Wednesday, March 25, 2015


News Clips For The Day


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/rare-earth-elements-china-monopoly-60-minutes-lesley-stahl/

Modern life's devices under China's grip?
Lesley Stahl
Mar 22 2015

From smartphones to cars and defense missiles, modern U.S. life depends on rare earth elements but China dominates the industry

Photograph – Mine in Mountain Pass, California
 CBS NEWS

Editor's Note: In September 2014, while we were working on this story, a Pentagon spokesman emailed us to say:

"The Department of Defense is confident in the ability of the defense industry to remain supplied with all necessary rare earths for U.S. defense acquisition programs. The Department continuously monitors and assesses its raw materials requirements, and if necessary, will again take action to ensure their availability to the defense industrial base."

That confidence is at odds with the Pentagon's Inspector General's Office, which issued a report on July 3, 2014 that concluded:

"DoD [Department of Defense] lacked a comprehensive and reliable process to assess REE supply and demand.... [and] As a result, DoD may not have identified all REEs with expected shortfalls, increasing the risk that those shortfalls will adversely affect critical weapons systems production in the DIB, and overall DoD readiness."

The following is a script from "Rare Earth Elements" which aired on March 22, 2015. Lesley Stahl is the correspondent. Graham Messick and Kevin Livelli, producers.

What do cars, precision-guided missiles and the television you're watching right now have in common? They all depend on something called rare earth elements, unusual metals that are sprinkled inside almost every piece of high-tech you can think of. Most people have never heard of them. But we have become so reliant on rare earths that a few years ago, an intense global power struggle broke out over their free flow. The reason is that one country has a virtual monopoly - roughly 90 percent -- of the mining, refining and processing of rare earths -- China. And in 2010, it used that power to disrupt the world's supply. It's especially troubling, because it was the United States that started the rare earth revolution in the first place.

It all began here at this mine in Mountain Pass, California, an hour west of Las Vegas, when geologists first identified rare earth elements deep in the Mojave Desert. They were considered geological oddities, until the 60s when it was discovered that one of these elements, "europium," enhanced the color red in TV sets and soon the rare earth industry was born.

Constantine Karayannopoulos: Rare earth chemistry is fascinating. There's so many more things that we could be doing with rare earths.

Constantine Karayannopoulos, chairman of Molycorp, which has owned and operated the Mountain Pass mine for six decades, took us to the heart of the operation.

Lesley Stahl: Is this considered a big mine?

Constantine Karayannopoulos: In terms of rare earth standards, yes. It's one of the biggest in the world.

Lesley Stahl: Are we actually walking on rare earth elements right now?

Constantine Karayannopoulos: We're physically on the ore body.

Lesley Stahl: We are right on it?

Constantine Karayannopoulos: It starts at the top of the mine, then comes down and we're walking on it and it goes in that direction.

So what are rare earth elements? If you ever took high school chemistry you learned that they're clumped together at the end of the periodic table...atomic numbers 57 through 71... and they have difficult-to-pronounce Greek or Scandanavian names.

Constantine Karayannopoulos: Lanthanum, cerium, neodymium, praseodymium, samarium, terbium...

Some of them are phosphorescent. Erbium amplifies light, and is used in fiber-optic cables. Gadolinium has magnetic properties and is used in MRI machines and X-rays. As for neodymium? You may be carrying some of it in your pocket.

Lesley Stahl: What I'm getting from you is that modern life depends on these elements.
Constantine Karayannopoulos: Absolutely.

Despite their name - rare earths are not rare. Small amounts can be found in your backyard. They're trapped in what looks like ordinary rock.

But there are only a few places on earth with concentrations high enough to mine.

Constantine Karayannopoulos: Rare earths normally are found in very, very low concentrations. This is probably running something in the 25 percent grade.

Lesley Stahl: That's good?

Constantine Karayannopoulos: Which is remarkable. To anyone who has ever worked with rare earths, this is a thing of beauty.

But getting the rare earths out of that rock is nasty business requiring toxic acids and lots of water. In fact, the mine was shut down by the state of California in 1998 after radioactive water seeped into the surrounding Mojave Desert from an underground pipe. The mine lay dormant for a decade, giving China an opportunity.

Lesley Stahl: So how did they pull it off? What were the factors that allowed them to basically take this away from us?

