from both directions….so, in a nutshell, blammo.
“I couldn’t see a line through the crowd and I couldn’t stop, so I laid it down and just plowed through the crowded crosswalk in the least-populated place I could find.”
Bucchere said he lost consciousness and awoke five minutes later. Someone told him that a 71-year-old injured pedestrian had been taken to the hospital.
“I remember seeing a RIVER of blood on the asphalt, but it wasn’t mine,” Bucchere wrote. “I really hope he ends up OK.”
Bucchere dedicated the post to his helmet, which “died in heroic fashion today as my head slammed into the tarmac…. May she die knowing that because she committed the ultimate sacrifice, her rider can live on and ride on. Can I get an amen? Amen.”
An “amen” would also be in order for the cause of justice.
Although prosecuted by the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office, what Bucchere got was the following sentence: Three years of probation and 1,000 hours of community service. He would not serve any jail time.
He might as well have posted that because his helmet made “the ultimate sacrifice, her rider can live on and ride on–and kill on.”
The District Attorney’s office–which has one of the worst conviction records in the country–lost no time in congratulating itself.
“Our goal is to send a message to cyclists about safety,” D.A. George Gascon said. “Just because you are riding a bicycle doesn’t mean all bets are off. All of the rules of the road that apply to everyone else apply to you, too.”
Gascon said Hui’s family did not want to see Bucchere imprisoned. Since prosecutors didn’t expect a judge to sentence him to jail, they offered probation and community service in the plea deal.
That’s what the life of a pedestrian is worth in San Francisco.
In July, 2011, bicyclist Randolph Ang, 23, ran a red light on the Embarcadero–and slammed into 68-year-old Dionette Cherney. She later died of her injuries.
In March, 2012, Ang pleaded guilty to one misdemeanor charge of vehicular manslaughter, as part of an agreement with prosecutors.
Ang faced up to a year in county jail, but a judge sentenced him to three years’ probation and 500 hours of community service, and ordered him to pay $15,375 in restitution to the Cherney family.
According to the website of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition:
“Pedestrians Always Have the Right of Way. In the crosswalk or not, bike riders and drivers are required to yield to pedestrians.”
“Stay on the Streets. It’s illegal and unsafe to ride on the sidewalk if you are over the age of 13.”
So much for the official version.
In reality, pedestrians risk their lives whenever they use the sidewalk–especially on tourist-crowded Market Street.
And what role do police play in enforcing the bike laws? None.
At best, a San Francisco cop might stop an law-breaking bicyclist and give him a citation. This amounts to a bicycle traffic ticket. The bike isn’t confiscated.
Most cops patrol in patrol cars. If they see a bicyclist whizzing down a sidewalk, they aren’t going to cut him off and slap handcuffs on him.
If police show no interest in protecting pedestrians, it’s largely because the Mayor and Board of Supervisors clearly favor the rights of law-breaking bicyclists over those of law-abiding pedestrians and drivers.
The greatest proof of this comes on the last Friday of every month. It’s called Critical Mass.
In this event, hundreds of bicyclists deliberately–at the height of evening rush hour–overwhelm the streets of downtown San Francisco, bringing vehicular and pedestrian traffic to a halt.
Founded in 1992 in San Francisco, the purpose of Critical Mass is not formally stated but nevertheless clear: To protest against those who use cars and public transit–and intimidate their riders and pedestrians alike.
Critical Mass riders often use a tactic known as “corking” to maintain the cohesion of the group: A few riders block traffic from side roads so that the mass can race through red lights without interruption.
Cars, buses and pedestrians are expected to wait patiently for however long these self-indulgent thugs-on-bikes flood the streets.
In March, 2010, reports in local media claimed that then-Police Chief George Gascon was considering shutting down Critical Mass.
Four years later, the bike-thuggies continue to tie up traffic and threaten the safety of any pedestrians stupid enough to think they have a legal right to stroll sidewalks and cross streets.
ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ANDREW JACKSON, CBS NEWS, CNN, COLLEGE FOOTBALL, DREW PEARSON, DWIGHT EISENHOWER, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, GEORGE C. MARSHALL, HARRY S. TRUMAN, JERRY SANDUSKY, JOE PATERNO, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, JOSEPH STALIN, LOUIS FREEH, NBC NEWS, NIKE, NIKITA KHRUSHCHEV, PENN STATE UNIVERSITY, SOVIET UNION, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, THIRD REICH, TWITTER, YEVGENEY YEVTUSHENKO
“One man with courage,” said frontier general Andrew Jackson, “makes a majority.”
Yet it’s amazing how many “heroes” come out of the woodwork once the danger is safely past.
Joseph Stalin dominated the Soviet Union from 1928 to 1953. He held absolute power twice as long as Adolf Hitler–whose Third Reich lasted only 12 years.
Above all, he was responsible for the deaths of at least 20,000,000 men, women and children:
- At the hands of the executioners of the NKVD (later named the KGB).
- In exile–usually in Siberia–in Soviet penal camps.
- Of man-made starvation brought on by Stalin’s forced “collective-farm” policies.
Then, the unthinkable happened–Stalin finally died on March 5, 1953.
Almost three years later–on February 25, 1956–Stalin’s successor, Nikita Khrushchev, shocked the 20th Party Congress of the Soviet Union with a bombshell announcement: Stalin–the “Wise Leader and Teacher”–had been a murderous despot.
Among his crimes:
- He had created a regime based on “suspicion, fear and terror.”
- His massive purges of the officer corps had almost destroyed the Red Army–thus inviting Hitler’s 1941 invasion, which killed at least 20 million Soviet citizens.
- He had allied himself with Hitler in 1939 and ignored repeated warnings of the coming Nazi invasion.
Naturally, Khrushchev didn’t advertise the role he had played as one of Stalin’s most trusted and brutal henchmen.
Over the ensuing years, many of the statues and portraits of Stalin that had dotted the Soviet Union like smallpox scars were quietly taken down. The city of Stalingrad–which Stalin had renamed from its original name of Tsaritsyn–became Volgograd.
Then, in 1961, Stalin’s corpse was removed from its prominent spot in the Lenin mausoleum and reburied in a place for lesser heroes of the Russian Revolution.
The young poet, Yevgeney Yevtushenko, noted the occasion in his famous poem, “The Heirs of Stalin.” Its gist: Stalin the tyrant was dead, but his followers still walked the earth–and lusted for a return to power.
Something similar happened in the United States around the same time.
From 1950 to 1954, Wisconsin Senator Joseph R. McCarthy terrorized the nation, hurling unfounded accusations and leaving ruined careers in his wake.
Among those civilians and government officials he slandered as Communists were:
- President Harry S. Truman
- President Dwight D. Eisenhower
- Broadcast journalist Edward R. Murrow
- Secretary of State George C. Marshall
- Columnist Drew Pearson
Finally, in 1954, McCarthy overreached himself and accused the U.S. Army of being a hotbed of Communist traitors. Joseph Welch, counsel for the Army, destroyed McCarthy’s credability in a now-famous exchange.
Later that year, the Senate censured McCarthy, and he rapidly declined in power and health.
Senatorial colleagues who had once courted his support now avoided him; they left the Senate when he rose to speak. Reporters who had once fawned on him for his latest sensational slander now ignored him.
Eisenhower–who had sought McCarthy’s support during his 1952 race for President–joked that “McCarthyism” was now “McCarthywasm.”
Fast-forward to July 12, 2012–and the release of former FBI Director Louie Freeh’s report on serial pedophile Jerry Sandusky. As the assistant football coach at Penn State University (PSU), he had used the football facilities to sexually attack numerous young boys.
But Sandusky was regarded as more than a second-banana. He received Assistant Coach of the Year awards in 1986 and 1999, and authored several books about his coaching experiences.
In 1977, Sandusky founded The Second Mile, a non-profit charity serving underprivileged, at-risk youth.
“Our most saddening and sobering finding is the total disregard for the safety and welfare of Sandusky’s child victims by the most senior leaders at Penn State,” Freeh stated.
College football is a $2.6 billion-a-year business. And Penn State is one of its premiere brands, with revenue of $70 million in 2010.
