Maine police department adds military armored personnel carrier to arsenal

Portland police boost arsenal with ‘tank’

The department receives two armored personnel carriers for free from the Department of Defense; one is for parts.

4.9.09 / David Hench / Portland Press Herald

Doug Jones/Staff Photographer
Doug Jones/Staff Photographer
Lt. Gary Rogers sits behind the wheel of the Portland Police Department’s refurbished vehicle.
U.S. Army photo
U.S. Army photo
Portland’s M113 armored personnel carrier will be painted a neutral black and will require some work before it’s ready to hit the streets.

The Portland Police Department is packing some heavy armor these days – 10 tons, give or take.

The department is in the process of configuring an M113 armored personnel carrier – affectionately referred to as a “tank” – for civilian law enforcement.

The track-driven military vehicles were offered for free as surplus property by the Department of Defense last fall, and Portland police got two of them. One will be used for parts, since maintaining the old vehicles is difficult.

“A lot of people look at it and say it’s too much,” said Capt. Ted Ross, head of operations for the department. “The benefit is to reduce the danger and exposure to danger for our officers that could be approaching a hostile or armed confrontation.”

There is no longer a turret-mounted machine gun, but Portland does plan on equipping the vehicle with a retractable battering ram – just in case officers need to force their way into a barricaded building.

“Anything we can do to make the officers and the general public safer, we’re willing to do,” Ross said. “We hope we never have to use it.”

Besides, they were free.

There are examples of when a department might need a heavily armored vehicle.

In Pittsburgh on Saturday, three officers were shot by a man with a high-powered assault rifle while they were responding to a domestic confrontation. When nearby officers sought to rescue two officers injured in the shooting, the only vehicle they had nearby was a standard panel van. They draped body armor over the windshield for protection.

The gunman did not fire on the van, but one of the retrieved officers died anyway.

Portland decided to apply for the armored personnel carrier last year because its 1980s vintage special reaction team vehicle was on its last legs.

“It wasn’t all that reliable,” said Lt. Gary Rogers, head of the special reaction team. “There were times when we would go to use it and it wouldn’t start and we’d leave it in the garage.”

A new armored police personnel vehicle costs between $185,000 and $200,000, money the department did not have, so the city pursued the M113.

“It was obtained with the intent of having something that would stop bullets,” Rogers said. “Although it may not be ideal for us in an urban environment, it will stop bullets.”

The department has since been able to obtain a homeland security grant to refurbish its old vehicle. In addition to a mechanical overhaul, the vehicle cab was affixed to a new, extended dual-wheel chassis, allowing it to be enlarged to carry more people.

The refurbished special reaction team vehicle, dubbed “Peacekeeper,” fits 10 people in a steel-encased cargo compartment in addition to a driver and a passenger in the front. It has a shielded turret on top and handrails and running boards on each side, which allows officers to use the vehicle’s steel-plate sides as protection from gunfire.

The back is large enough to load an injured person inside for medical treatment.

The vehicle was pressed into service its first day back from the shop in February, when the Maine Drug Enforcement Agency executed a “high-risk” search warrant on Portland Street, at a reputed drug house where guns were present. No shots were fired.

The “Peacekeeper” is more suited to an urban environment than the armored personnel carrier because it runs on tires and is therefore more maneuverable.

But the M113 is no slouch. The vehicle can do 40 mph and its linked tracks have rubber pads so they won’t damage the road. It gets 2.3 miles per gallon.

The vehicle is still sporting its Army camouflage paint job, which will be painted over with a more neutral black, and it will require some work before it is ready to hit the streets.

Once it is, members of the special reaction team can start training with it and devising scenarios for when it would be useful, said Rogers.

The Tucson Police Department has had an armored personnel carrier since 1994 and uses it 12 to 15 times a year for mobile cover, rescue and evacuation.

US citizens being deported, blocked from returning at border

US citizens locked up as illegal immigrants

4.12.09 / Suzanne Gamboa / AP


This undated photo released by the ACLU shows Pedro Guzman. THE ASSOCIATED PRESS/ACLU

WASHINGTON – Pedro Guzman has been an American citizen all his life. Yet in 2007, the 31-year-old Los Angeles native – in jail for a misdemeanor, mentally ill and never able to read or write – signed a waiver agreeing to leave the country without a hearing and was deported to Mexico as an illegal immigrant.

For almost three months, Guzman slept in the streets, bathed in filthy rivers and ate out of trash cans while his mother scoured the city of Tijuana, its hospitals and morgues, clutching his photo in her hand. He was finally found trying to cross the border at Calexico, 100 miles (161 kilometers) away.

These days, back home in California, “He just changes from one second to another. His brain jumps back to when he was missing,” said his brother, Michael Guzman. “We just talk to him and reassure him that everything is fine and nobody is going to hurt him.”