Dan McGroarty: Well, the advantage of lower labor costs, would be a place to start. Also, environmentally, very, almost no environmental constraints around mining--safety considerations for the miners doing mining, in huge contrast to the United States. So, that translates directly into lower pricing. And lower pricing can push other people out of the market.

Lesley Stahl: And that's basically what happened?

Dan McGroarty: That's basically what happened.

Dan McGroarty: It's extraordinary if they actually foresaw all the uses. Our designers and developers advanced the miniaturized applications for laptops and cell phones while the Chinese were going after the metals and materials out of which these things are actually built.

Lesley Stahl: How did they get the know-how?

Dan McGroarty: An enormous amount of investment. It's kind of like the Chinese moon shot, the moon program.

China poured billions into the industry, ignoring the consequences. We obtained this video from a freelance cameraman showing the area near Baotou, China's rare earth capital, where the air, land and water are so saturated with chemical toxins, the Chinese have had to relocate entire villages. This is one of the few places where rare earths are turned into metals, which are then alloyed -- or blended -- into things like permanent magnets.

The U.S. developed this technology, but China bought most of it right out from under us. For instance, in 1995, China bought the biggest American rare earth magnet company, "Magnequench" which was based in Indiana.

Ed Richardson: When they bought the factory, they now had the patents. They now had the equipment. And they actually had some of the Magnequench employees in the United States go to China and teach the people how to make the products.

Lesley Stahl: Did we not understand the strategic importance of keeping that industry here?

Ed Richardson: We didn't get it and unfortunately the technology was transferred to China before that technology was appreciated. And now, we're seeing so many, for instance, defense systems that are dependent on it.

A prime example of that is the new F-35 fighter jet, the most technologically advanced weapons system in history. Each one contains nearly half a ton of rare earths. Former White House Official Dan McGroarty says that's just for starters.

Dan McGroarty: The guidance systems on weapons system and tomahawk cruise missile, any of the smart bombs have rare earths in them. Lasers. I'd be hard-pressed to name anything that we would consider worth building today and going forward that would not have a rare earth compound in it.

Lesley Stahl: Because of this. Because of the monopoly on rare earths, does China threaten our national security?

Dan McGroarty: Unchecked, yes.

What finally woke up the U.S. government was an incident at sea in 2010. A Chinese fishing trawler rammed a Japanese coast guard ship in a territorial dispute.

The Japanese seized the boat's captain... and two weeks later, China stopped shipping rare earths to Japan.

Dan McGroarty: The Chinese cut them off. And for 30 to 40 days, the rare earths did not flow to Japan. So it was a real shot across the bow for the Japanese that this is something that you have to be worried with.

It was a wake up call. Finally, 20 years after Deng Xiaoping's speech, rare earths were on the U.S. radar screen.

[President Obama: This case involves something called rare earth materials...]

President Obama announced a formal complaint to the World Trade Organization against China for creating shortages for foreign buyers and last August the WTO ruled against Beijing.

No one in the Obama administration would talk to us on camera about rare earths and our dependence on China... including the Department of Energy... the Pentagon... or the U.S. trade representative. Even the private sector didn't want to discuss the problem.

Lesley Stahl: We tried to get interviews with heads of companies that use the magnets and other products coming out of China, and they would not talk to us. Is there fear in high-tech companies that if they say something negative, maybe China won't sell them what they need?

Dan McGroarty: I think that there is grave concern in these companies, but perhaps not a willingness to talk about that on a street corner.

So what is the U.S. doing to restore the industry here? Out in California, Molycorp was allowed to re-open after it developed new technology that protects the environment. But even when it's at full capacity, the mine will only produce a fraction of the world's supply of rare earths.

The Pentagon has begun stockpiling rare earths, and industry is researching new technologies that would replace them.

Lesley Stahl: Do you get any help from the U.S. government? They want to have a rare earth industry here.

Constantine Karayannopoulos: Encouragement, yeah.

Lesley Stahl: Encouragement, that's it?

Constantine Karayannopoulos: Yeah.

The government is not offering incentives like tax breaks or subsidies that would lure businesses into the market.

Lesley Stahl: What needs to change to bring more of the industry back to the United States?

Constantine Karayannopoulos: First of all, we need to take a long-term view. It took 20 years to lose the dominant position-- at least 20 years. And it's probably going to take us 10, 15 years, if we execute, for some of these supply chains to start coming back.

