Category: Wall of Fame Assholes

No Honor Amongst Thieves

With the number of laws on the books the state has to fast track as many cases as it can. Fast track, in this instance, refers to the practice of offering lesser sentences in exchanges for a guilty plea. This is commonly referred to as a plea bargain and is often chosen by those facing prosecution because the guarantee of 18 months in a cage beats the possibility of 50 years. But there’s no honor amongst thieves so even if you take the plea bargain you may not get the lesser sentence:

A 16-year-old Utah boy was sentenced earlier this month to up to 15 years in a maximum security prison after a judge changed the terms of a plea agreement.

Cooper Van Huizen pleaded guilty to two counts of second-degree felony robbery for his role in a home invasion late last year.

The teen, who had no prior criminal history, and his parents believed the plea deal would result in 180 days in jail.

But District Judge Ernie Jones told Van Huizen at the May 7 sentencing hearing he believed the terms recommended by prosecutors and the probation board were “too soft” and instead sent the boy to Utah State Prison for one to 15 years.

Never make a deal with the devil state because it, like all disreputable individuals, cannot be trusted to honor its side of the bargain. The darker part of my kind of hopes that this type of behavior becomes more common amongst judges. I feel that the plea bargaining system has put a lot of innocent people in prison and enabled the state to prosecute more people than it could if it had to bring each suspect to trail. If more judges changed the terms of plea bargains it would encourage people to take their case to trail, which would increase the state’s costs for prosecuting. On the other hand I would like to see this judge be disbarred for failing to honor his team’s side of the bargain.

John McCain Opens His Mouth and Reaffirms That He’s an A-Hole

One good thing I can say about Barack Obama winning the 2008 presidential election is that John McCain has basically faded into irrelevancy. But every so often McCain feels the need to remind America that he’s still alive (which is kind of shocking when you look at him) and to reaffirm the fact that he is still a total asshole. During one of his recent interviews McCain decided to give us his opinion on the surveillance state:

“It’s the world we’re living in. You don’t like it, but everything I say I expect to be recorded,” McCain told Patrick. He went on to defend its place in the lives of American citizens:

“It’s just the way we live. It is something you’ve got to accept. I don’t particularly like it, but it is what it is.”

McCain dismissed a poll that showed 53% of Americans believe that their phone calls are being recorded. When asked by Patrick if they are, McCain laughed, “no, no.”

“Young people aren’t particularly happy. We’ve forgotten a little bit about 9/11, and how if we’d intercepted the right communications we might have prevented 9/11,” McCain continued.

So we just have to accept it? I’ve got news for McCain, we don’t have to accept shit. Thankfully we have the tools to render his beloved surveillance apparatus impotent. And if McCain expects to be recorded I say we give him what he expects. Let’s follow him around 24/7 with cameras, tap his phones, and stream everything he does on the Internet for all to see. I guarantee that he won’t enjoy it and will sick his thugs on us for violating his privacy and harassing him.

Let’s also take a minute to talk about the 9/11 card. It has been pulled out every time the state wanted to implement some new draconian law that infringes on our supposed rights. After 12 years of infringements the card has worn thin. Especially when you consider that the vast surveillance apparatus currently in place hasn’t foiled a single terrorist attack. If the system hasn’t managed to foil a terrorist attack in 12 years it’s pretty hard to claim it could have foiled 9/11.

I can’t imagine what four years of McCain would have been like. OK, I can. It would have been exactly the same as the first four years we suffered under Obama but without Obama’s pretty bitchin’ speech writers (while the man’s policies are crap I must admit that he did hire some excellent speech writers for his first term).

Checks and Balances

Back in junior high school we spent a lot of time in civics class discussing the system of checks and balances that exists between the three branches of government. It was a wonderful fairytale about how no single branch of the government could ever attain absolute power because the other two branches would stomp it down. What wasn’t covered was the truth, which is that all three branches are playing on the same team. When the executive branch wants a law the legislative branch writes and passes it. When the legislative branch wants a law enforce the executive branch dutifully enforces it. When either branch want somebody to back their actions up they ask the judicial branch. It’s really just one big government circle jerk.

But the judicial branch has another option available to it. Instead of ruling in favor of the actions of the other two branches it can simple opt to not hear a case:

The Supreme Court declined Monday to resolve the constitutionality of the National Security Agency’s bulk telephone metadata surveillance program, leaving intact what a lower-court judge described as an “almost-Orwellian” surveillance effort in which the metadata from every phone call to and from the United States is catalogued by US spies.