In a drive to crack down on illegal immigrants, the United States has locked up or thrown out dozens, probably many more, of its own citizens over the past eight years. A monthslong AP investigation has documented 55 such cases, on the basis of interviews, lawsuits and documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. These citizens are detained for anything from a day to five years. Immigration lawyers say there are actually hundreds of such cases.

It is illegal to deport U.S. citizens or detain them for immigration violations. Yet citizens still end up in detention because the system is overwhelmed, acknowledged Victor Cerda, who left Immigration and Customs Enforcement in 2005 after overseeing the system. The number of detentions overall is expected to rise by about 17 per cent this year to more than 400,000, putting a severe strain on the enforcement network and legal system.

The result is the detention of citizens with the fewest resources: the mentally ill, minorities, the poor, children and those with outstanding criminal warrants, ranging from unpaid traffic tickets to failure to show up for probation hearings. Most at risk are Hispanics, who made up the majority of the cases the AP found.

“The more the system becomes confused, the more U.S. citizens will be wrongfully detained and wrongfully removed,” said Bruce Einhorn, a retired immigration judge who now teaches at Pepperdine Law School. “They are the symptom of a larger problem in the detention system. … Nothing could be more regrettable than the removal of our fellow citizens.”

Jim Hayes, ICE director of detention and removal, said he is aware of only 10 cases of U.S. citizens detained over the past five years. Even if combined with the cases found by the AP, “that’s not an epidemic,” Hayes said. He refused to identify any cases, citing privacy laws.

He added that agents investigate any claims to U.S. citizenship, but they often turn out to be false. He said U.S. citizens sometimes claim to be foreign-born, and that immigration officials never knowingly hold someone they can “definitively” determine is a citizen.

It’s impossible to know exactly how many citizens have been detained or deported because nobody keeps track. Kara Hartzler, an attorney at the Florence Immigrant and Refugee Rights Project in Arizona, testified at a U.S. House hearing last year that her group alone sees 40 to 50 jailings a month of people with potentially valid claims to citizenship.

“These cases are surprisingly, painfully common,” she said.

The nonprofit Vera Institute for Justice found 322 people with citizenship claims in 13 immigration prisons in 2007, up from 129 the year before. That number does not include possible citizens in the nation’s more than 300 other immigration prisons.

What is clear is that immigration detentions – including those of citizens – have soared in recent years. One reason is a heightened concern for security that arose out of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Another is a political climate that encouraged a tough stance on illegal immigration, especially after Congress failed to pass immigration reform legislation almost three years ago.

After 2003, the nation launched several programs to detain more immigrants, including one that called on local police and sheriffs for help. Before 2007, just seven state and local law enforcement agencies worked with immigration. By last November, more than 950 officers from 23 states had attended a four-week program on how to root out and jail suspected illegal immigrants.

A Government Accountability Office investigation has since found that ICE did not ensure local officials properly used their authority and failed to collect data to assess the program. As a result, ICE is rewriting agreements with 67 agencies.

The program came under fire partly because it gives local officers so much leeway to decide who to stop. Almost one in 10 Hispanic adults born in the U.S. report that police or other authorities stopped them and asked about their immigration status in 2007, according to a Pew Hispanic Center survey of more than 2,000 people.

-

It was a local sheriff’s office that sent Guzman out of the country.

He was picked up near his home in Lancaster, California, on March 31, 2007, by Los Angeles County sheriff’s department officers on a misdemeanor trespassing charge. He had tried three times to board a private plane, showing lottery tickets for passage on one attempt, officers said in a report. He had also stolen a car and told officers his mother’s car was broken.

A judge gave him three years’ probation and three months in jail for vandalism.

At the jail, Guzman told officers he was born in California, a response noted in official records. But a sheriff’s employee still got Guzman to sign an agreement to leave the country without a hearing.

On the day he arrived in Mexico, Guzman called a relative to say he didn’t know where he was, and asked a passer-by. The answer: Tijuana. Then the phone cut off.

Guzman was finally returned to California legally in August 2007.

Now he can no longer stand the sun because it reminds him of Mexico. His family will not let him talk about the ordeal because it upsets him. He has frequent counseling sessions, but he is shaky, stutters and seems to hear voices, according to his brother.

“He is our brother, somebody’s son, that they deported,” said Michael Guzman. “California is like the main capital of Latin Americans. It doesn’t matter whether you are a citizen or not. If you look Hispanic, they can question you. Deportation can happen to anybody.”

Neither the sheriff’s office nor immigration officials would discuss the case, citing pending litigation. The family has sued Los Angeles County and the federal government.

“When the whole story is told, people will see and understand what has occurred,” said Steve Whitmore, spokesman for the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Office.

In the meantime, Guzman’s mother, Maria Carbajal, often works the graveyard shift at a Jack in the Box because she is afraid to leave him alone during the day.