But trouble is once again looming for the U.S. rare earth industry. Since restarting operations two years ago, Molycorp's mountain pass mine has yet to turn a profit, and so deeply in debt that just last week, its own auditor warned it may not be able to stay in business.




The good news is that we do have some rare earths available here in the US, but not enough. However, Stahl says: “President Obama announced a formal complaint to the World Trade Organization against China for creating shortages for foreign buyers and last August the WTO ruled against Beijing.” The article also states that the Pentagon has begun stockpiling these rare earths, but that the US is not giving the now crippled industry the tax breaks and subsidies that the Koch brothers industries are getting. Is that because Republicans “don't do science”? Whatever the reason is, it's alarming. We still have missile systems, aircraft and simply the stuff of daily life – technological advances in general – to build.

For the government to fail to support US companies in their mining of these elements is not good business, clearly. Maybe this story will wake people up and Congress will move to issue the tax breaks and subsidies that they are now giving to the already huge and wealthy oil and coal companies. The good news in the article is that Molycorp has now developed a safer technology to protect the environment against the toxicity of rare earths. The bad news – or rather the OTHER bad news – is that Molycorp is in severe financial trouble and may not be able to stay in business much longer. It's time for some government subsidies, then. Right?





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bags-of-dead-dogs-and-roosters-being-dumped-in-dallas-park/

Bags of dead dogs and roosters being dumped on Dallas roadside
CBS NEWS
March 24, 2015

Photograph – The gruesome discovery has some Dallas residents worried about their safety.  CBS DALLAS

DALLAS -- Animal rescuers and residents in southeast Dallas are finding garbage bags with the remains of dogs and roosters in them on the roadside in the dense woods and creek behind their woods. CBS station KTVT reports that it has some worried about their safety.

"My daughters live right here, my son," said a man we agreed to only call 'Michael' to protect his identity. "If they'll do that to a dog, what will they do to a human?"

Michael normally helps the large number of stray dogs people dump in this area.

"I drive through here, I feed the dogs. I take care of them," Michael said.

But when he and another animal rescuer recently saw someone hastily throw out bags from a pickup truck and speed away they made a gruesome discovery.

Michael said, "It was the bags with all the dead dogs, mush, decomposed bodies, roosters, matted hair. It was hor-I mean, it stunk. You can imagine how it smelled."

They would later find feed bags full of dead chickens alongside the road and more dogs in garbage sacks.

"It was something you might see in a horror movie," Michael said.

Several residents nearby tell me they suspect there is an animal fighting ring near here. They fear it is gang related. But Michael says so far efforts to get a city or police investigation into animal fighting hasn't worked.

"There's no evidence," Michael said.

But, that may soon change. A Dallas Police Department spokesman told CBS 11 the department is working with animal control to recover evidence covered by water in recent rains. The spokesman said the department is confident it will be able to develop a case quickly after that.

Neighbors and police say a rooster fighting ring was broken up not far from that area just over a year ago.




This is another shocking way for the unscrupulous to make money without getting a decent job. Those with a cruel streak in their makeup will pay well for a chance to bet on a dog or rooster, or even breed animals themselves. The neighbors think that gangs are holding the fights, and may kill anyone who gets in their way. I am glad to see that the Dallas PD is looking into the case, and are hopeful that they can break the ring up. I hope that the prison term for fighting animals or breeding them will be high enough to be a deterrent. One of the problems with the sexual abuse of children is that the penalty isn't high enough to deliver real justice.






http://www.cbsnews.com/news/group-linked-to-alamo-takes-legal-action-against-texas/

Group linked to Alamo takes legal action against Texas
AP March 23, 2015

Photograph – The Alamo in San Antonio, Texas.  AP GRAPHICS BANK

SAN ANTONIO - A group that served as guardians of the Alamo for more than a century before the state of Texas announced it was taking over day-to-day management of the historic site is suing for control of more than 30,000 books and artifacts at its library.

The Daughters of the Republic of Texas filed suit Monday against the Texas General Land Office, alleging the agency "unilaterally declared" the state owner of the organization's private library collection after Land Commissioner George P. Bush announced that he was ending the group's management of the downtown San Antonio mission-turned-fortress.

