December 4, 2015


News Clips For The Day


http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/12/04/458464907/alleged-san-bernardino-attacker-pledged-allegiance-to-isis

Alleged San Bernardino Attacker Pledged Allegiance To ISIS
Bill Chappell
Updated December 4, 2015


Tashfeen Malik, one of the two people who police say carried out a bloody attack on the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, Calif., had pledged allegiance to the leader of ISIS on a Facebook page before the attack, a source with knowledge of the investigation tells NPR.

The federal source that confirmed the development to NPR's Carrie Johnson also warns that the statement on social media should not be seen as evidence that the attack was coordinated or ordered by the extremist group.

The source tells Carrie that Malik, 27, had pledged her support to ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi by using a Facebook account that was created under an alias.

Citing details such as the crude explosive devices that investigators say were built by Malik and her husband, Syed Rizwan Farook, the federal source says that as of now, investigators are exploring the possibility that Malik and Farook may have essentially "self-radicalized" after being inspired to action by ISIS.




“Tashfeen Malik, one of the two people who police say carried out a bloody attack on the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, Calif., had pledged allegiance to the leader of ISIS on a Facebook page before the attack, a source with knowledge of the investigation tells NPR. The federal source that confirmed the development to NPR's Carrie Johnson also warns that the statement on social media should not be seen as evidence that the attack was coordinated or ordered by the extremist group. …. the federal source says that as of now, investigators are exploring the possibility that Malik and Farook may have essentially "self-radicalized" after being inspired to action by ISIS.”


Self-radicalized or not, to me this shooting was “terrorism.” Another article about Farook’s sister states that the new wife, whom he met on the Internet and went to Saudi Arabia to marry, was already radicalized and convinced Farook to join her. I don’t understand all this quibbling over the terms by the Feds. I presume it is an effort to discover EXACTLY what the source of the brainwashing job was. As I have commented below in another article today, I don’t believe a mentally healthy person can be “radicalized” from scratch in such a short time. Another disturbing thing to me is that several of these people including bin-Laden have had links not with Syria or Iraq, but with Saudi Arabia which is ruled by individuals who are supposedly “friends” of the US. I wonder how stable that government is, since there seems to be much political/religious turmoil there.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/san-bernardino-shooting-syed-rizwan-farook-sister-saira-khan-speaks-out-disbelief/

San Bernardino suspect's sister breaks her silence
CBS NEWS
December 4, 2015

Play VIDEO -- Co-worker, family speak out about San Bernardino shooting suspect


As investigators sort through evidence picked up at the San Bernardino shooting suspects' Redlands home, family members say they are in disbelief.

"I can never imagine my brother or my sister-in-law doing something like this. Especially because they were happily married, they had a beautiful 6-month-old daughter. It's just mind boggling why they would do something like this," suspected gunman Syed Rizwan Farook's sister Saira Khan told CBS News' David Begnaud in an exclusive interview.

Saira and her husband Farhan Kahn share the heartache felt by their community and their country. They can't believe someone so close to them could do something so horrific.

"There are people who can't fathom how a mother and father could drop their 6-month-old baby girl off and then go commit mass murder," Begnaud said.

"Yeah, we can't either," Saira responded.

"Does it make you angry?" Begnaud asked.

"Of course it makes me angry," Saira said.

"Absolutely. It makes us very upset and angry that how you can leave a 6-month-old daughter," Farhan added.

"And he put us in this predicament," Saira said.

San Bernardino shooting

U.S. officials tell CBS News that 28-year-old Farook started searching for a wife using an online dating website. He met Tashfeen Malik and they became engaged in 2013 after he traveled to Saudi Arabia during the annual pilgrimage know as the Hajj. Farook returned to Saudi Arabia in July 2014 to bring her to the U.S. She passed a Homeland Security counterterrorism screening as part of the vetting process, and officials tell CBS News Farook was not on any U.S. terror watch lists.

Christian Nwadike was shocked when he learned the man accused of gunning down over a dozen people turned out to be the coworker he sat only feet from for five years. He said Farook was different after he returned from Saudi Arabia.

"Do you believe that he was radicalized?" Begnaud asked him.

"Yes, by the wife. I think he married a terrorist," Nwadike said.

"He married a terrorist?"

"Yes," Nwadike responded.

A law enforcement source tells CBS News that the bombs found in the couple's home are near carbon copies of explosives shown in an issue of al Qaeda's on-line magazine "Inspire," which printed instructions on "how to build a bomb in the kitchen of your mom."

On behalf of their family, Farhan and Saira expressed their condolences.

"I want to say that we are deeply saddened by what took place and we can't imagine the loss that everybody has gone through, all the people who are injured or hurt badly...our thoughts and prayers are going out to them," Saira said.

Saira insists she has no idea what motivated her brother and his wife to go on a deadly rampage. She and Farhan are left wondering -- could they have stopped it?

"So many things I asked myself. I ask myself if I had called him that morning or the night before, asked him how he was doing, what he was up to. If I had any inclination, maybe I could have stopped it," Saira said.

"Did you see weapons in their home?" Begnaud asked.

"He had guns," Farhan said, "but he purchased from regular stores. Like handguns somebody would have."

On Thursday, an FBI evidence response team combed through Farook's rental home. Inside, they found more than 4,500 bullets, 12 pipe bombs and enough material and tools to build several more.

"Even I was surprised...that somebody can go and buy that much weapons," Farhan said.

Saira said her brother did not talk much.

"He was always shy and quiet," she said.

She also said she liked Farook's wife.

"She was also shy and quiet, kept to herself," Saira said.

Saira said she hasn't had time to process what's happened.

"We're also mourning the loss of someone we knew, or we thought we knew. And so we would really want everybody to give us some time to mourn or, you know, give us some time, I guess, just like everyone else out there that needs time to mourn," an emotional Saira said.

Farhan said he felt an obligation to address the victims on the night of the shooting.

"I wanted to go there and talk to the victims, people who were hurt... So I love this country, I love the people," Farhan said. "And I felt responsible to go and tell this to the people."

"Do you think your brother deserves to be forgiven?" Begnaud asked Saira.

"That's a hard question," she said. "I don't even know if I would forgive him. Just because of what he did."