PSU’s seven-month internal investigation, headed by Freeh, revealed:
- Joe Paterno, head coach of the Penn State Nittany Lions, was aware of a 1998 criminal investigation of Sandusky.
- So was president Graham Spanier, athletic director Tim Curley and vice president Gary Schultz.
- In 2001, then-graduate assistant Mike McQueary reported to Paterno that he’d seen Sandusky attacking a boy in the shower.
- Paterno, Spanier, Curley and Schultz then conspired to cover up for Sandusky.
- The rapes of these boys occurred in the Lasch Building–where Paterno had his office.
- A janitor who had witnessed a rape in 2000 said he had feared losing his job if he told anyone about it. “It would be like going against the President of the United States,” Freeh said at a press conference.
In 2011, Sandusky was arrested and charged with sexually abusing young boys over a 15-year period. On June 22, 2012, he was convicted on 45 of the 48 charges. He will likely spend the rest of his life in prison.
On the day the Freeh report was released, Nike–a longtime sponsor for Penn State–announced that it would remove Paterno’s name from the child care center at its world headquarters in Beaverton, Oregon.
ABC NEWS, CBS NEWS, CNN, JOSEPH STALIN, KIM JONG-UN, LAVRENTI BERIA, NBC NEWS, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, NIKITA KHRUSHCHEV, NORTH KOREA, ROBERT PAYNE, SOVIET UNION, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE PRINCE, THE RISE AND FALL OF STALIN, THE WASHINGTON POST, USA TODAY, WARFARIN
According to an October 29 story on National Public Radio, at least 10 North Korean officials have been executed for watching South Korean soap operas.
If true, this brings to 50 the number of people murdered by North Korean dictator KIim Jong-Un for committing this “crime”.
Kim Jong-Un and his generals
Sources for Bloomberg News speculated they were likely purged for having close ties to his uncle, Jang Song Thae, who was executed in 2013.
Kim inherited control of the country after his father, Kim Jong-Il, died in 2011. Since then, he has ruthlessly eliminated all possible opposition.
“Kim Jong Un is trying to establish absolute power and strengthen his regime with public punishments,” Yang Moo Jin, a professor at the University of North Korean Studies in Seoul, told Bloomberg. “However, frequent purges can create side effects.”
Niccolo Machiavelli, the father of political science, couldn’t have said it better.
In fact, Machiavelli did say it–in Chapter Eight of The Prince, his famous work on the realities of politics, he tackled the subject: “Of Those Who Have Attained the Position of Prince by Villany.”
“…In taking a state, the conqueror must arrange to commit all his cruelties at once, so as not to have to recur to them very day, and so as to be able, by not making fresh changes, to reassure people and win them over by benefiting them.
“Whoever acts otherwise, either through timidity or bad counsels, is always obliged to stand with knife in hand, and can never depend on his subjects, because they, owing to continually fresh injuries, are unable to depend upon him.”
Another Communist dictator–Joseph Stalin–may have paid the price for violating this counsel.
Throughout his 30-year reign over the Soviet Union, Stalin was responsible for the deaths of at least 20 million men, women and children.
These deaths resulted from executions, a man-made famine through the forced collectivation of harvests, deportations and imprisonment in Gulag camps.
Robert Payne, the British historian, vividly portrayed the crimes of this murderous tyrant in his brilliant 1965 biography, The Rise and Fall of Stalin.
According to Payne, Stalin–who died on March 5, 1953–was planning yet another purge during the last weeks of his life. This would be “a holocaust greater than any he had planned before.
“The chistka [purge] had become a ritual like a ceremonial cleansing of a temple performed every three or four years according to ancient laws.
“The first chistka had taken place during the early months of the [Russian] revolution. It had proved so salutory that periodical bloodbaths were incorporated in the unwritten laws of the state.
“This time there would be a chistka to end all chistkas, a purging of the entire body of the state from top to bottom. No one, not even the highest officials, was to be spared.
“…The men who had been his closest companions and most willing executioners, would be the first to fall, followed by the leaders of the second rank, then of the third and fourth…until there was no one in the entire country who had not felt the touch of the healing knife.”