The suit maintains that the items in question were donated to the Daughters - who began caring for the Alamo in 1905 - and that the donors wanted the items to be maintained under the group's stewardship, not the state's. The group accuses the General Land Office of "an unlawful attempt to take the organization's private property."

A spokeswoman for the General Land Office said the agency doesn't comment on pending litigation.

The Alamo was the site of an 1836 battle in the Texas Revolution in which some 180 defenders were killed during a siege by Mexican forces. Weeks later, those deaths provided Texas soldiers with their rallying cry - "Remember the Alamo!"- that they carried to victory at the Battle of San Jacinto, which clinched Texas' independence from Mexico.

The General Land Office took ownership of the Alamo in 2011 at the behest of the Legislature, which had grown concerned about the care of the Texas landmark. Worries arose following accusations of mismanagement and financial incompetence levied at the nonprofit Daughters. However, even after the state took ownership, the group had continued managing the site.

In announcing the management change on March 12, Bush had said that his office would solicit proposals for the development of a strategic plan for the Alamo grounds and search for a new management company.

The Daughters' lawsuit focuses on the collection within the research library, which was built in 1950. In the lawsuit, the group said it owns more than 77 percent of the collection, made up of some 38,000 items, including books, maps, flags, and other artifacts used by researchers.

Ellen McCaffrey, president general of the Daughters of the Republic of Texas, said part of the collection is stored in a vault within the library.

"Our intent is to have oversight over how the collection is maintained, of the staffing, of how items are treated to make sure they are treated properly and to make sure donors' wishes are honored," McCaffrey said.

Even if the group wins the suit, she said it does not intend to pack up the collection and haul it away. The library and its collection, she said, was "created to be on the grounds of the Alamo."

"That's how we would like to see it remain," she said. "We simply want to see it remain intact and cared for properly."




“The Daughters of the Republic of Texas filed suit Monday against the Texas General Land Office, alleging the agency "unilaterally declared" the state owner of the organization's private library collection after Land Commissioner George P. Bush announced that he was ending the group's management of the downtown San Antonio mission-turned-fortress. The suit maintains that the items in question were donated to the Daughters - who began caring for the Alamo in 1905 - and that the donors wanted the items to be maintained under the group's stewardship, not the state's. The group accuses the General Land Office of "an unlawful attempt to take the organization's private property."A spokeswoman for the General Land Office said the agency doesn't comment on pending litigation.... In announcing the management change on March 12, Bush had said that his office would solicit proposals for the development of a strategic plan for the Alamo grounds and search for a new management company. The Daughters' lawsuit focuses on the collection within the research library, which was built in 1950. In the lawsuit, the group said it owns more than 77 percent of the collection, made up of some 38,000 items, including books, maps, flags, and other artifacts used by researchers.... Even if the group wins the suit, she said it does not intend to pack up the collection and haul it away. The library and its collection, she said, was "created to be on the grounds of the Alamo."

I do like to see history preserved, and in this case, the artifacts remaining available on site so they can be part of the experience for visitors to the Alamo. If the Daughters were not maintaining the collection properly, perhaps they could use a financial subsidy from the state, or even from the US government. It should be like the Gettysburg battle field, and will probably draw as many visitors. They could also pay a small fee to visit the site, if there is a need for money.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/secret-nazi-lair-possibly-found-deep-in-argentine-jungle/

Secret Nazi lair possibly found deep in Argentine jungle
CBS NEWS
March 23, 2015

Photograph – Adolf Eichmann, former Nazi SS leader, is seen here in a photo taken circa 1960. Captured by U.S. forces in 1945, he escaped from prison some months later, having kept his identity hidden, and in 1950 reached Argentina. He was tracked down by Israeli Mossad agents there and taken to Israel in 1960, where he was tried and executed in 1962.  AFP/GETTY IMAGES

Several ruined buildings lying deep in the jungle in Argentina near its border with Paraguay carried a local legend: Martin Bormann, who was Adolf Hitler's personal secretary, had used them to hide after World War II.

While investigators have long since discovered a skeleton in Germany confirmed to be Bormann's -- meaning he probably never left Berlin after the war -- the legend itself may have not been that far off.

Archaeologists probing the unusual set of buildings have discovered several artifacts from 1930s and 1940s Germany, including coins, German porcelain and Nazi carvings in the walls, reports The Telegraph newspaper.