Farhan said, right now, he could not forgive Farook.

"With what he did, no. What he did to his own family, to his daughter, to our family, to the innocent people there -- no. I wouldn't forgive him," Farhan said.




“Saira and her husband Farhan Kahn share the heartache felt by their community and their country. They can't believe someone so close to them could do something so horrific. "There are people who can't fathom how a mother and father could drop their 6-month-old baby girl off and then go commit mass murder," Begnaud said. …. Christian Nwadike was shocked when he learned the man accused of gunning down over a dozen people turned out to be the coworker he sat only feet from for five years. He said Farook was different after he returned from Saudi Arabia. "Do you believe that he was radicalized?" Begnaud asked him. "Yes, by the wife. I think he married a terrorist," Nwadike said. "He married a terrorist?" "Yes," Nwadike responded. A law enforcement source tells CBS News that the bombs found in the couple's home are near carbon copies of explosives shown in an issue of al Qaeda's on-line magazine "Inspire," which printed instructions on "how to build a bomb in the kitchen of your mom."


Several factors are involved in all these killings, from jihadists to the ordinary American killer at events like Sandy Hook. First, they are in love with guns and worse weapons, and second, they are “shy and quiet.” A certain kind of mentally ill person is “shy” or socially timid and “quiet” because their mind is preoccupied with dark thoughts or even hallucinations. Often they feel left out and see a mass shooting as a way to get attention and a little “respect.”

Such people are also likely to be involved in a cult-like religious group. People who don’t think logically can be convinced by others to “believe” about anything; and people who are socially timid may want to find a powerful “leader” and follow him. That relieves them of the responsibility for becoming an individual. In other words, they are followers. The more forceful the leader is, the more impressive they find him. I think that is involved when teens join a violent street gang as well. They “feel marginalized,” and often in fact are, but they don’t have good leadership from their elders at home which would push or guide them toward being a strong, thinking and ethical person. The absence of a positive and hopeful personal identity is the hallmark of such people. They seek strength through the group instead.

Unfortunately, ours is a culture based on following rules, and that can be good up to a point. We certainly don’t want our citizens to be criminals who have no conscience, but some of us are so intimidated that we no longer make good citizens, for a democracy, that is. We do what we are told, even when it is despicable. I think these “radicalized” individuals are of the same turn of mind. They are young and passionate, and groups like ISIS and al-Qaeda give them the forceful leader they want.

The case of Europe under the influence of Hitler is a prime example. The hatred of all “other” racial or religious groups causes them to accede to the perpetration of evil as long as their cultural group is not the scapegoat of choice. Economic privation is often a factor as well. Hitler’s Germany was in the throes of a deep depression along with the rest of the world, and the citizens were easily convinced to blame the Jews for their situation. In the case of ISIS, the villain in the picture is modernity and Western values. The same brainwashing techniques are present in that group as under Hitler, and the psychologically vulnerable -- especially young people -- are following them.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/san-bernardino-mass-shooting-victims-remembered-vigil/

Woman who fled Islamic extremism among mass shooting victims
CBS NEWS
December 4, 2015

Photograph -- mw-2.jpg, People hold candles during a vigil for shooting victims on Thursday, Dec. 3, 2015, at San Manuel Stadium in San Bernardino, Calif. AP PHOTO/MARK J. TERRILL
Play VIDEO -- Officials name San Bernardino shooting victims


Thousands gathered in San Bernardino Thursday night at a candlelight and prayer vigil to honor the victims.

Family and friends of the 14 men and women killed in Wednesday's shooting are honoring their loved ones by offering a glimpse into who they were and how they lived their lives.

Thirty-seven-year-old Michael Wetzel was a father of six.

In a statement posted to a fundraising website, his wife Renee said, "I didn't know a better person... Without him, this family will never be the same."

Jennifer Thalasinos says her husband Nicholas was deeply devoted to his Messianic Jewish faith. The 52-year-old worked for the health department in San Bernardino County.

"He was so kind to everybody, he was very chivalrous," Thalasinos said. "They're a very tight knit group that worked together and some of them that passed away were very good friends."

According to Iranian born Benetta Bet-Badals's family, the mother of three "fled to America at the age of 18 to escape Islamic extremism."

"She came in to have a better life, a better education and everything else, and unfortunately it was taken away from her at an early age," said her husband, Arlen Bet-Badal.

On Facebook, one of Sierra Clayborn's photos is covered in blue, white and red - a tribute to the victims of last month's Paris Massacre. A message beneath the photo reads, "Even as you go, your picture is out of love of victims elsewhere."

The Los Angeles Times reports Daniel Kaufman worked at a coffee shop at the Inland Regional Center.

"He had this grin that made it look like he was up to something," said his friend, Stachia Chadwick.

"When things were starting to get to you, Daniel would show up," said another friend, Jack Prewett.

"He'd pull some stunt and make you laugh," Chadwick added.

In addition to the 14 people who died, nearly two dozen more were injured.

One of the survivors - 22-year-old Jennifer Stevens - was shot in the side.

"She kept calling me. I said there's something wrong, I've got to take this call. And she said, 'Mommy I've been shot,'" said her mother, Lisa. "You could hear responders in the background and they took the phone from her and that was all I knew. About four hours later she texted me, 'I'm okay.' It was terrible."

Other relatives of the injured say they're lucky.

"Unfortunately the other fourteen families don't have the story to share," said Rosa Ortiz, a victim's aunt. "It really breaks our heart that this is happening to all of us."




“Jennifer Thalasinos says her husband Nicholas was deeply devoted to his Messianic Jewish faith. The 52-year-old worked for the health department in San Bernardino County. "He was so kind to everybody, he was very chivalrous," Thalasinos said. "They're a very tight knit group that worked together and some of them that passed away were very good friends." …. According to Iranian born Benetta Bet-Badals's family, the mother of three "fled to America at the age of 18 to escape Islamic extremism." "She came in to have a better life, a better education and everything else, and unfortunately it was taken away from her at an early age," said her husband, Arlen Bet-Badal.”