Then, on January 13, 1953, the Soviet Union’s two government-controlled newspapers–Pravda (“Truth”) and Izvestiya (“News”)–announced that a siniser plot by Jewish doctors had been uncovered.
Its alleged object: No less than the murder of Joseph Stalin himself.
Nine doctors, said Pravda, had so far been arrested.
Stalin’s closest associates–veteran observers of past purges–quickly realized that another was about to descend. And there could be no doubt who its chief victims would be.
Yet Stalin did nothing to calm their fears. He often summoned his “comrades” to the Kremlin for late-night drinking bouts, where he freely humiliated them.
“What would you do without Stalin?” he asked one night. “You’d be like blind kittens.”
Then, on March 4, 1953, Moscow Radio announced “the misfortune which has overtaken our Party and the people–the serious illness of Comrade J.V. Stalin.
“During the night of March 1-2, while in his Moscow apartment, Comrade Stalin suffered a cerebral hemorrhage affecting vital areas of the brain.”
Death came to Stalin on March 5. Officially, the cause was ruled a cerebral hemorrhage. Stalin was 73 and in poor health from a lifetime of smoking and little exercise.
So it’s possible he died of natural causes.
But it’s equally possible that he died of unnatural ones.
In the 2004 book, Stalin’s Last Crime, Vladimir P. Naumov, a Russian historian, and Jonathan Brent, a Yale University Soviet scholar, assert that he might have been poisoned.
If this happened, the occasion was during a final dinner with four members of the Politburo: Lavrenti P. Beria, chief of the secret police; Georgi M. Malenkov, Stalin’s immediate successor; Nikita S. Khrushchev, who eventually rose to the top spot; and Nikolai Bulganin.
The authors believe that, if Stalin was poisoned, the most likely suspect was Beria. And the method: Slipping warfarin, a tasteless and colorless blood thinner also used as a rat killer, into his glass of wine.
Lavrenti P. Peria
In Khrushchev’s 1970 memoirs, he quotes Beria as telling Vyacheslav M. Molotov, another Polituro member, two months after Stalin’s death: “I did him in! I saved all of you.”
Kim Jong Un had better hope that Communist history doesn’t repeat itself.
ABC NEWS, ASHLEY JUDD, BARACK OBAMA, BOB WOODWARD, CBS NEWS, CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, CNN, DEEP THROAT, FACEBOOK, FBI, FORTY-SEVEN PERCENT, MITCH MCCONNELL, MITT ROMNEY, NBC NEWS, REPUBLICAN PARTY, RICHARD NIXON, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DENVER POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK POST, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, USA TODAY, W. MARK FELT, WATERGATE
President Barack Obama and Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney raised and spent millions of dollars for campaign ads. They logged thousands of miles, crisscrossing the nation, speaking to millions of Americans.
And yet, when the 2012 Presidential race finally ended on November 6, 2012, history recorded the contest was settled with a single video.
It was the infamous “47%” video of Romney speaking–for once, truthfully–at a private fundraiser:
“Well, there are 47% of the people who will vote for the President no matter what. All right? There are 47% who are with him.
“Who are dependent upon government. Who believe that–that they are victims. Who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them.
“Who believe that they’re entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing, to you name it. But that’s–it’s an entitlement.
“…These are people who pay no income tax. 47% of Americans pay no income taxes. So our message of low taxes doesn’t connect. And he’ll be out there talking about tax cuts for the rich.”
A great deal of speculation has centered on: Who filmed it?
And in April, 2013, history repeated itself–with another Republican caught telling the ugly truth behind closed doors.
In this case, it was Kentucky United States Senator Mitch McConnell. A microphone (probably stationed outside his Senate office) caught him discussing how to attack Ashley Judd’s mental health if the actress decided to challenge him in 2014.
“She’s clearly, this sounds extreme, but she is emotionally unbalanced,” a McConnell aide said. “I mean, it’s been documented….She’s suffered some suicidal tendencies. She was hospitalized for 42 days when she had a mental breakdown in the 90s.”
“I assume most of you have played the game Whac-A-Mole,” said McConnell. “This is the Whac-A-Mole period of the campaign…when anybody sticks their head up, do them out.”