-

American citizens also have been caught in the net of increased workplace arrests and jail sweeps.

Workplace arrests rose from 517 in fiscal year 2003 to 6,274 in 2008. Julie Myers, former Homeland Security assistant secretary overseeing ICE, said agents quickly sort out which workers are citizens during raids. She added that federal law, court decisions and search warrants give immigration agents the authority to enter workplaces to question everyone inside, including citizens.

But the raids have already led to several lawsuits.

In 2007, 114 U.S. citizens and permanent residents sued after a raid on Micro Solutions Enterprises, a computer printer equipment recycler in Van Nuys, California. They alleged illegal detention and sought $5,000 damage each.

In 2008, the union representing workers at six Swift & Co. meatpacking plants sued on behalf of eight citizens and legal residents caught up in raids.

In one case, three citizens and nine others, all Hispanic, sued after ICE agents raided their New Jersey homes as part of what was dubbed Operation Return To Sender. The lawsuit alleges that an immigration agent pulled a gun on one of the citizens, a 9-year-old boy.

A program to sweep jails and deport immigrants who have committed crimes is more popular. But critics fear the temptation is to deport anyone for anything because they are seen as bad seeds, even if they are American citizens.

-

Rennison Castillo arrived early at the Seattle immigration office on Oct. 28, 1998, to take his citizenship oath. He was dressed in a freshly starched Army uniform and was eager to grab a good seat. He sat in the second row.

Born in Belize, Castillo had lived in the U.S. since he was 7 and had served two years in the Army. But his superiors told him he could not stay in the Army without citizenship. So he took the citizenship test and passed easily, missing only one question, on the name of a locally elected official.

“I felt pretty good. I felt I definitely accomplished something, because having a citizenship to the United States was something that I felt proud of,” Castillo said.

Seven years later, the U.S. government locked Castillo in a Tacoma, Washington, immigration jail. He had been picked up at the Pierce County jail, where he had spent eight months for violating a restraining order and for residential burglary.

At the holding cell, an officer asked if he wanted to go home. He thought she meant his home in Lakewood, Washington “Yes,” he answered. “I’d love to go home.”

She chained him up and told him he would be deported.

Over and over, Castillo said, he told officers he was a citizen. He pleaded with them to check their computer files.

But officials said nothing in their records confirmed his citizenship or his military service. One officer actually recognized Castillo from their Army days at Fort Lewis, Washington, and mentioned their battalion, but told Castillo he couldn’t help.

Then Castillo saw a number posted on the wall for the Northwest Immigration Rights Project. On the group’s advice, he contacted a friend who pulled his military document from the trunk of his car.

Nearly eight months after he was transferred to ICE custody, Castillo was released. He discovered that immigration officials had two files on him, with different numbers, and has since filed a lawsuit. ICE declined to comment because the lawsuit is pending.

“I understand that nothing is perfect, nothing will be perfect, but I don’t understand how they could make a grave mistake like that,” he said. “Because if this happened to me, I’m quite sure it’s happened to somebody else. What’s going to happen to the next person it happens to?”

-

For Ricardo Martinez, born in McAllen, Texas, it was not being able to get back into his own country.

Even though he was a U.S. citizen, Martinez lived in Mexico between the ages of 5 and 17.

Like many border residents with family on the other side, he made frequent trips to Mexico. When he tried to return to the U.S. after a visit to Mexico in July 1999, he was turned away by border officers at Nogales, Arizona, because two copies of his birth certificate, issued years apart, had different hospital registration dates. Not proficient in English, Martinez said he had never noticed the error.

Told to get his documents in order, he got a U.S. passport and was able to get into the country. But the problem was not over.

In January 2006, he went back to Mexico to be with his dying grandmother. When he tried to cross back at Laredo, Texas, in March, he carried his birth certificates, his birth registration card, his passport and state ID cards from Nebraska, California and Texas, where he had worked.

But by that time border security had become far stricter. Agents looked up Martinez in their database and found the earlier problem at Nogales. They claimed his U.S. passport was fake, he said.

Martinez was taken to an inspection room, forced to remove his shoes, searched, handcuffed to a chair and held for two hours while officers questioned his documents, he said. He was told unless he confessed to fraud, he would be sent to prison for six to eight months, according to a court document filed in Martinez’s lawsuit against the government.

“They told me if I didn’t say I was from over there, they would put me in jail. I was frightened,” Martinez said.

He said he asked to call his mother to help prove his citizenship, but was refused.

Martinez’s stepfather, Florentino Mireles, said in a Feb. 27, 2008, affidavit that he called border inspectors to ask why they had taken Martinez’s documents. The response, he said: An officer didn’t believe Martinez was a U.S. citizen because he didn’t speak English.