I wonder if this woman’s presence at the party was one of the reasons for the shooting. There was also a Jewish man. I wish we knew exactly what set the two killers off in this way. Of course they wanted to hit some US “soft target,” but why this one? From the way the first several articles read it appears to me that someone there may have crossed words with the killer, probably with no idea that this shooting would be the result.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-caves-in-on-threat-to-skip-cnns-upcoming-debate/

Donald Trump caves in on $5 million threat to skip CNN's upcoming debate
By REBECCA SHABAD CBS NEWS
December 4, 2015


Donald Trump said Thursday that he will participate in CNN's presidential debate on Dec. 15, after he had threatened earlier this week to boycott the debate unless the network donated $5 million to charities benefitting veterans.

"When you're leading in the polls, I think it's too big of a risk to not do the debate," Trump told The Washington Post Thursday at a Trump National Golf Club in Virginia. "I don't think I have the kind of leverage I'd like to have in a deal, and I don't want to take the chance of hurting my campaign. So, I'll do the debate."

A new CNN/ORC national poll shows Trump leading the Republican field with 36 percent. The next candidate behind him trails by 20 points. Ted Cruz has 16 percent, and Ben Carson registers 14 percent.

Trump complained on Monday at a rally in Georgia that CNN doesn't treat him fairly and might not attend the fifth debate in Las Vegas.

"I won't do the debate unless they pay me $5 million, all of which money goes to the Wounded Warriors or goes to vets," Trump said.

But on Thursday, the GOP presidential frontrunner told the Post that if he doesn't participate, he would look like a "chicken" and that CNN will make "a fortune" because of him.

CNN Worldwide President Jeff Zucker explained Thursday at The Paley Center for Media why his network covers Trump so much, saying that it's "not our role to build up a campaign or take down a campaign" and that the network must fact-check his comments.

Candidates can qualify for the debate if they win an average of 3.5 percent support nationally, at least 4 percent in Iowa or at least 4 percent in New Hampshire.




“Donald Trump said Thursday that he will participate in CNN's presidential debate on Dec. 15, after he had threatened earlier this week to boycott the debate unless the network donated $5 million to charities benefitting veterans. "When you're leading in the polls, I think it's too big of a risk to not do the debate," Trump told The Washington Post Thursday at a Trump National Golf Club in Virginia. "I don't think I have the kind of leverage I'd like to have in a deal, and I don't want to take the chance of hurting my campaign. So, I'll do the debate."


Apparently Trump has decided that he wants to win the presidency more than he wants to showboat for the cameras. He’s not really stupid, but he is a fool in my book. He hasn’t taken the matter seriously until the last few weeks when he started giving real answers to the press on his plans as would-be president. I still don’t think there are enough Republicans who really want to vote for him to put him over the top. I wonder how many will boycott the voting booth or vote for a Democrat (choke, gasp!).



http://www.cbsnews.com/news/peoples-racist-facebook-comments-appear-on-billboards-near-users-homes/

Racist Facebook comments appear on billboards near users' homes
By JENNIFER EARL CBS NEWS
December 1, 2015

Photograph -- According to Racismo Virtual, the comment translates to: "If she bathed properly, she wouldn't get that grimy." Racismo Virtual
Screen-shot-2015-12-01-at-2-06-11-pm.png, Maria Júlia Coutinho. RACISMO VIRTUAL
Map.jpg -- Campaign Racismo Virtual shows steps it takes to complete project. RACISMO VIRTUAL


It's time Internet trolls learned a lesson: your words cause harm.

At least, that's what the nonprofit group Criola, an organization in Brazil that works to defend black women's rights, is trying to teach social media users.

To prove their point, the group created the "Virtual Racism, Real Consequences" campaign, partnering with billboard media companies to plaster people's racist Facebook comments on signs near their homes.

The group identifies offensive remarks, locates the places where the comments were posted using geotag tools, and then displays them on billboards near those locations. The names and faces of the authors are blurred to keep their identities private.

The goal isn't to expose the offenders personally, but to raise awareness and start a discussion, an online description of the project explains.

"Does a comment on the Internet causes less damage than a direct offense?" the Racismo Virtual project asked. "For those who comment, it may be. But for those who suffer it, the prejudice is the same."

Maria Julia Coutinho, a Brazilian journalist for the prime-time TV news show Jornal Nacional, was the inspiration behind the campaign. When a photo of her was posted on the show's Facebook page, the post was flooded with racist comments.

"A black girl named 'Maju'? You can't complain about prejudice, GFY," one Facebook user posted.

"If she bathed properly, she wouldn't get that grimy," another wrote.

Soon, the hateful comments spread around the country -- on billboards.

The group posted a video of people's reactions to the signs around a Brazilian neighborhood on YouTube, which has already received more than 13,000 views.

"People who make comments like these should be arrested," one man said in the video. "It's an endless evil."

"It's stupidity from the close-minded people," another man agreed.

Hopefully, after seeing their words in print, people who post these kinds of comments will think twice about their actions, Racismo Virtual said: "Because, after all, the worst enemy of racism is silence."



https://www.alternatives.ca/en/allies/criola-brazil
Criola (Brazil)

Criola is a NGO based in Rio de Janeiro. It was founded in 1992 by a group of Afro-Brazilian women from diverse backgrounds. Its mission is to enable Afro-Brazilian women, teenagers and girls to become agents for change in the struggle against racism, sexism, and homophobia, and work for the creation of better conditions of life for the Black population in Brazilian society. The main "lines of action" of the organisation include: black women's health; economic development - work and a living wage; human rights; political action and dialogue; and dissemination of information and publications. CRIOLA is also a member of Projeto Trama, an anti-trafficking consortium of four organisations in Brazil.

The Alternatives Press Room is a space where we post links to articles from various media which we believe our members will find of interest. You can see these articles by clicking here:

The Alternatives Press Room

If you know of any recently published articles (in English or French) that are related to the work and aims of Alternatives, please send us the URL(s) via our Contact page.

We appreciate your involvement!




“It's time Internet trolls learned a lesson: your words cause harm. At least, that's what the nonprofit group Criola, an organization in Brazil that works to defend black women's rights, is trying to teach social media users. To prove their point, the group created the "Virtual Racism, Real Consequences" campaign, partnering with billboard media companies to plaster people's racist Facebook comments on signs near their homes. The group identifies offensive remarks, locates the places where the comments were posted using geotag tools, and then displays them on billboards near those locations. The names and faces of the authors are blurred to keep their identities private. …. "People who make comments like these should be arrested," one man said in the video. "It's an endless evil." "It's stupidity from the close-minded people," another man agreed.”