Surveillance state got you down? Are the people unhappy about being spied on? Is the executive branch demanding you rule its actions constitutional? Do you want to avoid a public relations nightmare but are stuck between a rock and a hard place? No problem, simply refuse to hear the case!

With the simple act of refusing to hear the case the Supreme Court managed to make the issue of phone surveillance somebody else’s problem, which likely saved it from the wrath of both the executive branch and the people being spied on. It’s a wonderful way to avoid being a check against abuses of power and tipping the balance of public opinion against you. Good job guys!

Don’t Worry Mr. President, The Senate Has Your Back

The best thing about having three branches of government is that you can get three separate affirmations for all government activities. I kind of feel bad for dictators, kings, and other monarchs. When they make a decision they don’t have anybody else to back them up. But here in American when the government does something it’s first written and voted on by Congress, signed by the President, and ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court.

A few days ago President Obama was concerned that he might actually have to release details about the people who he ordered to be executed by drones. Fortunately the Senate reassured him that it had his back:

WASHINGTON — The Senate has quietly stripped a provision from an intelligence bill that would have required President Obama to make public each year the number of people killed or injured in targeted killing operations in Pakistan and other countries where the United States uses lethal force.

The move highlights the continued resistance inside the government about making these operations, primarily carried out using armed drones, more accountable to public scrutiny. In a letter to the Senate earlier this month, James R. Clapper, the director of national intelligence, expressed concern that a public report would undermine the effectiveness of the operations.

And with that simple removal the Senate affirmed that the President’s practice of withholding information about those executed by drones is totally cool. We’re still waiting for the Supreme Court’s affirmation of this behavior but that should be coming soon since the case is moving through the judicial system:

A federal appeals panel in Manhattan ordered the release on Monday of key portions of a classified Justice Department memorandum that provided the legal justification for the targeted killing of a United States citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki, who intelligence officials contend had joined Al Qaeda and died in a 2011 drone strike in Yemen.

The unanimous three-judge panel, reversing a lower court decision, said the government had waived its right to keep the analysis secret in light of numerous public statements by administration officials and the Justice Department’s release of a “white paper” offering a detailed analysis of why targeted killings were legal.

I’m sure the Supreme Court will reverse this decision quick, fast, and in a hurry. We can’t have the government going around disagreeing with itself, it creates a bad image.

Verizon Collecting More Customer Information to Sell to Advertisers

Verizon has notified its customers that it will begin collecting more information from its customers for sale to advertisers:

The company says it’s “enhancing” its Relevant Mobile Advertising program, which it uses to collect data on customers’ online habits so that marketers can pitch stuff at them with greater precision.

“In addition to the customer information that’s currently part of the program, we will soon use an anonymous, unique identifier we create when you register on our websites,” Verizon Wireless is telling customers.

“This identifier may allow an advertiser to use information they have about your visits to websites from your desktop computer to deliver marketing messages to mobile devices on our network,” it says.

That means exactly what it looks like: Verizon will monitor not just your wireless activities but also what you do on your wired or Wi-Fi-connected laptop or desktop computer — even if your computer doesn’t have a Verizon connection.

The inevitable outcome of government protected monopolies is customer abuse. This move by Verizon is a prime example of this. Verizon enjoys government protection from competitors in many forms such as the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) monopoly over wireless spectrum distribution, municipal control over the installation of new communication infrastructure, and outright monopolies granted by local governments to favored Internet Service Providers (ISP). Without any effective competition Verizon enjoys the ability to abuse its customers who have two options: put up with the abuse or go entirely without the service. And this abuse is only going to increase as Verizon realizes it has a captive audience who can be used to extract every possible penny from without fear of retaliation.

Abuses by ISPs is another reason why we need to radically decentralize Internet access. One of the more promising ideas for decentralizing Internet access are mesh networks. I’ve been working with several other people on using a combination of Ubiquiti M2-HP access points with Commotion Wireless firmware to create mesh networks. We’ve found out that setting up a mesh network is trivial and I believe it could be an option in bypassing ISPs, especially high-density in neighborhoods where access points could be installed on every building. While such a solution isn’t universal it is a step in the right direction.