Afraid of jail, Martinez signed the papers. In an affidavit in his lawsuit, Martinez said he didn’t understand that by signing he was admitting to not being born in the U.S.

It took his parents two years to find an affordable attorney. Finally, at a meeting in Hidalgo, attorney Lisa Brodyaga showed border officers a copy of Martinez’ birth certificate from his parents that included his footprints and a thumbprint and tax records showing he had worked legally in the U.S. Officials agreed he was a U.S. citizen and allowed him to cross the border.

Lloyd Easterling, spokesman for Customs and Border Protection, declined comment because Martinez has sued. In court filings, the agency said Martinez denied being physically assaulted or subjected to excessive force and never filed a complaint against the officers.

Brodyaga said the cases of U.S. citizens detained or deported show more than bureaucratic bungling.

“I’ve been doing this for 30 years and I’ve seen bureaucratic bungling. This is more than that,” she said. “This is an atmosphere of suspicion and hostility, particularly for Mexican-Americans on the border.”

US lawmakers say jobless recieving welfare and unemployment should submit to random drug tests

Jobless should have random drug tests before receiving state handout, say U.S. lawmakers

3.26.09 / David Gardner / Daily Mail

U.S. lawmakers are pushing through plans to force Americans claiming welfare benefits to submit to random drug testing.

Supporters claim the tests will ensure that taxpayer’s money will not be wasted paying for people’s illegal drug habits. Those on drugs will be denied payments.

And supporters say it will encourage addicts to seek treatment.

But the proposals have caused an outcry as more Americans than ever before are turning to government welfare safety nets to help them ride out the deepening recession.

Economic desperation: A man resorts to Depression-era sandwich boards as he searched for work in New York in November. As more Americans ask for state benefits, lawmakers want to implement random drug testing

Economic desperation: A man resorts to Depression-era sandwich boards as he searched for work in New York in November. As more Americans ask for state benefits, lawmakers want to implement random drug testing

The controversy erupted yesterday after it was revealed that the number of US workers collecting unemployment benefits rose to a record 5.56 million this month.

New claims increased by a staggering 652,000 during just one week ending on March 21.

The welfare overload is putting unprecedented pressure on states to crackdown on welfare fraud.

But critics complain the drug testing plan is an unfair attack on people bearing the brunt of the economic crisis.

Civil rights activists say they fear the strategy could backfire by discouraging some of the poorest people most in need of help from seeking financial aid.

Lawmakers in eight states are considering bills that require jobless residents receiving food stamps, unemployment payments or other welfare benefits to be drug free.

‘Nobody’s being forced into these assistance programmes,’ said West Virginia Republican Craig Blair. ‘If so many jobs require random drug tests these days, why not these benefits?’

Blair is proposing the most comprehensive drug tests in the country, which would even include a welfare programme for needy families and women, infants and children.

On Wednesday, the Kansas House of Representatives passed a first round of legislation mandating testing for up to 15,000 receiving child care assistance, temporary aid for families and other cash subsidies for the poor.

Similar bills are also being debated in Florida, Hawaii, Missouri, Oklahoma and Arizona.

Michigan, which began random drug testing of welfare recipients a decade ago but had to stop when a court ruled it unconstitutional, is hoping to reinstate the plan.

Opponents argue that states are simply using the drug clampdown as an excuse to save money.

‘It’s an example of where you could cut costs at the expense of a segment of society that’s least able to defend themselves,’ said Frank Crabtreee, of the American Civil Liberties Union.

‘It doesn’t seem like the kind of thing to bring up during a recession,’ added Ron Haskins, of the Brookings Institute, a Washington-based economic think-tank.

‘People who are unemployed, who have lost their job, that’s a sympathetic group.’

But Kansas congresswoman Kasha Kelly said the motive behind the plan is to encourage drug users to get treatment.

Those who test positive would get help and only after three failed tests would benefits be denied.

‘No-one would lose benefits unless they repeatedly failed to get clean,’ she said. ‘There’s a lot of good here.

‘Shouldn’t you only be fearful if you are using?’ she added.

During a heated debate, Kansas Republicans argued that even grandparents shouldn’t be exempt from testing.

But Democrat Paul Davis asked: ‘You want grandma and grandpa to come down to a state office building and pee in a cup so that they can take care of their grandchildren?’

The Kansas bill needs Senate approval before becoming law.

While the jobless figures continue to soar, more than 31.7 Americans were receiving food stamps last December, compared with 27.5 million the year before.

Drug testing is not the only restriction envisaged for people receiving government welfare. Tennessee is considering a bill to cap lottery winnings for recipients at £400.