Shaming can be effective. Hopefully it will be in this case. The Internet does have some very hate-filled people commenting on its’ websites. Hard core crime like those “kiddie porn” sites can be taken down, but opinion can’t. Besides, there’s no group tracking such things, which is basically a good thing. Doing that is a short step away from keeping close watch on everything our good citizens do as well. perhaps to get the Republicans in office another four years. Of course if hate speech were to be made a crime, that would be different. I would like to see that happen, because hate speech directly causes hate crimes of violence. The way our people think and feel define the way they will act, I feel sure.




http://www.npr.org/2015/12/04/458426970/reformers-fear-police-will-revisit-militarized-mindset-after-mass-shootings

Reformers Fear Police Will Revisit Militarized Mindset After Mass Shootings
Martin Kaste
Updated December 4, 2015

Photograph -- Police officers conduct a manhunt after a mass shooting in San Bernardino, Calif., on Dec. 2, 2015.
Mike Blake/Reuters/Landov
Photograph -- [I]t's not that we seek to militarize law enforcement. The goal is to try to make sure that we reduce the number of human casualties. Lt. Travis Walker, San Bernardino SWAT team commander
Related article -- Why Utah Is The Only State Trying To Track And Limit SWAT-Style Tactics


On the day of the mass shooting in San Bernardino, Calif., the city's SWAT team was training for an active shooter situation just minutes away from the scene of the massacre.

"We were just working through scenarios when this call went out," says Lt. Travis Walker, the SWAT team commander.

Walker says they'd decided to train on Wednesday in part to learn some lessons from the deadly shooting in Colorado Springs, Colo., last week. This response isn't unique to San Bernardino; in the weeks since the terrorist attacks in Paris, local law enforcement agencies around the country have been preparing for the possibility of more challenging attacks. In San Bernardino on Wednesday morning, Walker was running his officers through scenarios with volunteers playing the role of shooters.

"We'd just finished a training scenario that involved multiple shooters at multiple locations within a small confined area," he says.

And then they were off — to the scene of a real-life multiple-shooter attack. They didn't get there in time to stop it, but the suspects were killed in a shootout later in the day. Walker and his team were there for that, too, using armored vehicles to get close. And that scene was meaningful because those were the very same kind of armored vehicles that for the past year or so have become a symbol of what some people call police militarization, something that's gotten a bad rap since the Ferguson, Mo., protests last year. But Walker says now people can see why they have the heavy gear.

Investigators stand next to evidence markers in front of the house of Matthew Stewart, who was shot and injured by Ogden police during a drug raid, in Ogden, Utah, Jan. 5, 2012. One police officer was killed and five were wounded in the shootout that erupted as a narcotics enforcement team executed a search warrant at Stewart's home.

"Society has changed, weaponry has changed that individuals have access to," he says. "And it's not that we seek to militarize law enforcement. The goal is to try to make sure that we reduce the number of human casualties."

Most policing experts agree this kind of gear is needed, but some of the more reform-minded experts are also apprehensive. They're watching for the fallout from attacks like this.

"What went through my mind was the fear that people were going to jump to the conclusion that, oh, my gosh, we have to go back to just being warriors," says Sue Rahr, who runs the police academy in Washington state. Rahr was part of President Obama's Task Force on 21st Century Policing, where she argued strongly for police to think of themselves less as warriors and more as "guardians."

"Frankly, the most important thing we can do is figure out ways to prevent or predict when these are going to happen so we can stop them before they happen," she says, "because there's no way — with the best training and equipment in the world, we [only] have about two or three minutes before the worst of it is usually over."

Rahr says even with military-style training and gear, police should think like guardians. And San Bernardino may be a case in point. Walker recalls the active-shooter safety classes his officers have been teaching in the community. He says they taught one of those classes at the Inland Regional Center last year, and on Wednesday his men saw people there using those techniques, something he believes saved lives.




“This response isn't unique to San Bernardino; in the weeks since the terrorist attacks in Paris, local law enforcement agencies around the country have been preparing for the possibility of more challenging attacks. …. And that scene was meaningful because those were the very same kind of armored vehicles that for the past year or so have become a symbol of what some people call police militarization, something that's gotten a bad rap since the Ferguson, Mo., protests last year. But Walker says now people can see why they have the heavy gear. …. "What went through my mind was the fear that people were going to jump to the conclusion that, oh, my gosh, we have to go back to just being warriors," says Sue Rahr, who runs the police academy in Washington state. Rahr was part of President Obama's Task Force on 21st Century Policing, where she argued strongly for police to think of themselves less as warriors and more as "guardians." "Frankly, the most important thing we can do is figure out ways to prevent or predict when these are going to happen so we can stop them before they happen," she says, "because there's no way — with the best training and equipment in the world, we [only] have about two or three minutes before the worst of it is usually over." …. Walker recalls the active-shooter safety classes his officers have been teaching in the community. He says they taught one of those classes at the Inland Regional Center last year, and on Wednesday his men saw people there using those techniques, something he believes saved lives.”


Police officers reaching out intellectually to the community and “thinking as guardians” rather than as warriors is exactly what I want to see. At Ferguson, however, there was a peaceful demonstration going on and not a mass shooting with automatic weapons. In the latter case I can see the usefulness of what looks to me like a tank. I just don’t want to see this country become “a police state” before my very eyes, and if there were much fewer cold blooded shootings of the poor and the minorities by police officers, the whole matter wouldn’t have ballooned overnight into liberal “attacks” on the police of this country. As the situation is, there is a shooting of that kind every couple of weeks at some location around the country, and that’s really a shame!



http://www.npr.org/2015/08/31/435599585/why-only-utah-is-trying-to-track-and-limit-swat-style-tactics

Why Utah Is The Only State Trying To Track And Limit SWAT-Style Tactics
Martin Kaste
Updated September 1, 2015·

Related NPR Stories --
Police in riot gear stand around an armored vehicle as smoke fills the streets of Ferguson, Mo., in November 2014.
The Two-Way
White House Ban On Militarized Gear For Police May Mean Little
Sgt. Jason Mudrock, a veteran SWAT officer with the Unified Police of Greater Salt Lake. Martin Kaste/NPR
Around the Nation -- For Police, A Debate Over Force, Cop Culture And Confrontation



The phrase "police militarization" conjures up an image of cops wrapped in Kevlar, barging into homes with semi-automatic weapons. But familiar as that image is, we don't know how common it is. There are simply no good statistics on police tactical operations in America. The federal government doesn't keep track, and neither do the states — with one exception: Utah.

