Now I’ll Tell You *Why* An Italian Died

This National Review piece previously cited by No-Treason’s own John Sabotta sure is interesting. A portion of this ramble-fest tells of Fabrizio Quattrocchi, an Italian hostage kidnapped and murdered in Iraq.

As the gunman’s pistol was pointing at him the hostage “tried to take off his hood and shouted: ‘now I’ll show you how an Italian dies,'” he said.

But there’s more to this heroic tragedy than Leeden is telling us. I’ll clue you in:

The four Italian security guards kidnapped in Iraq had their personal protection weapons confiscated by American soldiers just hours before they were seized by suspected rebels, colleagues have revealed.

Breaking his silence about the incident, Mr Simeoni said the Americans claimed that the Italians had flouted gun permit rules. The soldiers issued a receipt so that the arms could be collected at a later date.

The men, who had been on their way back to Italy, were forced to return to their hotel and search for substitute weapons. They managed to find just a single machine pistol and two handguns, which friends fear left them vulnerable to their attackers.

One of the hostages, Fabrizio Quattrocchi, was executed by the kidnappers, an Iraqi Islamist group, two days after the men were captured, on April 12.

You get that? The wonderful American liberators of Iraq forcibly disarmed Mr. Quattrocchi and his companions, leaving them defenseless when they were confornted by local guerillas. While it’s possible that Quattrocchi would have still been kidnapped and killed, I seriously doubt that that man would have gone down without a serious fight, had he had the means to do so. The US military is culpable here for stealing Quattrocchi’s guns, leaving him with a “receipt” and a few scrounged guns with which to fight off the Jihadists. A fucking receipt, probably filled out in carbon-copy triplicate, signed and dated and delivered with a daddy-knows-best-now-go-away-Citizen sneer that every armed government drone seems born with.

Isn’t it strange how National Review’s Micheal Leeden utterly fails to take notice of this?

Something To Keep In Mind

..The next time some yammerhead mouths off about “freedom” here in the US of A: the definition of freedom now includes the freedom to have a platoon of government agents armed with machineguns and tear gas invade your home, kidnap a child, and return him to a Communist hell-hole.

But [US District Judge] Cooke said the agents’ actions “were not unreasonable considering the agents were there to search for a small child who could have been, and in fact, was, carried away and hidden.”

Those small children who might be carried away and hidden require a large amount of force to deal with, you see.

Above: officially not an unreasonable action.

Slippery Slope To Hell

One thing that’s sure to evoke a scoff from the local nanny-state apologist is the “slippery slope” argument. Example: “Drunk driving laws are nice and all, but pretty soon you won’t even be able to have a drop and get near a car.”

Ha, ha. Stupid libertarians, always so paranoid.

Well, it’s not too damn’ funny here in the Northwest Sector anymore:

Washington has, for all practical purposes, abandoned the concept of a “legal limit.” But wait, you say. I don’t remember anything about a “zero tolerance” law being passed.

It may come as a shock, but the legal limit has become a mere formality. A Washington driver can be found guilty of DUI or “physical control” (vehicle not in motion) in two ways:

Within two hours after driving, an alcohol concentration of .08 or higher as shown by analysis of the person’s breath or blood or;

While the person is under the influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor or any drug; while the person is under the combined influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor and any drug.

What does that mean? Who decides if you are “affected by” alcohol? Usually it’s the officer who stopped you — he or she will file a ticket with the prosecutor and declare that you were “affected” by the consumption of alcohol when you drove, even if your breath test was under .08.

And they don’t have any stake in the matter, uh-uh. And what’s that “physical control” crap, anyhow? Keys in hand? Keys in pocket? Passed out in back seat with keys in pocket? More:

I have had the difficult task of representing a number of defendants with tests as low as .06, .05 and even .04. My firm once represented a client with a mere .02. Each of these clients believed he or she was responsible and cautious in consuming alcohol and each client was charged with DUI.

The reason for these charges appears to be tactical. A prosecuting attorney can offer a reduced charge of reckless driving or negligent driving and many clients will “cut their losses” and accept the deal. The risk and expense of facing a trial with even the possibility of a DUI conviction is horrifying. So many defendants plea to a lesser charge, and now they have criminal histories — without ever blowing more than .08.