McConnell, the Senate Minority Leader, refused to answer reporters’ questions about whether an opponent’s mental health or religious beliefs are fair game in a political campaign.
Instead, he accused “the political left” of mounting “quite a Nixonian move.” An ironic charge, considering that Nixon and McConnell rose to power within the same political party.
As in the case of the Mitt Romney videotape, the focus of the press quickly turned to: Who recorded it?
But this totally missed the point.
It doesn’t matter who provides vital information. What does matter is: Is that information accurate?
In Romney’s case, it opened a window into a world seldom-seen by voters: The world of big-league donors and their money-grubbing political solicitors.
In McConnell’s case, it cast light on the how entrenched politicians ruthlessly defend their turf.
It should be clear that money-grubbing politicians have two versions of campaign speaking: One for donors whose money they seek, and another for the public whose votes they seek.
Rich and greed-obsessed donors (unlike poor and ignorant voters) are too smart to be fobbed off with appeals to their fears and prejudices. They expect a tangible return for their support–namely:
- Lower (preferably no) taxes
- Freedom to pollute
- Freedom to pay their employees the lowest possible wages
- Freedom to treat their employees like serfs
- Freedom to churn out shoddy or even dangerous goods
So what a candidate says in private, to his wealthy donors–or his campaign strategists–reflects what he really means and intends to do.
A similar frenzy of speculation centered on the identity of “Deep Throat”–the legendary source for Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward during the Watergate scandal. For decades, this proved a favorite guessing game for Washington reporters, politicians and government officials.
Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein working on Watergate
In the end, “Deep Throat” turned out to be W. Mark Felt, assistant director of the FBI.
Commentators have endlessly debated his motives for leaking crucial Watergate evidence that ultimately ended the corrupt Presidency of Richard Nixon.
And, in the end, despite all the theories, it didn’t matter.
Felt provided Washington Woodward with the evidence necessary to keep the Watergate investigations going–by both the Post and the FBI.
W. Mark Felt
Thus, the question making the rounds about the McConnell discussion shouldn’t have been: Who taped it?
It should have been: How can more private fundraisers and political strategy sessions be penetrated and recorded–so voters can learn the truth about those who would become our elected rulers?
Definitely, those who specialize in “opposition research” should be thinking hard about this.
Private investigators–who regularly unearth secrets others want to keep secret–might also take an interest in this line of work.
And news organizations should offer financial rewards to those who provide such secret information.
With the advent of billionaires trying to buy the Presidency, and the unwillingness of Congress and the Supreme Court to stop the flow of unsavory money into politics, this may be our only chance to preserve what is left of the Republic.
Anyone who’s ever turned on a light to find roaches scurrying quickly over a kitchen floor knows the truth of this.
Turn on the lights–and watch the roaches scurry away.
ABC NEWS, AIRLINES, BUSINESS, CBS NEWS, CNN, COMPUTER SECURITY, CREDIT CARDS, CYBERSECURITY, DAIRY QUEEN, FACEBOOK, JOHN HERING, JPMORGAN/CHASE, LILY TOMLIN, LOOKOUT, LUGGAGE THEFTS, MA BELL, NBC NEWS, ROWAN & MARTIN'S LAUGH-IN, STAPLES, TARGET, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, USA TODAY
Comedian Lily Tomlin rose to fame on Rowan & Martin’s Laugh-In as Ernestine, the rude, sarcastic switchboard operator for Ma Bell.
She would tap into customers’ calls, interrupt them, make snide remarks about their personal lives. And her victims included celebrities as much as run-of-the-mill customers.
On one occasion, she called then-FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, letting him know that “it really takes a Hoover [vacuum cleaner] to dig up the dirt.”
She introduced herself as working for “the phone company, serving everyone from presidents and kings to the scum of the earth.”
But perhaps the line for which her character is best remembered was: “We don’t care. We don’t have to. We’re the phone company.”
Watching Ernestine on Laugh-In was a blast for millions of TV viewers during the mid-1960s and early 70s. But confronting such corporate arrogance in real-life is no laughing matter.
Clearly, too many companies take the same attitude as Ernestine: “We don’t care. We don’t have to.”