The pressure to start counting the operations there dates back to 2012, after a drug raid gone wrong in Ogden. A tactical team from the local drug task force had gone into a little house where marijuana was being grown. But they ran into gunfire. In the chaos, five officers were hurt, and one was killed. The resident, Matthew Stewart, later said he thought he was being robbed.

Three-and-a-half years later, his father, Michael Stewart, dressed in a Second Amendment-themed T-shirt, sits across from the house, recalling the aftermath.

"There were bullets in the house next door," he says. "These guys were — they were just shooting. I mean, this neighborhood has children. Why would they be that out of control?"

The raid caused intense arguments in Utah: Did the agents give Matthew Stewart enough time to answer the door? Did he know the intruders were police? Those questions were never answered in court, because Stewart died in jail, apparently a suicide.

But there was still a chance to answer some deeper questions, such as how often police use these tactics, and for what purposes. In 2014, Utah's Legislature required police agencies to start reporting some basic statistics on tactical deployments.

The first year's numbers came out recently. State Sen. Mark Madsen, the chairman of the Judiciary, Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Committee, says the numbers are interesting — but not that surprising. He's especially interested in the breakdown of the reasons for the 559 times tactical teams were deployed in 2014.

"Active shooter, barricaded suspect — these are less than a percent," Madsen says. And then he points to the single biggest portion of that same breakdown: 78 percent of deployments were for cases involving illegal drugs. "This is mostly about drugs. Mostly about drugs," he says.

This annoys Madsen, because he's a Republican with a strong libertarian bent, and he sees drug raids as cases of government run amok.

"They're telling us what pursuit of happiness is legal and what pursuit of happiness will cause our door to be kicked down and to be dragged off to prison," he says.

In Utah, Libertarian-minded Republicans have joined the minority Democrats on this issue, putting law enforcement agencies on the defensive in a way they're not used to.

State Sen. Mark Madsen, in his office at the Utah State Capitol. A Republican with a libertarian bent, he sees excessive use of police tactical teams as a threat to personal freedoms.

Feeling the criticism, some tactical officers are eager to draw distinctions.

"I think part of the problem is in the definition of what we're calling SWAT and what we're calling tactical teams," says Jason Mudrock, a sergeant with the Unified Police of Greater Salt Lake. He says you shouldn't confuse SWAT with other kinds of heavily armed police tactical groups, such as drug task forces. He says his SWAT team isn't in the business of barging into houses unless there's a clear danger.

"This is the biggest stick in the agency, and we don't use that stick unless we can quantify it somehow with either weapons history, statements made by suspects, availability of weapons," Mudrock says. "All these different factors that we take into account prior to us even saying, 'OK, we're going to take this operation on and deploy it.' "

In private, SWAT officers often criticize the drug task forces, which proliferated in the 1980s and '90s. SWAT officers don't like how the task forces seem focused on taking suspects by surprise in order to keep them from destroying the evidence. SWAT officers say the tactics should be about protecting lives not evidence. But Mudrock admits all tactical police are feeling pressure to up their standards.

Michael Stewart stands across the street from the house where his late son Matthew David Stewart used to live in Ogden, Utah. It was raided by the local drug task force in January 2012, and an agent died in the crossfire, igniting a statewide controversy over the use of police tactical teams in drug cases.

"We've had some of these blurred lines over the years, and I agree with the legislation, in that we're trying to professionalize this a little bit and make it more standardized," he says.

Besides requiring numbers, the Utah Legislature has tightened the rules. Officers have to wear clearly marked uniforms, and body cameras if they have them. And the law now clarifies that simple possession or use of illegal drugs isn't enough to justify police breaking down your door.

On the receiving end of this kind of legislation is Troy Burnett. NPR interviewed him at a diner in Ogden. That's because he's on a drug task force, and the office location is supposed to stay secret. In fact, he's on the Weber-Morgan Narcotics Strike Force — the same task force that raided Matthew Stewart's house in 2012.

"I lost a friend. And a lot of my other friends were hurt. And I thought it was just so unnecessary," Burnett says.

He wasn't on the task force at the time of the raid, but he's convinced Matthew Stewart knew he was shooting at police. Burnett rejects the suggestion that drug task forces are reckless, and he says he doesn't mind that the state is now keeping track of operations. But he also says the debate over tactical operations has been tangled up with a very different question: whether drugs like marijuana should be illegal.

"Marijuana legal or not legal — I don't give two [expletive]," Burnett says. "I have my own opinion, but as long as it's illegal, I'm going to enforce the law," he says.

And he says enforcing the law sometimes means serving warrants with tactical methods.

"We're law enforcement officers. It's on the books. We're supposed to do this," Burnett says.

New York City police officers stand guard in Times Square earlier this month after a blog affiliated with the so-called Islamic State militants mentioned the area as a target for bombing.

Many of the people who want to count police tactical operations also want to decriminalize drugs. Chief among them is Connor Boyack, who runs a local libertarian advocacy group called Libertas. And in his efforts, he says, collecting data is key.

"Imagine if we as taxpayers allowed the government to tax and spend on whatever it wanted without tracking that information," Boyack says. "There would be no accountability, and there would be every incentive for abuse. As it pertains to law enforcement, we've allowed for the same incentive without tracking and measuring this exact information."

But numbers aren't everything. Sometimes they have a way of being ignored. As it turns out, Utah is not the first state to count tactical operations. Maryland passed a similar law in 2010, after a botched raid there. But three years later, the law lapsed after legislators reportedly forgot to renew it.