Women’s History Month profile: Bilderberger Indra Nooyi

Women’s History Month Profile: Indra Nooyi

3.25.09 / Claire / Hyphen Magazine

225px-Indra_Nooyi_-_World_Economic_Forum_Annual_Meeting_Davos_2008.jpg

The third most powerful woman in the world is Indian American? And she’s part of an international conspiracy of the rich and powerful who select politicians and broker wars?

Well first of all, the criteria for determining Forbes’ “100 Most Powerful Women in the World” are as follows:

Our annual ranking of the most powerful women in the world measures “power” as a composite of public profile–calculated using press mentions–and financial heft.

So on this list, “power” is skewed toward people who make a lot of money for their companies, and political leaders who run countries with a big GDP. Angela Merkel has been the most powerful for the past three years, although I wonder if she has that big of an impact outside of the EU.

I would argue that Indra Krishnamurthy Nooyi, technically occupying the number three spot, may well be more powerful than Merkel. Raised and educated in India, Nooyi came to the States as an adult to get a master’s at the Yale School of Management … and then to step smoothly into leadership positions at a series of American corporations, such as Motorola and ABB. She joined PepsiCo in 1994, and was named CEO in 2006. Her leadership of PepsiCo — for better or, often, for worse — puts her in the position to affect the daily economic and cultural lives of individuals and communities around the world; first world and third. (Here’s a profile of PepsiCo’s companies. Here are her compensation stats.)

But that’s not all. Nooyi is also a member of the highly secretive annual conclave of liberal and conservative political, media, and commercial leaders called the Bilderberg Group. Conspiracy theorists hold that Bilderberg constitutes a shadow government that grooms American presidents and British Prime Ministers (Clinton attended in summer 1992, Edwards in summer 2004 before he was asked to join Kerry’s campaign, and rumor has it that Obama was at the event last summer. Angela Merkel’s image was supposedly a discussion topic in 2005.) They’ve also been accused of starting wars.

Nooyi definitely attended the conference in 2004. Bilderberg attendees vary from year to year, but always represent the 120 most influential people in the first world. The attendees are selected by a 30-member steering committee, whose membership list is entirely secret. So it’s unlikely that Nooyi is a member of the steering committee. But the simple fact that she was invited to attend marks her as a member of the global power elite. And Nooyi apparently counts Henry Kissinger among her personal friends. I’ll pause while you hiss and spit.

On the other hand (and I do mean “hand”) Nooyi caused a mini-furor in 2005 when she addressed new Columbia Biz School MBAs by criticizing the US thus:

Ms. Nooyi began to compare the world and its five major continents (excl. Antarctica and Australia) to the human hand. First was Africa – the pinky finger – small and somewhat insignificant but when hurt, the entire hand hurt with it. Next was Asia – the thumb – strong and powerful, yearning to become a bigger player on the world stage. Third was Europe – the index finger – pointing the way. Fourth was South America – the ring finger – the finger which symbolizes love and sensualness. Finally, the US (not Canada mind you) – yes, you guessed it – the middle finger. She then launched into a diatribe about how the … rest of the world sees us as an overbearing, insensitive and disrespectful nation that gives the middle finger to the rest of the world. … It is our responsibility to make the other fingers rise in unison with us as we move forward. She then goes on to give a personal anecdote about some disrespectful US business women in an Asian country and how that is typical of Americans overseas.

Now, don’t you think that’s what Asian Americans in powerful positions should do: take advantage of their dual or hybrid perspective to help the mired American viewpoint get out of the quicksand?

Nooyi’s taken her (perhaps only mildly) outsider perspective in deeper as well. Under her leadership, PepsiCo has spun off their fast food assets and bought into healthier food alternatives such as Quaker Oats and Tropicana. And she’s well known in the commercial world for her lighthearted, irreverent attitude.

[She] patrol[s] the office barefoot at times and even sing[s] in the halls, perhaps a holdover from her teen days in an all-girl rock band in her hometown of Chennai, India. She gave Enrico a karaoke machine before he left in 2001 and hired a live “Jam-eoke” band to help senior executives belt out tunes at a management conference earlier this year.

“Indra can drive as deep and hard as anyone I’ve ever met,” Enrico says, “but she can do it with a sense of heart and fun.” … Nooyi wore a sari to an interview at Boston Consulting Group and was offered the job.

As chairman and CEO, Nooyi promotes the concept of “performance with purpose,” trying to make PepsiCo a ground-breaker in areas like selling healthy food and diversifying its workforce.

Maybe I’m a cheap date, but I kind of love her, despite the Kissinger thing. She wouldn’t be either a hero or a role model for me. She’s not a hero because — whether or not she actually takes health, diversity, and American moral leadership to heart — she is clearly and pragmatically combining such values with a profit motive. To be a hero to me, a person has to do the hard work of maintaining pure motives.