The less power ISPs have over us the less they can abuse us. Our priority at this point in time should be to take as much control away from ISPs as possible.

Michael Bloomberg Really is Arrogant

Michael Bloomberg has always been a power-hungry tyrant but his acts could always be written off with the standard “trying to do the right thing” schtick. But a an article about Michael Bloomberg’s continuing push for gun control his arrogance really showed:

Pointing to his work on gun safety, obesity and smoking cessation, he said with a grin: “I am telling you if there is a God, when I get to heaven I’m not stopping to be interviewed. I am heading straight in. I have earned my place in heaven. It’s not even close.”

I may not be the more educated man when it comes to Christianity but most of the people I know who identify as Christians don’t believe that they will be fast tracked into Heaven. Usually they state something along the lines of “When I die I will be judged by God. I only hope that I lived a life worthy of entering his kingdom.”

Mind you this doesn’t surprise me. The man is obviously a tyrant who believes he alone knows what is best for everybody else. But most tyrants are smart enough to keep their arrogance somewhat low-key.

As for his push for more gun control, whatever. He managed to rule New York City with an iron fist and an overtly violent police force. But his track record on pushing for gun control elsewhere has been lackluster. I don’t see him being able to single-handedly overcome the entire gun rights movement. After all, pride goeth before the fall.

When Different Government Departments Have Mutually Exclusive Missions

Trying to unwrap every mission the federal government has tasked itself with is practically impossible. The beast as grown so large that no single individual can fully grasp it. There are many dangers inherit in such a massive system. One of those dangers is different departments holding mutually exclusive mission. Take the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for instance. One of its missions [Warning: link is operated by a dangerous gang of violent criminals] is to defend the nation’s communication infrastructure. This would imply discovering and notifying the public about potential security exploits. Now consider the National Security Agency (NSA). Its mission is to exploit vulnerable system of both domestic and foreign entities in order to spy on them. This mission is mutually exclusive to DHS’s:

WASHINGTON — Stepping into a heated debate within the nation’s intelligence agencies, President Obama has decided that when the National Security Agency discovers major flaws in Internet security, it should — in most circumstances — reveal them to assure that they will be fixed, rather than keep mum so that the flaws can be used in espionage or cyberattacks, senior administration officials said Saturday.

But Mr. Obama carved a broad exception for “a clear national security or law enforcement need,” the officials said, a loophole that is likely to allow the N.S.A. to continue to exploit security flaws both to crack encryption on the Internet and to design cyberweapons.

It is impossible for the government to both protect the nation’s communication infrastructure and not inform the public about major security flaws. When you discover a security flaw you cannot know for certain that you’re the only one who knows about it. Any number of people could have discovered it beforehand. That being the case you cannot assume that the flaw isn’t being actively exploited by nefarious individuals or organizations. Therefore the only way to protect the general public is to disclose information regarding the exploit so it can be fixed.

This is one of the reasons why any mission statement given by a government agency is meaningless. While one government agency may be tasked with a certain mission another agency is likely tasked with the exact opposite mission.

Taxes Are Proof of Government Sadism

It’s April 15th, which is the date taxes are due for most people in the United States. If ever there existed proof of government sadism it’s the tax system.

Consider this. The government already knows who your employer is. Your employer is requires to file withholding taxes, take out Social Security “benefits”, and other various taxes for the government. If you have children the state issued Social Security numbers, which means it knows how many children you have and when they were born. Getting married requires a marriage license issued by the government. Basically everything applicable to filing taxes is information already possessed by the government.

This being the case it would seem trivial for the government to kick off a script at the end of the year that collects all information on an individual related to taxes, determines what that individual owes or is owed, and send him or her a bill or check. Instead the federal government demands that you fill out the fucking paperwork. To add insult to injury it then has the audacity to charge you fines and possibly put you in a cage if you fill that paperwork out in an unsatisfactory manner.

One can only conclude that the government is making the act of paying taxes more painful than necessary because it gets off on causing pain.

Rules Are For Thee, Not For Me

If you live in Minneapolis then you know that the words “snow emergency” mean that your car will be towed faster than you can turn your head if it’s not parked on the correct side of the road. Tow companies make a fortune off of unlawfully parked automobiles, which is why their response time for towing an illegally parked vehicle seems to exceed their response time for towing a broken down vehicle that is obstructing traffic. But sometimes tow companies get overzealous and they remove an unlawfully parked car owned by members of the oligarchy. When that happens tow company owners get to spend some time in a cage:

An ongoing federal lawsuit in Portland, Oregon accuses police officers of arresting two tow truck company employees after they towed unmarked police cars parked illegally on a private lot.