Boyack says he doesn't expect attention to wane the same way in Utah. He says the first year's report is just the beginning — a baseline. And he looks forward to comparing Utah's numbers with those of other states, if they follow suit.



“That's because he's on a drug task force, and the office location is supposed to stay secret.” A Secret police office? This definitely goes in the wrong direction for a democratically oriented government. Any citizen should be able to walk into a police department of any kind and make a personal complaint as needed. I’m glad to see that legislators in Utah are pushing against this. …. "I think part of the problem is in the definition of what we're calling SWAT and what we're calling tactical teams," says Jason Mudrock, a sergeant with the Unified Police of Greater Salt Lake. He says you shouldn't confuse SWAT with other kinds of heavily armed police tactical groups, such as drug task forces. He says his SWAT team isn't in the business of barging into houses unless there's a clear danger. "This is the biggest stick in the agency, and we don't use that stick unless we can quantify it somehow with either weapons history, statements made by suspects, availability of weapons," Mudrock says. ….


“And he says enforcing the law sometimes means serving warrants with tactical methods. "We're law enforcement officers. It's on the books. We're supposed to do this," Burnett says.” There’s clearly no middle ground in this officer’s thinking as to the cause or the effect, if effect happens to be a teenaged boy ending up full of bullets for walking in the street. I understand that police have real problems when encountering criminals, but the situations simply are not all equal. The most recent case in Chicago was one of some danger, but very little. He had a three-inch knife, but no gun. He didn’t move toward the officers, but away. He was NOT a threat, and according to the articles I found on the Net about that particular “crime,” it will get you a ticket but not a jail term.



http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/12/04/458444673/5-things-to-know-net-neutrality-is-back-in-court

5 Things To Know: Net Neutrality Is Back In Court
Updated December 4, 2015
ALINA SELYUKH

Photograph -- The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals will hear the latest challenge to the FCC's attempts to regulate Internet access.
kynny/iStockphoto


Remember net neutrality?

Right, it's that brain-flexing term that refers to the idea that phone and cable companies should treat all of the traffic on their networks equally. No blocking or slowing their competitors, and no fast lanes for companies that can pay more.

In fact, the term itself was so nerdy that it's been "re-branded" as Open Internet.

You might have thought things were kind of settled with net neutrality after the Federal Communications Commission passed hotly debated rules in February that redefined its authority over Internet service providers.

But the new regulations could be undone: The cable and telecom industries have taken the FCC to court.

It's the third time in five years that the FCC's attempts to regulate Internet access have been challenged in court. Three judges at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals will decide whether the rules get to stay. Here are a few things to know about the lawsuit:

1. The key question the court will answer is whether the FCC had proper authority to reclassify broadband Internet as a more heavily regulated telecommunications service.

This wonky reclassification approach has been the biggest point of contention in the FCC's latest take on net neutrality.

This court, early last year, threw out the FCC's earlier rules because it ruled they were effectively treating ISPs as if they were providing "telecommunications services," sort of like traditional telephone companies, even though the FCC itself had classified them in the more lightly regulated category of "information service providers."

So this time around, the FCC (with President Obama's weigh-in) decided to reclassify broadband Internet access under what's known as Title II of the Telecommunications Act — considering it like an essential public utility, like landline telephone service in the past century.

Various Internet and venture companies and public interest groups are supporting the FCC in the case, which is brought by cable, wireless and broadband industry associations alongside AT&T, CenturyLink and several smaller providers.

2. Reclassification is at the heart of the industry's legal challenge.

The ISPs say they don't oppose the specific net neutrality rules — no blocking or slowing down of websites and no payments for prioritized delivery of any traffic — but present the new regulatory regime as "arbitrary and capricious," illegal, overbearing and arcane.

One big fear is that the government would at some point decide to dictate prices. But the FCC has said it will "forebear from" this part of Title II.

3. Another part of the new rules the court will consider will be whether mobile Internet and cable Internet should be regulated the same way.

Wireless broadband in the past enjoyed some exemptions from net neutrality rules (including some anti-discrimination and no-blocking rules) to prevent congestion on their networks. The new rules regulate them much the same as their wireline rivals.

Internet content companies say that equality was long overdue, while the wireless industry argues that the FCC didn't follow proper procedure to adopt those rules and that the rules themselves threaten the industry's growth and innovation.

4. Not much has changed since the rules went into effect in June.

Telecom lawyers say that's because net neutrality principles were already being followed and nobody in the industry planned to violate them. Also, Netflix — a major factor in how people perceive the quality of their Internet download speeds — has settled its negotiations with several major ISPs to make sure its streaming goes smoothly.

But what about the telecom companies' worries about innovation and investment?

One critic of the rules has suggested a link between the industry's lower capital expenditures and the FCC's new rules, though his findings have been disputed by net neutrality supporters. Economists at a House hearing on the topic said it may be just too early to see any real evidence of any effect the rules may be having.

When FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler was asked about T-Mobile's new unlimited-streaming offer that doesn't count participating video services against data allowances, Wheeler praised it as innovative and competitive. But he also said he'd "continue to watch" how it complies with the new rules. An AT&T executive later said such mixed messages have forced the company to shelve some of its creative ideas.

The FCC has received complaints through its new net neutrality consumer portal, but my previous Freedom of Information requests showed that they tend to get settled without the FCC's involvement. And the FCC hasn't said that it has found any violations.

5. Whatever this court decides, net neutrality will likely end up at the Supreme Court.

Friday's oral arguments are scheduled to last more than two hours, and then the D.C. Circuit Court is expected to rule sometime in the spring.

If the ISPs lose, they're likely to take their case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

If the FCC loses, the agency may do the same depending on the scope of its loss — if it loses on the margins, the commission could consider going back and tweaking the rules, but a bigger loss might lead to the high court.

NPR's Joel Rose contributed to this post.