This is especially true for companies that are supposed to safeguard their customers’ most sensitive information–such as their credit card numbers, addresses, emails and phone numbers.
An October 22 “commentary” published in Forbes magazine raises the highly disturbing question: “Cybersecurity: Does Corporate America Really Care?”
And the answer is apparently: No.
Its author is John Hering, co-founder and executive director of Lookout, which bills itself as “the world leader in mobile security for consumers and enterprises alike.”
October proved a bad month for credit card-using customers of Kmart, Staples and Dairy Queen–all of which have reported data breaches involving the theft of credit card numbers.
Earlier breaches had hit Target, Home Depot and JPMorgan/Chase.
“One thing is clear,” writes Hering. “CEOs need to put security on their strategic agendas alongside revenue growth and other issues given priority in boardrooms.”
Hering warns that “CEOs don’t seem to be making security a priority.” And he offers several reasons for this:
- The sheer number of data compromises;
- Relatively little consumer outcry;
- Almost no impact on the companies’ standing on Wall Street;
- Executives may consider such breaches part of the cost of doing business.
“There’s a short-term mindset and denial of convenience in board rooms,” writes Hering.
“Top executives don’t realize their systems are vulnerable and don’t understand the risks. Sales figures and new products are top of mind; shoring up IT systems aren’t.”
Anyone who’s ever watched the operation of an airport luggage carousel has seen this principle in action.
If you’ve checked your luggage, then you need to head for the baggage carousel as quickly as you can get out of the airplane.
Because if you don’t get there in time to grab your own bag, there’s a good chance that someone else will.
The reason? There’s no security officer there to make sure that your luggage goes only to you, and not to someone else.
Experienced baggage thieves know this. So they wait at the luggage carousel for a piece of luggage to go around two or three times. If no one collects it, they assume the owner isn’t there yet–and make off with it.
Sure, there might not be anything of value in it–from the thief’s viewpoint, anyway.
No expensive cameras.
For the thief, it’s a setback–but only a minor one. He simply dumps the luggage and perhaps goes back to the carousel for another shot at finding a bag stuffed with valuables.
But for the traveler-victim, it’s a disaster.
Most–if not all–of his clothes are gone.
Anything personal–such as gifts he was bringing for friends or relatives–is gone.
So are any vitally-needed medications–if he was foolish enough to store these in his suitcase instead of a carry-on bag.
And does the airline care?
Don’t be stupid.
Why should they? They got your money when you bought the plane ticket.
That’s all they wanted from you. And the truth is, that’s all they’ve ever wanted from you–even during the “golden age of air travel” before airplanes became “flying buses.”
The skies of United were never so friendly that airlines felt an obligation to ensure that their passengers’ luggage was actually waiting for its rightful owners.
And the same principle–or lack of principle–applies with such companies as banks, department stores and insurance companies that hold the most private information of their customers.
There are two ways corporations can be forced to start behaving responsibly on this issue.
First, some smart attorneys need to start filing class-action lawsuits against companies that don’t take steps to safeguard their customers’ private information.
Second, there must be Federal legislation to ensure that multi-million-dollar fines are levied against such companies–and especially their CEOs–when such data breaches occur.
Only then will the CEO mindset of “We don’t care, we don’t have to” be replaced with: “We care, because our heads will roll if we don’t.”
ABC NEWS, CBS NEWS, CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, CNN, FACEBOOK, INTERROGATION, MIRANDA VS. ARIZONA, NBC NEWS, POLICE, THE DENVER POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT, USA TODAY
Ever heard of “polygraph by copier”?
If you haven’t, here’s how it works:
A detective loads three sheets of paper into a Xerox machine.
“Truth” has been typed onto the first sheet.
“Truth” has been typed onto the seond sheet.
“Lie” has been typed onto the third sheet.
Then a criminal suspect is led into the room and told to put his hand against the side of the machine.
“What is your name?” asks the detective.
The suspect gives it.
The detective hits the copy button, and a page comes out: “Truth.”
“Where do you live?” asks the detective.
The suspect gives an address, the detective again hits the copy button, and a second page appears: “Truth.”
Then comes the bonus question: “Did you or did you not kill Big Jim Tate on the evening of….?”