She’s also not a role model for me because I’m not interested in business, prepared foods, multinational concerns, or hierarchical organization. I don’t despise her field of endeavor for its own sake, but rather because of the evil multinational corporations commit and permit. I’m uninterested in this field not because of the evil, but because I’m by nature a corporatist, not a corporate type.

But I have to point out that people with impure motives and a practical and aggressive nature often get more good done than the bleeding hearts, even while they’re making money. I’m not suggesting that Nooyi’s PepsiCo is a model of pragmatic sustainability: it’s far from that. But what we might be seeing in her example is real female leadership: not the “Iron Lady” brand of masculine mimicking that has been pressed on ambitious women for decades, and not the hyperfeminine, high-level-helpmeet service offered by conservatives like *nn C**lt*r, M*ch*ll* M*lk*n, and S*r*h P*l*n. (I disemvoweled them so as not to attract a flame war.)

For those young women who want to rule the world and still be themselves, still be women, Nooyi might be your best example.

Just why are there all these cop shows on TV?

“Dude, What’s Up With These Cop and Spy Shows?”

4.10.09 / Jake / Nolanchart.com

I recently resigned my job in Shanghai, China and repatriated to Pennsylvania.  It has been a bit of a reverse culture shock, and I keep most of my posts on message, but this is a little weird.

I don’t watch TV, but my family does. Recently, I was trying to read while this cop show “The Mentalist” was on.  Someone wanted to switch channels and lo and behold it was just another cop show.  I got curious and started asking how many cop shows there were, and was surprised to hear a list of over 10 rattled off. Here’s the results of a 2-minute brainstorm… geez.

  1. 24 (FOX) – A Federal Agent can’t afford to always play by the rules. As a member of a counter terrorist unit, he must stop bombs, viruses, assassination attempts, etc.
  2. NCIS: Naval Criminal Investigation Service (USA) – Team operates outside of the military chain of command under a highly skilled investigator and interrogator who is smart, tough and willing to bend the rules to get the job done.
  3. CSI: Crime Scene Investigation (CBS) – An elite team of police forensic evidence investigation experts work their cases in Las Vegas.
  4. CSI: Miami (AETV) – Same as above but in Miami.  (Pete)
  5. CSI: NY (SPIKE) – Same as above but in NYC.  (and Re-Pete)
  6. Law & Order (TNT) – The show follows a crime, usually adapted from current headlines, from two separate vantage points police fieldwork and in the courtroom. (Fascinating.)
  7. Law & Order: Special Victims Unit (USA) – The crimes they deal with are painful, emotional, disturbing, horrific and scarring – and every day there’s more of the same… (Sounds pretty boring)
  8. Law & Order: Criminal Intent (USA) – Stars a detective hellbent on getting inside the minds of the city’s worst criminals in order to bring them to justice. (Booooring!)
  9. Southland (NBC) – Stars a rookie cop intent on solving crime and adapting to life as a cop.  (Ooo, drama!)
  10. Bones (FOX) - A cynical and lonely forensic anthropologist and a cocky FBI agent partner up to solve long-ago murders. (Now this sounds fun!)
  11. Monk (USA/NBC) – A “defective detective” with a obsessive-compulsive disorder who investigates cases the police can’t solve to pay the bills with a single mom.
  12. Castle (ABC) - A famous mystery novelist who is initially called in to help the police solve a copy-cat murder based on his novels teams up to solve murder cases with a young, attractive female detective.
  13. The Shield (SPIKE) – The story of an inner-city police precinct where some of the cops aren’t above breaking the rules or working against their associates to both keep the streets safe and their self-interests intact.
  14. Psych (USA) – A young crime consultant for a police department whose “heightened observational skills” and impressive detective instincts allow him to convince people that he is psychic.
  15. The Mentalist (CBS) – A mentalist turned private investigator uses his skills to help the police.
  16. Life (NBC) - A former police officer returns to the force after having been wrongly imprisoned for years.
  17. In Plain Sight (USA) – US Marshals keep people in the Witness Protection Program alive.
  18. Burn Notice (USA) – A spy recently disavowed by the US Government uses his Special Ops training to help others in trouble.
  19. Chuck (NBC) – When a twenty-something computer geek inadvertently downloads critical government secrets into his brain, his former college friend turned CIA recruits him as a secret agent, all while keeping him out of evil hands.
  20. Medium (NBC) – A wife and mother of three works at the District Attorney’s office and uses her psychic abilities to help crack criminal cases.
  21. Saving Grace (TNT) – An angel offers a jaded Oklahoma City police detective the chance to redeem her life.
  22. The Closer (TNT) – A female police chief runs a homicide division with an unorthodox style and obtains confessions helps her and her team solve the city’s toughest, most sensitive cases.
  23. Cops (TRUTV) – Follows real-life law enforcement officers from various regions and departments.