Germany is believed to have built remote hideouts for their top leaders in some of the most remote locations on Earth prior to the conclusion of World War II in the event of their defeat.

While their findings so far are not definitive proof of these set of structures being one of them, Daniel Schavelzon, leader of the team archaeologists exploring the site, said: "We can find no other explanation as to why anyone would build these structures, at such great effort and expense, in a site which at that time was totally inaccessible, away from the local community, with material which is not typical of the regional architecture."

Besides its incredibly remote location, the site is also remarkable for having features like 9-foot-thick walls in places, among its unique architectural elements,the BBC reports.

Schavelzon told the press he believes the site may have never actually been used by the Nazis, because the thousands who fled to Argentina after the war largely lived out in the open at the invitation of then-President Juan Peron, until Israeli Mossad agents began tracking them down in the 1950s and 1960s.

The most famous Nazi fugitive to have settled in Argentina was Adolf Eichmann, a key organizer of the Holocaust, who lived openly in a Buenos Aires suburb until Mossad agents secretly caught him and brought him back to Israel for trial and eventual execution.

Schavelzon said his team will continue to probe the remote site for more artifacts.




“While investigators have long since discovered a skeleton in Germany confirmed to be Bormann's -- meaning he probably never left Berlin after the war -- the legend itself may have not been that far off. Archaeologists probing the unusual set of buildings have discovered several artifacts from 1930s and 1940s Germany, including coins, German porcelain and Nazi carvings in the walls, reports The Telegraph newspaper. Germany is believed to have built remote hideouts for their top leaders in some of the most remote locations on Earth prior to the conclusion of World War II in the event of their defeat.”

Even if they can't prove what individual the site was built for, the presence of Nazi artifacts and the 9' thick walls are signs of its use as a stronghold. The Nazi's were king of the hill for awhile, but they couldn't fight the whole world, and the Israeli Massad is merciless. I wonder how many of the old Nazis are left around the world. Are we still sheltering any? I hope not.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/pakistan-needs-short-range-tactical-nuclear-weapons-official-says/

Pakistan wants short-range nuclear weapons
AP March 24, 2015

Photograph – Pakistani military personnel stand beside a short-range surface to surface NASR missile system during the Pakistan Day military parade in Islamabad, March 23, 2015.  GETTY

WASHINGTON -- Pakistan needs short-range "tactical" nuclear weapons to deter arch-rival India, a top adviser to its government said Monday, dismissing concerns it could increase the risk of a nuclear war.

Khalid Kidwai also rejected concerns over the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, insisting that adequate safeguards are in place to protect what analysts have described as the world's fastest-growing atomic arsenal.

Pakistan's development of smaller warheads built for use on battlefields, in addition to longer-range weapons, has increased international concerns that they could get into rogue hands because of the pervasive threat of Islamic militants in the country.

Pakistan and its larger neighbor India have fought three wars. They have held on-off peace talks over the years but are involved in a nuclear and missile arms race that shows no sign of abating.

Neither side discloses the size of its arsenal. But a recent report by the Council on Foreign Relations think tank estimated that Pakistan has enough fissile material to produce between 110 and 120 nuclear weapons, and India enough for 90 to 110 weapons.

For 15 years, Kidwai led the administration of Pakistan's nuclear and missile weapons program. He now serves as an adviser to the National Command Authority, a committee of the top civilian and military leaders that sets the country's nuclear weapons policy. He spoke Monday at a conference on nuclear security organized by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.

On the sidelines of the conference, Rakesh Sood, former Indian special envoy for disarmament and nonproliferation, said it was "extremely destabilizing for any country to develop tactical nuclear weapons" and that India has no plans to. He contended that Pakistan's nuclear doctrine is "cloaked in ambiguity" which undermines confidence between the two countries.

Kidwai said nuclear deterrence had helped prevent war in South Asia. He said Pakistan's development of tactical weapons -- in the form of the Nasr missile, which has a 37-mile range -- was in response to concerns that India's larger military could still wage a conventional war against the country, thinking Pakistan would not risk retaliation with a bigger nuclear weapon.

Peter Lavoy, a former senior U.S. defense official, questioned whether such intermingling of conventional forces and nuclear weapons in a battlefield could increase the risk of nuclear war.

Kidwai replied that having tactical weapons would make war less likely.

He said given the strength of the rest of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, the fear of "mutually assured destruction" of the South Asian rivals would ensure that "sanity prevails."