See how it works? Just like a machine: cop writes ya up, prosecutor offers you a “deal”, you go to jail, cop gets a pat on the back, prosecutor builds that record, and you – well, you get to go put your life back together, Citizen. If you can. Of course, don’t even think about giving any back-talk:

What is a responsible citizen to do when faced with a breath test after what seems to be a responsible glass of wine or two during dinner? Many of my clients ask, “If the legal limit isn’t going to save me, why should I take the test?” Well, the Legislature made this decision a bit easier with a June 10 amendment to the DUI laws, which punishes a “refusal” DUI with much higher consequences than a “breath test” DUI. For instance, a first offense DUI with a breath test carries between 90 and 365 days of license revocation — but a conviction for a first offense “refusal” DUI now carries two years of license revocation, with restricted work licenses available after a waiting period of 90 days and the installation of an ignition interlock device.

Simple, isn’t it? The fact that you are arrested makes it obvious that you are guilty, so we make pleading guilty the least-bad alternative. That is, you don’t want to go up in front of twelve people too stupid to get out of jury duty, do you Citizen?

Hmm? Didn’t think so.

Slippery slope? Hell, we’re tumbling down ass-over-teakettle, and there isn’t a bottom in sight.

The Ethical Standard

WASHINGTON – Stung by suggestions that top U.S. officials encouraged mistreatment of prisoners from the war on terrorism, the Justice Department disavowed a memo that appeared to justify the use of torture Tuesday.

The memo, signed by former Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, included long sections that appeared to defend the use of torture and contended that U.S. personnel could be immune from prosecution. The memo also argued that the president’s powers as commander in chief allowed him to override U.S. laws and international treaties banning torture.

The decision became known as the White House launched a wide-ranging public relations campaign to counter suggestions that the administration had condoned torture. Late Tuesday afternoon, it released hundreds of pages of documents concerning the treatment of prisoners captured in Afghanistan and Iraq.

So, the infamous torture memo has been repudiated after a quick two years. Of course, it isn’t because anyone was revolted by the prospects of systematically torturing other human beings, nor was it even because the subjects of the torture were almost all nobodies.

No, it’s simply part of “a wide-ranging public relations campaign”, along the lines of the usual election nonsense. “Pessimism never created a job”, says the Prez, and people weren’t meant to be beaten to death, either. Honestly. Mistakes were made, procedures are being reviewed, and it’s time to put the past behind us so we can heal. Again.

A “public relations campaign”. That’s the concrete manifestation of the ethics of the government of the United States of America.

Seattle Pravda Sampler

As usual, it isn’t with a bang nor a whimper that freedom dies, but with a penstroke. Perhaps you’ve noticed kids whizzing down the streets and sidewalks on those little motorized scooters? Well, all that nonsense will be done with soon, and the Seattle People’s Press is cheering it on:

Unlicensed, uninsured, unprotected and underage, riders regularly rip down city sidewalks on gas- powered scooters, zigging past dogs and startled elders, engines whining.

Detractors compare the sound to chain saws, weed eaters, Jet Skis and hyperventilating leaf blowers. In mounting calls to city halls, they complain about boys, toys, noise, speed, safety and the lack of rules.

In response, city staffs across the state have been hammering out pedestrian-friendly proposals to regulate the motorized “powerboards.”

Of course the have. Busy little workers those “city staffs” are. And of course the prescription is, as always, “rules”. Helmets and tests and licences and registrations will quickly swathe this little shoot of anarchy in suffocating rolls of government compassion, rendering us all safe from this sort of menace:

Even the slower e-scooters lend them an exhilarating sense of freedom. “I like how you don’t have to do anything but just stand there and, like, just let go,” said Evan Miglorie, a 13-year-old in West Seattle who rides an electric Bravo that averages about 12 mph. “It’s kind of like driving a real car.”

Sense of freedom? Pish and tosh – true freedom comes with having a licenced, registered, and taxed vehicle, son. Just ask any Republican: this is all about preserving freedom, not limiting it. That’s why the Scooter Police will kick your ass if you cross them – they protect your freedoms, too.