I thought I would ask to see if any brave souls will tell me why there are at least 23 spy/cop TV shows on?  Is the viewing public supposed to be fearing for their collective safety?  Is this a result of content meeting consumer demand, or the mainstream media setting the tone for the population?

At least it’s still an improvement over China.  There are only a few state channels but no matter what time of day it is, at the gym they always had on a pro-Communist military soap opera.  Usually the “valiant” forces of Mao overcoming the mighty Japanese “bastards” type of deal. What was a bit shocking was one day at a friend’s home they turned on some scenes of trench warfare to occupy their 3-year-old son.  Geez.

German government deleted Wikileaks.de after Nazi-style raid

Germany deletes WikiLeaks.de domain after raid

4.9.09 / Wikileaks.org

WIKILEAKS PRESS RELEASE

On April 9th 2009, the internet domain registration for the investigative journalism site Wikileaks.de was suspended without notice by Germany’s registration authority DENIC.

The action comes two weeks after the house of the German WikiLeaks domain sponsor, Theodor Reppe, was searched by German authorities. Police documentation shows that the March 24, 2009 raid was triggered by WikiLeaks’ publication of Australia’s proposed secret internet censorship list. The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) told Australian journalists that they did not request the intervention of the German government.

The publication of the Australian list exposed the blacklisting of many harmless or political sites and changed the nature of the censorship debate in Australia. The Australian government’s mandatory internet censorship proposal is now not expected to pass the Australian senate.

On March 25 the German cabinet finalized its own proposal to introduce a nation-wide internet censorship system. Australia and Germany are the only Western democracies publicly considering such a mandatory censorship scheme.

While last week German police claimed to the news magazine Der Spiegel that they had been ignorant about WikiLeaks’ role as an international press organization, this “excuse” is surely no longer valid. Despite being questioned by the press, German authorities have still not contacted WikiLeaks or its publishers to resolve the issue, or indeed, at all. The lack of contact is inexcusable.

The situation is similar to the legal dispute between WikiLeaks and the Swiss bank Julius Baer last year. WikiLeaks had published documents exposing hundreds of millions dollars hidden by Baer under Cayman Islands trusts. That case saw the “wikileaks.org” domain temporarily disabled by a California judge following an ex-parte hearing by the bank. Publishing continued on other WikiLeaks domains and following representations by WikiLeaks lawyers and 20 major media and civil liberties organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press, the EFF, the Associated Press and Public Citizen, the judge admitted his error and rescinded his orders.

Like the Swiss bank, German authorities have attempted to silence an entire press outlet over their objection to a handful of documents or articles.

WikiLeaks continues publishing on its other (non-German) domains. If the German cabinet’s censorship proposal passes the Bundestag, presumably those WikiLeaks domains would be added to Germany’s secret blacklist.

Germany and China are now the only two countries currently censoring a WikiLeaks domain.

We are investigating the matter and expect to have further updates soon.

To assist us in our fight against censorship in Germany and elsewhere you can make a donation.

Joe Biden to Israel: Military strike on Iran would be ill advised

Biden warns Israel off any attack on Iran

Vice President Joe Biden tells CNN that the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be ‘ill advised’ to try to strike Iranian nuclear facilities.

4.8.09 / Paul Richter / LA Times

Reporting from Washington — Vice President Joe Biden issued a high-level admonishment to Israel’s new government Tuesday that it would be “ill advised” to launch a military strike against Iran.

Biden said in a CNN interview that he does not believe newly installed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would take such a step. Even so, his comment underscored a gap between the conservative new Israeli government and the Obama White House on a series of questions, including the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and Iran.

While the Obama administration has made a series of recent overtures to Tehran, the Israelis have grown more confrontational out of concern that the Islamic Republic’s increasing nuclear know-how could one day become an existential threat.

Netanyahu signaled several times during his election campaign that he would not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran. “I promise that if I am elected, Iran will not acquire nuclear arms,” he said in one appearance, “and this implies everything necessary to carry this out.”

With his brief comment Tuesday, Biden became the highest-ranking administration official to caution the Jewish state against a military strike. In the interview, Biden was asked whether he was concerned that Netanyahu might strike Iranian nuclear facilities.

“I don’t believe Prime Minister Netanyahu would do that. I think he would be ill advised to do that,” Biden said.

“And so my level of concern is no different than it was a year ago.”

But many U.S. officials believe Israel is serious. Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of U.S. forces in the Middle East, told senators this month that the Israeli government may be “so threatened by the prospect of an Iranian nuclear weapon that it would take preemptive military action to derail or delay it.”

Other U.S. officials have made it clear in the past that they would prefer that Israel not carry out a strike against Iran. Navy Adm. Michael G. Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, cautioned last summer against military action.

“This is a very unstable part of the world,” he said then. “And I don’t need it to be more unstable.”

Among other concerns, U.S. Defense Department officials worry that Iran might retaliate by striking at U.S. troops in neighboring Iraq.