At the other end of Pakistan's missile inventory is the Shaheen-III missile that it test-fired this month. It has a range of 1,700 miles, giving it the capability to reach every part of India - but also potentially to reach into the Middle East, including Israel.

Kidwai said Pakistan wanted a missile of that range because it suspected India was developing strategic bases on its Andaman and Nicobar islands in the Bay of Bengal. He said the nuclear and missile program was "India-specific" and not aimed at other countries.

India and Pakistan have not fought a major conflict since 1999, when Pakistani military infiltrated into an Indian-held area of disputed Kashmir called Kargil, sparking fighting that left hundreds dead on both sides. Tensions, however, have sometimes escalated dangerously since then. In 2008, Pakistan-based militants attacked India's commercial hub of Mumbai, killing 164 people.




“Pakistan needs short-range "tactical" nuclear weapons to deter arch-rival India, a top adviser to its government said Monday, dismissing concerns it could increase the risk of a nuclear war. Khalid Kidwai also rejected concerns over the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, insisting that adequate safeguards are in place to protect what analysts have described as the world's fastest-growing atomic arsenal.... They have held on-off peace talks over the years but are involved in a nuclear and missile arms race that shows no sign of abating. Neither side discloses the size of its arsenal. But a recent report by the Council on Foreign Relations think tank estimated that Pakistan has enough fissile material to produce between 110 and 120 nuclear weapons, and India enough for 90 to 110 weapons.... At the other end of Pakistan's missile inventory is the Shaheen-III missile that it test-fired this month. It has a range of 1,700 miles, giving it the capability to reach every part of India - but also potentially to reach into the Middle East, including Israel.”

Who is in a position to keep Pakistan from developing short-range nuclear weapons? The UN, I suppose, would be a forum. There is a fear that the use of tactical nuclear weapons on a battlefield could lead to all out nuclear war. If the numbers mentioned in this article are correct, Pakistan already has more nukes than India, so why do they need more? I for one don't feel secure that the Taliban or al-Qaeda can't possibly get any of Pakistan's weapons. Pakistan doesn't seem to control its radical Islamic elements very well. When the US went in after bin Laden they carefully did not inform the government of the raid, undoubtedly from a lack of trust of their government.






Supreme Court On Law Enforcement Methods


http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/03/24/is-the-supreme-court-about-to-give-cops-the-right-to-execute-the-mentally-ill/

Is The Supreme Court About To Give Cops The Right To Execute The Mentally Ill?
AUTHOR: RANDA MORRIS 
MARCH 24, 2015

In 2008, Teresa Sheehan was a patient at a home for the mentally disabled. A social worker at the facility where Sheehan was housed used a key to enter her room without permission, triggering an episode in which she grabbed a knife and ordered him to leave. Sheehan was off her medication, and scheduled for a mental health evaluation. The social worker called police to report that the 56-year-old woman had gotten hold of a knife. He testified that he wanted the police to come, in order to help him get the woman to her scheduled mental health appointment.

When police arrived, they used the same key to let themselves into the woman’s room. Sheehan, who is diagnosed with schizophrenia, ordered them to leave, brandishing the knife at officers and telling them she didn’t want their help. The two officers, who were members of the San Francisco police force, called for back-up. Without waiting for assistance, however, officers Kimberly Reynolds and Katherine Holder forced their way back into woman’s room. According to their statements, she came at them with the knife. The two officers opened fire on the mentally ill woman, shooting her in the face, shoulders, chest and groin.

Remarkably, Sheehan survived the shooting, but suffered permanent injuries because of it.

Following a nationwide trend toward criminalizing mental illness, Sheehan was arrested and charged with two counts of assault with a deadly weapon, two counts of assaulting a police officer, and one count of making a criminal threat to the social worker.

A jury found her not guilty on the threat charges. They could not reach a verdict on the assault charges.

It’s impossible to say who failed this woman the most, the staff at the home where she was being treated for mental illness or the officers who were called out “to help.”

Either way, Sheehan’s family filed a lawsuit on her behalf, against both the city of San Francisco and the police. The suit states that police have a responsibility to take special measures when dealing with the mentally ill, under the Americans With Disabilities Act. After seven years of conflicting lower court verdicts, the Sheehan’s suit has now made its way to the Supreme Court.