The five cars belonged to police officers and a DEA agent who were working on a nearby sting. A business owner at the lot says the cars were parked there over a span of two days. The owner first put a note on the windshields of the cars asking them to be moved. The next day, he spoke with one of the officers.

The officer allegedly “responded with expletives” to the note and insisted the cars would not be moved. The business owner then called the property’s trustee, who called a towing company. The cars were towed.

Later, several police officers showed up at the tow company’s office to get their cars back. Per protocol, employees of the company asked for proof of ownership of the vehicles. The officers were unable to display any information proving they owned the cars. They left and said they would return later.

Soon after, a group of cops both in uniforms and street clothes returned to the office. Then, according to the lawsuit, Sgt. Andrew Roberts showed his badge to the tow company employees and insisted that was all he needed to retrieve the cars. When the employees didn’t comply, they were arrested.

When a man in a funny looking costume that includes a badge and a gun walks into your business or home and makes demands you either company or get beaten and/or kidnapped. The tow company in this story made two mistakes. First, they towed vehicles that belonged to the oligarchs’ enforcers. Second, they didn’t do exactly as they were told when the costume-clad psychopaths with badges showed up. Because of those two mistakes the tow company employees spent time in a cage and now have to beg the oligarchs’ court system to be lenient and transfer some tax money from the city that employs the police to the employees of the tow company. Whether the courts will grant such a gift or not is up in the air.

But this story further demonstrates that rules are for us little people, not for those in charge. When we park unlawfully we will face parking finds and impound fees. But when the police park unlawfully they will arrest the tow company employees and take their vehicles back without paying the impound fee.

Dishonesty Kills Movements

A lot of drama exploded over Boston’s annual St. Patrick’s Day Parade. According to every account I had read the organizations of the parade had banned gay rights activist groups from participating in the parade. I didn’t bother digging into the story because I had other things to do. Yesterday I decided to read a couple of stories regarding the kerfuffle to see what exactly went down. As it turns out the story has two sides. Every article I’ve come across has given the side that explains how the organizers of the event discriminated against gay activists but then I found this buried in the linked story:

Parade organizers said Monday in a press release that they had been misled by MassEquality, which had applied to march on behalf of 20 veterans, and Mayor Walsh. The application came from an affiliate of MassEquality called LGBT [Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender] Veterans of Equality.

“We were unable to find any evidence of LGBT Veterans for Equality that would confirm them as a recognized Veterans Organization,” organizers said in the statement posted on their website. “It is our belief that the application submitted to us by LGBT Veterans for Equality was a ploy by them to enter this parade under false pretenses and is hereby denied.”

At a meeting in the mayor’s office Sunday night, parade organizers said, it became clear that MassEquality did not have 20 veterans who wanted to march in the parade. Instead they presented one “supposed veteran” and a group of other marchers carrying rainbow flags, parade organizers said.

“When asked about a color guard, their (lone) veteran replied that he wasn’t sure he could supply any more veterans willing to march,” the South Boston Allied War Veterans Council, which organizes the event, said in the statement.

Being unable to field the promised number of veterans and provide evidence that your veterans organization is at all recognized as such is quite different from parade organizations denying the applicants from marching on account of their sexual orientation. Were I organizing an event and participants misrepresented themselves I would also deny them participation.

But stories like this upset me because I feel that discrimination is a real problem and real problems are cheapened when advocates lie. Had Mass Equality simply brought up the fact that parade participants were prohibited from displaying their sexual orientation then I wouldn’t care. While I believe organizers of private events have the right to establish such rules I also believe that individuals have a right to speak out against such rules. Pointing out a rule against displays of sexual orientation would open the door for discussion. But, based on the press release by the parade organizers, that’s not what happened. Instead Mass Equality lied to the parade organizers and then lied about why it was denied the ability to participate in the parade to push its agenda.

A movement cannot succeed in the long run by being dishonest. Dishonesty is what ultimately killed the gun control movement, every segregation movement, and is beginning to kill the prohibitionist movement. I would hate to see the gay rights movement collapse due to dishonesty on behalf of some of its proponents.