And also noted in the People’s Press, the Seattle jail staff murdered a man:

But while in custody, medical staff members at the jail opted to treat the pain with methadone, something Henderson’s family said he objected to.

According to the court documents, the Medical Examiner’s Office suggested that medical providers at the jail calculated Henderson’s dosage based on the amount a recovering heroin addict would require. But Henderson, who was not a heroin user, did not have the tolerance for the drug that an addict would have built up. Hence, the dosage he was given was lethal.

…But he was a criminal anyways and black besides so who really cares and the matter is being taken “very seriously” and “additional training” is being implemented. So move along, Citizen – nothing more to see here.

Note that the Seattle P-I lavishes far more attention on the scooter-nannies than they do to the matter of the death of a helpless human being. The gentle paternal scold towards the rebellious moto-brats contrasts quite nicely with the clipped and vague boredom of the tale of rogue lethal injectors in the public employ.

Unbiased media is a contradiction in terms.

Notes From The Occupation

This did not turn out the way we wanted it to turn out,” [Portland police cheif] Foxworth said Friday. “Looking back, and I know the officers feel this as well, they may have done something differently. We would have wanted the minimal amount of force to have been used. But I feel we need to recognize Ms. Crowder has some responsibility. She contributed to the situation.”

Standard cop boiler-plate when some untermensch gets uppity with ’em, right? Yep, except that this case centers around a 71 year old blind woman:

Eunice Crowder, you see, didn’t follow orders. Eunice was uncooperative. Worried a city employee was hauling away a family heirloom, a 90-year-old red toy wagon, she had the nerve to feel her way toward the trailer in which her yard debris was being tossed.

Enter the police. Eunice, who is hard of hearing, ignored the calls of Officers Robert Miller and Eric Zajac to leave the trailer. When she tried, unsuccessfully, to bite the hands that were laid on her, she was knocked to the ground.

When she kicked out at the cops, she was pepper-sprayed in the face with such force that her prosthetic marble eye was dislodged. As she lay on her stomach, she was Tased four times with Zajac’s electric stun gun.

And when Nellie Scott, Eunice’s 94-year-old mother, tried to rinse out her daughter’s eye with water from a two-quart Tupperware bowl, what does Miller do? According to Ernie Warren Jr., Eunice’s lawyer, the cop pushed Nellie up against a fence and accused her of planning to use the water as a weapon.

You get me, boy? Disobedience is not an option here in America, and the sooner you get that through your thick head the less hurt you’ll be in. Just shut up and do what you’re told. What, you got nothing to say? I’ll tell you what, you’re a smart citizen. You know your place. Keep that mouth of yours shut, and you won’t bump up against a squad car and get your feelings hurt. Now move along, Citizen – nothing to see here.

Via John Venlet.

Endarkenment Update

Consider this story, courtesy of Grabbe:

State police have charged a 15-year-old Latrobe girl with child pornography for taking photos of herself and posting them on the Internet.

Police said the girl, whose identity they withheld, photographed herself in various states of undress and performing a variety of sexual acts. She then sent the photos to people she met in chat rooms.

A police report did not say how police learned about the girl. They found dozens of pictures of her on her computer.

She has been charged with sexual abuse of children, possession of child pornography and dissemination of child pornography.

Police said they are trying to identify all the people who receive[d] photos from the girl.

So, she’s getting charged with sexual abuse of… herself? Will she have to register as a sex offender in order to protect herself from herself? Will she be allowed, once released from imprisonment as a sex offender, to live in the same house (and sleep in the same bed!) as herself?

Anyone out there still not getting the fact that this culture is fork-stuck done-for?

Special Involuntary Servitude Today

I have jury duty today. I’m threatened with at least a fine of $120 if I don’t show up. What good are jurors who are compelled to serve? I’m pretty sure I’m not what they want, but I guess we’ll see. I can’t get this Steve Earle lyric out of my head this morning…

The trial was in the morning
and they drug me out of bed
Asked me how I pleaded, not guilty I said
Not guilty I said, you’ve got the wrong man
Nothing touched the trigger
but the devils right hand.

(Mrs. K predicts I’ll end up in jail if I open my big mouth down at the courthouse.)