During oral arguments, which were heard on Monday, March 23, several Supreme Court justices appeared to disagree with statements made by disability rights advocates, regarding the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). Several of the justices implied that the ADA doesn’t apply to police who feel ‘threatened’ or who believe that the person might be a danger to the public.

Even those justices who are normally considered “liberal” appear to be siding with police, over people with mental illness.

According to San Francisco’s SFGate, Justice Elena Kagan said that there is “some reason to give the police officers who have to deal with them (the mentally ill) the benefit of the doubt.”

The Obama administration also sided with police, “arguing that police are justified in using force unless they know the individual poses no threat to the public,” according to SFGate.

Not surprisingly, Justice Anthony Kennedy said that the Americans With Disabilities Act is not meant to provide guidance to police who are dealing with an armed person, suffering from mental illness.

On the other hand, at least one of the justices, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, appears to believe that the ADA should serve as a protection for people with mental illness.

SFGate reports that Justice Sotomayor said the ADA is:
“intended to ensure that police officers try mitigation in these situations before they jump to violence.”

Sotomayor brought up the obvious fact that the alternative could be “a society in which the mentally ill are automatically killed.”

In her comments, Sotomayor cited a report which showed that roughly 350 mentally impaired individuals are fatally shot by police each year in the United States.

In December 2012, the Portland Press Herald published a detailed review of officer-involved shootings in the United States. The findings of that research show that, each year, more than half of all people killed by police are mentally ill.

There are hundreds, possibly thousands of citizens killed by law enforcement in the US each year. When compared to other developed nations, even the most conservative estimates of officer-involved shootings in the United States, between 400 and 600 yearly, are horrific. In Great Britain, for example, there were no instances in which police were ‘forced to kill’ a citizen in 2013. In Germany, there were eight instances of officer-involved shootings over a two year period, from 2012-2013. In Canada, there are about a dozen officer-involved shootings, yearly.

Yet here in the United States, the Supreme Court seems inclined to give police even greater leeway when it comes to ‘justifiable’ homicide, even in cases like Sheehan’s, where the person is known to be mentally ill and is already in the care of a mental health treatment facility.

The US is moving further and further away from a system designed to protect citizens from the state. While the Constitution bars the use of ‘cruel and unusual punishment,’ and guarantees all citizens a right to a trial by a jury of their peers, these rights are usurped every time a police officer summarily executes an American citizen.

Over and over again we’re told that police had “no choice” but to use lethal force against an American citizen. Officer-involved shootings are so common in the United States that rarely a day goes by where we don’t hear about another one, whether in local, state or national media. The “no-choice” narrative suggests that officers attempted something other than lethal force, prior to killing the latest suspect. But we know this isn’t true. We know that officer-involved shootings often occur within a matter of seconds, and that even though they are armed with tasers and pepper-spray, police often use deadly force as a first resort, instead of a last.

And that’s ultimately what this case is about; whether police are required to use the least amount of force necessary to subdue a mentally ill person.

In 2015, we are aware that mental illness is often a treatable medical condition. Yet, in the case of Sheehan, no psychiatrists or medical professionals were called to assist. Instead, the police were brought in, with devastating consequences. They responded by forcing entry into Sheehan’s room, an act which certain served to escalate the situation. Then they fired “five or six” bullets into her body. After she recovered, they arrested her for being mentally ill, although she was in a place where she should have been getting treatment for her illness, when the incident occurred.

Now it seems that the Supreme Court of the United States is poised to determine that the actions of San Francisco police were “justified,” sending us on a direct course toward “a society in which the mentally ill are automatically killed,” as Justice Sotomayor warned.