“In fact, the term itself was so nerdy that it's been "re-branded" as Open Internet. You might have thought things were kind of settled with net neutrality after the Federal Communications Commission passed hotly debated rules in February that redefined its authority over Internet service providers. But the new regulations could be undone: The cable and telecom industries have taken the FCC to court. …. So this time around, the FCC (with President Obama's weigh-in) decided to reclassify broadband Internet access under what's known as Title II of the Telecommunications Act — considering it like an essential public utility, like landline telephone service in the past century. Various Internet and venture companies and public interest groups are supporting the FCC in the case …. The ISPs say they don't oppose the specific net neutrality rules — no blocking or slowing down of websites and no payments for prioritized delivery of any traffic — but present the new regulatory regime as "arbitrary and capricious," illegal, overbearing and arcane. One big fear is that the government would at some point decide to dictate prices. But the FCC has said it will "forebear from" this part of Title II. …. Wireless broadband in the past enjoyed some exemptions from net neutrality rules (including some anti-discrimination and no-blocking rules) to prevent congestion on their networks. The new rules regulate them much the same as their wireline rivals. Internet content companies say that equality was long overdue, while the wireless industry argues that the FCC didn't follow proper procedure to adopt those rules and that the rules themselves threaten the industry's growth and innovation. …. The FCC has received complaints through its new net neutrality consumer portal, but my previous Freedom of Information requests showed that they tend to get settled without the FCC's involvement. And the FCC hasn't said that it has found any violations.”


“If the ISPs lose, they're likely to take their case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. If the FCC loses, the agency may do the same depending on the scope of its loss….” So this promises to go on for years, between the ISPs and the FCC. It seems to me that this is another case of monopoly versus more moderately sized businesses, and the ever present risk that under a monopoly the rates that we pay to use the Internet whether for business or for personal reasons could rise indefinitely and unreasonably. Right now we “poor folks” can afford a low priced Internet fee, and since it is essential to the way we conduct our daily lives at this point, that situation should continue. For one thing, it is now impossible to apply for a job in 99% of cases without going on the company website. Gone are the days of a face to face interview or the ability to locate any other information that is needed without the Internet. AT&T doesn’t give me a free telephone book anymore without my asking for it, and then they got my order botched and sent me the residential white pages when I specifically asked for the city yellow pages. Personally, I still prefer a telephone book because I want to see all the entries going down the page together so I can scan for a physical address within easy driving distance.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/marine-joseph-scott-pemberton-homicide-killing-filipino-transgender/

Marine convicted of killing Filipino transgender woman
AP December 1, 2015

Photograph -- U.S. Marine Lance Corporal Joseph Scott Pemberton (right) is escorted into a court in Olongapo city, north of Manila, Philippines, Dec. 1, 2015.
Photograph -- Supporters of the late Jennifer Laude hold up her image during a protest near a Philippine court in Olongapo, north of Manila, Feb. 23, 2015. GETTY



OLONGAPO, Philippines -- A Philippine court on Tuesday convicted a U.S. Marine of killing a Filipino last year after he discovered she was a transgender woman in a hotel in the Philippines while he was on a break after participating in joint military exercises in the country.

Lance Corporal Joseph Scott Pemberton was convicted of homicide by first strangling Jennifer Laude and then dunking her head into a toilet bowl in the hotel they had checked into after meeting in a disco bar in Olongapo city, northwest of Manila. He was sentenced to 6-12 years in jail, with time spent in detention credited, said court clerk Gerry Gruspe.

Laude's mother, Julita, said that while she was happy the verdict detailed everything that had transpired, she was not pleased with the jail term because she had hoped Penderton would be found guilty of murder, a graver crime.

"But the important thing is he will be jailed," she said. "My son's life is not wasted."

Outside the courthouse, a small number of left-wing activists rejoiced but warned that they would closely watch to ensure Pemberton is detained in a Philippine jail, as the judge ordered.

The Oct. 11, 2014, killing had sparked anger in the Philippines and reignited calls by left-wing groups and nationalists for an end to America's military presence in the country at a time when the U.S. is reasserting its dominance in Asia and Manila has turned to Washington for support amid an escalating territorial dispute with China.

Pemberton, an anti-tank missile operator from New Bedford, Massachusetts, was one of thousands of American and Philippine military personnel who participated in a joint exercise last year. He and a group of other Marines were on leave after the exercise and met Laude and her friends at a bar in Olongapo, a city known for its nightlife located outside Subic Bay, a former U.S. Naval base. At least two witnesses testified that Laude was a sex worker.

Pemberton and Laude left the bar and checked in together at a nearby hotel. About 30 minutes later, Pemberton walked out, leaving the room's door ajar, according to hotel staff.

Pemberton testified in August that he choked Laude during a fight that erupted when he discovered she was a transgender woman, but said she was still alive when he left her in a shower, according to his lawyer, Rowena Garcia Flores.

Lawyers of the Laude family, however, said Laude was dead when Pemberton left her. Police have said that Laude had apparently been drowned in a toilet.

In the decision, Regional Trial Court Judge Roline Ginez-Jabalde ordered Pemberton jailed at the New Bilibid Prison, a national penitentiary in suburban Muntinlupa City.

The case also revived a debate over which government should have custody of U.S. military personnel who run afoul of local laws under a Visiting Forces Agreement the two allies signed in 1998.

The agreement, which allows U.S. forces to conduct military exercises in the Philippines, says the Philippines can prosecute American service members, but that the U.S. has custody over them "from the commission of the offense until completion of all judicial proceedings."

However, the Philippine Supreme Court ruled in 2009 that convicted U.S. personnel must serve their sentences in the Philippines.

In a compromise last year, the U.S. agreed to have Pemberton detained in a compound at Philippine military headquarters in Quezon City guarded by U.S. Marines with an outer ring of Filipino forces.

Left-wing activists and nationalist Filipinos have cited the custody provision as proof that the accord was lopsided in favor of the U.S. and undermines the sovereignty of the Philippines, which was an American colony until 1946.