The suspect answers. The detective presses the copy button one last time, and the sheet appears: “Lie.”
“Well, well, well, you lying little bastard,” says the detective.
Convinced that the police have found some mysterious way to peer into the darkest recesses of his criminality, the suspect “gives it up” and makes a full confession.
Yes, contrary to what many believe, police can legally use deceit to obtain a confession.
In 1973, the Supreme Court ruled, in United States v. Russell: “Nor will the mere fact of deceit defeat a prosecution, for there are circumstances when the use of deceit is the only practicable law enforcement technique available.”
In that case, the Court narrowly upheld a conviction for methamphetamine production even though the defendant had argued entrapment.
So what types of interrogative deceit might a police officer use to develop admissible evidence of a suspect’s guilt?
The general rule is that deception can be used so long as it’s not likely to cause an innocent person to commit a crime or confess to a crime that s/he didn’t commit.
Consider the following examples:
- A detective is interviewing a suspect in a rape case. “Oh, that girl,” he says, thus implying that the victim was a slut and had it coming. The suspect, thinking he’s dealing with a sympathetic listener, starts bragging about his latest conquest–only to learn, too late, that his listener isn’t so simpatico after all.
- “We found your prints on the gun”–or on any number of other surfaces. Actually, there are few good places on a pistol to leave prints. And those that are left can be smeared. The same goes for other surfaces. But if a suspect can be led to believe the cops have his prints, a confession is often forthcoming.
- A police officer is interrogating a suspect in a murder case. “He came at you, didn’t he?” asks the cop. The suspect, who murdered the victim in cold blood, thinks he has an escape route. “Yeah, he came at me”–this confirming that, yes, he did kill the deceased.
- “Your partner just gave you up” is a favorite police strategen when there is more than one suspect involved. If one suspect can be made to “flip”–turn–against the other, the case is essentially wrapped up.
- Interrogating a bank robbery suspect, a cop might say: “We know you didn’t do the shooting, that you were only the wheelman.” This implies that the penalty for driving the getaway car is far less than that for killing someone during a robbery. In fact, criminal law allows every member of the conspiracy to be charged as a principal.
- “I don’t give a damn what you did,” says the detective. “Just tell me why you did it.” For some suspects, this offers a cathartic release, a chance to justify their guilt.
- The “good cop/bad cop” routine is known to everyone who has ever seen a police drama. Yet it continues to yield results so often it continues to be routinely used. “Look, I believe you,” says the “good” cop, “but my partner’s a real asshole. Just tell me what happened so we can clear this up and you can go.”
- “So,” says the detective, “why do you think the police believe you did it?” “I have no idea,” says the suspect, confident that he isn’t giving up anything that might come back to haunt him. “Well,” says the cop, “I guess you’ll just have to make something up.” Make something up sounds easy, but is actually a trap. The suspect may end up giving away details that could incriminate him–or lying so brazenly that his lies can be used against him.
So is there a best way for a suspect to deal with an invitation to waive his Miranda right to remain silent?
Yes, there is. It’s to refuse to say anything and to ask for permission to call a lawyer.
That’s the preferred method for Mafia hitmen–and accused police officers.
Any cop who finds himself under investigation by his department’s Internal Affairs unit automatically shuts up–and calls his lawyer.
Any other response–no matter how well-intentioned–may well result in a lengthy prison sentence.
ABC NEWS, AFGHANISTAN, ALCIBIADES, ALEXANDER THE GREAT, BILL O'REILLY, CBS NEWS, CNN, FACEBOOK, FOX NEWS CHANNEL, GATES OF FIRE, MERCENARIES, NBC NEWS, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, SPARTA, STEVEN PRESSFIELD, THE AFGHAN CAMPAIGN, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE O'REILLY FACTOR, THE PROFESSION, THE VIRTUES OF WAR, THE WASHINGTON POST, THERMOPYLAE, TIDES OF WAR, TWITTER
Bill O’Reilly, host of the Fox News Channel program The O’Reilly Factor, has offered his own solution to fighting terrorism: A multinational mercenary army, based on a NATO coalition and trained by the United States.