“The two officers, who were members of the San Francisco police force, called for back-up. Without waiting for assistance, however, officers Kimberly Reynolds and Katherine Holder forced their way back into woman’s room. According to their statements, she came at them with the knife. The two officers opened fire on the mentally ill woman, shooting her in the face, shoulders, chest and groin.... Following a nationwide trend toward criminalizing mental illness, Sheehan was arrested and charged with two counts of assault with a deadly weapon, two counts of assaulting a police officer, and one count of making a criminal threat to the social worker. A jury found her not guilty on the threat charges. They could not reach a verdict on the assault charges. It’s impossible to say who failed this woman the most, the staff at the home where she was being treated for mental illness or the officers who were called out “to help.”.... Either way, Sheehan’s family filed a lawsuit on her behalf, against both the city of San Francisco and the police. The suit states that police have a responsibility to take special measures when dealing with the mentally ill, under the Americans With Disabilities Act. After seven years of conflicting lower court verdicts, the Sheehan’s suit has now made its way to the Supreme Court..... several Supreme Court justices appeared to disagree with statements made by disability rights advocates, regarding the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). Several of the justices implied that the ADA doesn’t apply to police who feel ‘threatened’ or who believe that the person might be a danger to the public. Even those justices who are normally considered “liberal” appear to be siding with police, over people with mental illness.... several Supreme Court justices appeared to disagree with statements made by disability rights advocates, regarding the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). Several of the justices implied that the ADA doesn’t apply to police who feel ‘threatened’ or who believe that the person might be a danger to the public. Even those justices who are normally considered “liberal” appear to be siding with police, over people with mental illness....

“In Great Britain, for example, there were no instances in which police were ‘forced to kill’ a citizen in 2013. In Germany, there were eight instances of officer-involved shootings over a two year period, from 2012-2013. In Canada, there are about a dozen officer-involved shootings, yearly.” Police procedure is clearly different in these countries because surely there are not that many more violent and insane people here in the US than in Britain, Canada and Germany. Perhaps the most important thing that is different is that in the US our police officers are given carte blanche rather than being disciplined, fined, tried in court or simply fired. Another thing that occurred in this case is that the two female officers chose to go forcibly into the patient's room rather than waiting for the backup which they did summon when they understood the situation. Sotomayer has warned that a society in which police aren't REQUIRED to use minimum force first rather than shooting first, is one in which the mentally ill are automatically killed. The same, unfortunately, is true for twelve year old boys with toy guns out playing in the park. Are we building a Gestapo police force here in the US? How can we justify that?





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cops-massachusetts-house-was-wired-to-explode-at-flip-of-a-light-switch/

Cops: Mass. house was wired to explode at flip of a light switch
By CRIMESIDER STAFF CBS/AP
March 25, 2015

Photograph – Authorities respond to a home in Milton, Mass., Tuesday, March 25, 2015, where police say someone placed an explosive device that was designed to ignite when a light switch was turned on.  CBS BOSTON

MILTON, Mass. - Police say someone carefully placed an explosive device in a house in Milton, Mass. that was designed to ignite when a light switch was turned on.

A Boston bomb squad disarmed the device Tuesday afternoon. No one was hurt.
CBS Boston reports the homeowner and an electrician came across the device on Tuesday and called police.

The home was vacant at the time the explosive was discovered as it was about to go up for sale. The tenants reportedly moved out on Sunday.

Lindell Williams, the homeowner, told the station the device was discovered in an upstairs bedroom closet.

According to Milton Police Chief Richard Wells, the device was wired throughout the house and was rigged so that if someone flipped the light switch on where it ended, the device would have exploded.

The device was reportedly in a gallon container and was hidden behind a recently plastered section of wall.

Williams, the homeowner, told CBS Boston he believes the former tenants, who are also suspected of pouring concrete down his drains, might be responsible.

Police confirmed they had recently been called to the house for a vandalism report.

Investigators have not commented on a motive in the case and no arrests have been made.




“The home was vacant at the time the explosive was discovered as it was about to go up for sale. The tenants reportedly moved out on Sunday. Lindell Williams, the homeowner, told the station the device was discovered in an upstairs bedroom closet.... The device was reportedly in a gallon container and was hidden behind a recently plastered section of wall. Williams, the homeowner, told CBS Boston he believes the former tenants, who are also suspected of pouring concrete down his drains, might be responsible.”

Some people really are dangerously malicious, but sneaky about it. Rather than starting a fight -- which they might not win -- they do something like this. This man Williams had probably made the previous renters angry, perhaps by asking for his rent, and the man poured concrete in the drains, probably at the same time putting the bomb into the wall. He hoped to get away with killing Williams. The article says that no arrests have been made, but who could it be besides the renters? The damages required extensive access to the house and the time involved in placing the bomb and replastering the wall. Apparently Williams noticed immediately that the drains had been filled, but not the condition of the upstairs closet. This is sheer viciousness. I hope and assume the former renters will be found and charged with attempted murder. They should also have to pay the several thousand dollars it will cost to redo the plumbing.