“The Oct. 11, 2014, killing had sparked anger in the Philippines and reignited calls by left-wing groups and nationalists for an end to America's military presence in the country at a time when the U.S. is reasserting its dominance in Asia and Manila has turned to Washington for support amid an escalating territorial dispute with China. …. Pemberton and Laude left the bar and checked in together at a nearby hotel. About 30 minutes later, Pemberton walked out, leaving the room's door ajar, according to hotel staff. Pemberton testified in August that he choked Laude during a fight that erupted when he discovered she was a transgender woman, but said she was still alive when he left her in a shower, according to his lawyer, Rowena Garcia Flores. Lawyers of the Laude family, however, said Laude was dead when Pemberton left her. Police have said that Laude had apparently been drowned in a toilet. …. The case also revived a debate over which government should have custody of U.S. military personnel who run afoul of local laws under a Visiting Forces Agreement the two allies signed in 1998. The agreement, which allows U.S. forces to conduct military exercises in the Philippines, says the Philippines can prosecute American service members, but that the U.S. has custody over them "from the commission of the offense until completion of all judicial proceedings." …. In a compromise last year, the U.S. agreed to have Pemberton detained in a compound at Philippine military headquarters in Quezon City guarded by U.S. Marines with an outer ring of Filipino forces. Left-wing activists and nationalist Filipinos have cited the custody provision as proof that the accord was lopsided in favor of the U.S. and undermines the sovereignty of the Philippines, which was an American colony until 1946.”


So the US is in trouble in yet another country. I don’t know whether our soldiers made themselves unwelcome by our behavior to civilians or not, but the desire to have ones’ nationality recognized and given autonomy is pretty basic to the human personality. That’s why there are so many wars around the globe. It’s not a matter of right and wrong, but who. It really makes me feel discouraged as the unrest in the world gets worse and worse rather than better. I used to think people were bright creatures, but now I think we are smart in technical and theoretical ways, but not socially. Unfortunately, with the potential for nuclear war and environmental destruction, I want to see us doing things that make sense, but I keep being disappointed.





https://finance.yahoo.com/news/mark-zuckerberg-away-99-percent-211800451.html

Mark Zuckerberg says he's giving 99% of his Facebook shares — $45 billion — to charity[
By Biz Carson, Business Insider
December 1, 2015

Photograph -- (Rick Wilking/Reuters)
Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan.


Mark Zuckerberg announced Tuesday that he's giving away 99% of his Facebook shares — valued at $45 billion today — to charity during his lifetime.
The Facebook CEO announced the news in a letter to his newborn daughter, Max.

Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, created the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. Its mission mimics much of what Zuckerberg and Chan's donations have focused on in the past: personalized learning, curing diseases, and connecting people.

The move is not surprising given that five years ago Zuckerberg signed the "Giving Pledge" — along with other tech billionaires such as Bill Gates — to give away the majority of his wealth.

Zuckerberg will retain control of the majority of Facebook voting rights for the foreseeable future, and has limited himself to giving away no more than $1 billion in Facebook stock each year for the next three years, according to an SEC filing.

Because of Facebook's unique dual-class structure, where he owns special super voting shares, Zuckerberg can give away ordinary shares of stock while still maintaining majority control of the social network he founded in 2004.

The Facebook CEO announced his donation in a letter to his newborn daughter, Max.

Today your mother and I are committing to spend our lives doing our small part to help solve these challenges. I will continue to serve as Facebook's CEO for many, many years to come, but these issues are too important to wait until you or we are older to begin this work. By starting at a young age, we hope to see compounding benefits throughout our lives.

As you begin the next generation of the Chan Zuckerberg family, we also begin the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative to join people across the world to advance human potential and promote equality for all children in the next generation. Our initial areas of focus will be personalized learning, curing disease, connecting people and building strong communities.

We will give 99% of our Facebook shares -- currently about $45 billion -- during our lives to advance this mission. We know this is a small contribution compared to all the resources and talents of those already working on these issues. But we want to do what we can, working alongside many others.

Chan and Zuckerberg made a video before Max was born about their new project.

'Wow'

With the announcement, philanthropists such as Bill Gates and Bono congratulated the young couple on giving away the majority of their money.

Bill and Melinda Gates wrote in a press release:

As for your decision to give back so generously, and to deepen your commitment now, the first word that comes to mind is: Wow. The example you’re setting today is an inspiration to us and the world. We can be confident of this: Max and every child born today will grow up in a world that is better than the one we know now. As you say, 'seeds planted now will grow.' Your work will bear fruit for many decades to come.

Zuckerberg and Chan have already donated more than $1.6 billion to charity in the past decade, including a $100 million gift to the Newark Public School System, a $25 million donation to the CDC to stop the spread of Ebola, and a $120 million commitment to education in the Bay Area.

Bono, the lead singer of U2, said:

In these troubled times, Mark and Priscilla’s announcement today is life-affirming and will be life-changing for tens of millions of people. The scope of their commitment will be stunning to many, but to their friends it is not surprising. This is who they are. Community for Mark and Priscilla isn’t just a word, it’s a core value. I can’t wait to see what they achieve, not just with their wealth, but by their example and with their ingenuity, creativity and vision applied to some of the biggest challenges — and opportunities — of our time.

NOW WATCH: Mark Zuckerberg just got on stage and raved about the future of virtual reality



“Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, created the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. Its mission mimics much of what Zuckerberg and Chan's donations have focused on in the past: personalized learning, curing diseases, and connecting people. The move is not surprising given that five years ago Zuckerberg signed the "Giving Pledge" — along with other tech billionaires such as Bill Gates — to give away the majority of his wealth. …. Our initial areas of focus will be personalized learning, curing disease, connecting people and building strong communities. …. In these troubled times, Mark and Priscilla’s announcement today is life-affirming and will be life-changing for tens of millions of people. The scope of their commitment will be stunning to many, but to their friends it is not surprising. This is who they are.”


The Koch billionaires have done everything they can to tighten the US purse strings for the aid of humanity, while these other more liberal billionaires have given to help people. Their goal of “personalized learning” and financial aid to some of our country’s dangerously deprived public school systems are not perhaps any more important than fostering medical care for underprivileged people. It is, however, less common in our society. Too many people in this country not only have never gone beyond high school, but they have no interest in “individual learning” unless it is to bring a better job – a teaching, medical, economics or legal position for instance. The idea of learning for self-improvement mentally and emotionally is all too uncommon. Many will criticize that particular goal as being “useless,” “elitist,” or worse, “acting white,” but in fact it is essential for a generous, informed and fair society in which people will be able and willing to read more than the daily newspaper. Opening up our minds is not elitist, but our duty, in my opinion. Thank you, Mr. Zuckerberg!