“We would select them, special forces would train them–25,000-man force to be deployed to fight on the ground against worldwide terrorism. Not just ISIS,” O’Reilly said on “CBS This Morning” on September 24.
Actually, O’Reilly’s idea is the subject of The Profession, a 2011 novel by bestselling author Steven Pressfield.
Pressfield made his literary reputation with four classic novels about classical Greece.
In Gates of Fire (1998) he explored the rigors and heroism of Spartan society–and the famous last stand of its 300 picked warriors at Thermopylae.
In Tides of War (2000) Pressfield depicted the rise and fall of Alcibiades, Athens’ greatest general, as he shifted his loyalties from that city to its arch-enemy, Sparta, and then to Persia, the enemy of both.
In The Virtues of War (2004) he took on the identity of Alexander the Great, explaining to his readers what it was like to command armies that swept across the known world, destroying all who dared oppose them.
Finally, in The Afghan Campaign (2006) Pressfield–this time from the viewpoint of a lowly Greek soldier–refought Alexander’s brutal, three-year anti-guerrilla campaign in Afghanistan.
But in The Profession, Pressfield created a seemingly plausible world set into the future of 2032. The book’s own dust jacket offers the best summary of its plot-line:
“The year is 2032. The third Iran-Iraq war is over. The 11/11 dirty bomb attack on the port of Long Beach, California is receding into memory. Saudi Arabia has recently quelled a coup. Russians and Turks are clashing in the Caspian Basin.
“Iranian armored units, supported by the satellite and drone power of their Chinese allies, have emerged from their enclaves in Tehran and are sweeping south attempting to recapture the resource rich territory that had been stolen from them, in their view, by Lukoil, BP, and ExxonMobil and their privately-funded armies.
“Everywhere military force is for hire. Oil companies, multi-national corporations and banks employ powerful, cutting-edge mercenary armies to control global chaos and protect their riches.
“Even nation states enlist mercenary forces to suppress internal insurrections, hunt terrorists, and do the black bag jobs necessary to maintain the new New World Order.
“Force Insertion is the world’s merc monopoly. Its leader is the disgraced former United States Marine General James Salter, stripped of his command by the president for nuclear saber-rattling with the Chinese and banished to the Far East.’
Salter appears as a hybrid of World War II General Douglas MacArthur and Iraqi War General Stanley McCrystal.
Like MacArthur, Salter has butted heads with his President–and paid dearly for it. Now his ambition is no less than to become President himself–by popular acclaim. And like McCrystal, he is a pure warrior who leads from the front and is revered by his men.
Salter seizes Saudi oil fields, then offers them as a gift to America. By doing so, he makes himself the most popular man in the country–and a guaranteed occupant of the White House.
And in 2032 the United States is a far different nation from the one its Founding Fathers created in 1776.
“Any time that you have the rise of mercenaries…society has entered a twilight era, a time past the zenith of its arc,” says Salter.
“The United States is an empire…but the American people lack the imperial temperament. We’re not legionaries, we’re mechanics. In the end the American Dream boils down to what? ‘I’m getting mine and the hell with you.’”
Americans, asserts Salter, have come to like mercenaries: “They’ve had enough of sacrificing their sons and daughters in the name of some illusory world order. They want someone else’s sons and daughters to bear the burden….
“They want their problems to go away. They want me to to make them go away.”
And so Salter will “accept whatever crown, of paper or gold, that my country wants to press upon me.”
More than 500 years ago, Niccolo Machiavelli warned of the dangers of relying on mercenaries:
“Mercenaries…are useless and dangerous. And if a prince holds on to his state by means of mercenary armies, he will never be stable or secure; for they are disunited, ambitious, without discipline, disloyal; they are brave among friends; among enemies they are cowards.
“They have neither the fear of God nor fidelity to men, and destruction is deferred only so long as the attack is. For in peace one is robbed by them, and in war by the enemy.”
Centuries ago, Niccolo Machiavelli issued a warning against relying on men whose first love is their own enrichment. Steven Pressfield, in a work of fiction, has given us a nightmarish vision of a not-so-distant America where “Name your price” has become the byward for an age.
Both warnings are well worth heeding.