Differences between U.S. and Israeli officials also are emerging on key issues involving the Palestinians. Netanyahu has not embraced Washington’s goal of an independent Palestinian state, and some of his key supporters favor expanded Jewish settlements in the West Bank, an idea criticized by President Obama.

But U.S. views are important to the Israelis. Steven J. Rosen, a former policy director of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, an influential lobbying group, said a decision by Israel to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities “depends to a large extent on the impact such a strike might have on the United States.” He made the comment in a blog, the Obama Mideast Monitor.

Many top officials in the Obama administration have said they believe the costs of a U.S. attack on Iran would outweigh any benefits, and they are considered less likely to favor military action than the Bush administration.

One hint of the Obama administration’s intentions may lie in its choice of top experts.

Richard C. Holbrooke, the administration’s representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan, has hired longtime Iran expert Vali Nasr. Dennis Ross, senior administration advisor for Southwest Asia, has hired Ray Takeyh, another veteran Iran expert.

Both Nasr and Takeyh have advocated diplomatic engagement with Tehran.

UK bank Lloyd’s Banking Group’s cutthroat debt collection tactics

Lloyds bank staff ‘puts frighteners’ on debtors

Bank staff are harassing customers with talk of home repossessions and blacklists

4.12.09 / Claire Newell & Jonathan Calvert / UK Sunday Times Online

LLOYDS Banking Group staff are intimidating victims of the recession who have fallen behind on loan payments, an investigation by The Sunday Times has found.

Workers at Lloyds debt recovery department were secretly tape-recorded saying they would “put the frighteners on” and “f***” customers who owed the bank money.

The bank staff are incentivised by bonuses and some claimed to be representing a solicitors’ firm, while others pressured customers with repeated calls that left them in tears. Customers were told they would not even be able to obtain a Blockbuster video shop card if they failed to pay back their debt.

The employees would appear to be in breach of the Banking Code, which pledges to customers that banks “will be sympathetic and positive” when dealing with people in financial difficulties.

The tactics were witnessed by an undercover reporter who worked at the bank’s debt recovery office in Hove, East Sussex, for more than three weeks.

Andrew Mackinlay, the Labour MP, said he would be raising this newspaper’s findings in the Commons next week when he is due to speak in a adjournment debate on debt collection. “The current rules on the collection of debt are inadequate and need to be reviewed because they are not being enforced properly,” he said. “There need to be severe financial penalties if companies are found to be harassing customers and treating them badly.”

Lloyds said last week that it would investigate the findings. Sally Jones-Evans, director of collections and recoveries, said: “We do not condone behaviour that breaks our policies and procedures. Our first action is always to gather the facts, but we take action where these [inquiries] substantiate improper behaviour.”

Lloyds is 65%-owned by the taxpayer after receiving billions of pounds of government aid. The bank prides itself on customer service and recently ran television adverts claiming: “Every day we are helping millions of customers get where they want to go in life.”

The undercover reporter began her job as trainee telephone debt collector in mid-March. At the induction, her trainer, Martin, suggested his own bank might share some of the blame for the large number of defaulting customers. They had fallen into debt, he said, because of “bad management of money, a change of circumstances or possibly irresponsible lending”.

The reporter was assigned a mentor, Sebastian, who told her about a recent case of an 85-year-old man who had been granted a £10,000 loan by Lloyds and had only a meagre pension to pay it back. “What were the branch thinking?” he said, before adding: “Bank lending – probably one reason why there’s a bloody recession going on right now.”

The trainers emphasised that the job was not just about retrieving money. They stressed that people should be given realistic repayment targets. But would it work in practice?

The first signs were not encouraging. The salary for a telephone collector is just under £16,000 a year but up to £750 a quarter can be earned from bonuses, awarded for meeting performance targets. Points are given for the amount of money retrieved and the number of calls in an hour. It is in the collector’s interest to make quick calls and persuade customers to pledge large repayments.

The collectors were told to ask for a bank debit or credit card payment for the outstanding amount. The trainer made clear that the credit cards could not be from Lloyds, to ensure the debt would be shuffled away from the bank. The customer, on the other hand, could end up paying higher interest.

Support groups such as National Debtline and the Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) say it is wrong to shuffle debt in this way. But it appears to be industry practice. Last week the British Bankers’ Association (BBA), which represents the main banks, claimed the customer might have a credit card charging a lower rate of interest.

On the third day of training the reporter and fellow trainees were sent onto the main floor to practise their technique. One of the trainees listened into a call in which a woman was crying on the phone and begging Lloyds to stop calling her.

A collector called Becky was dealing with another distraught woman who said her case was being handled by a debt organisation. She asked Lloyds to approach the organisation. However, after putting down the phone, Becky said she would not deal with anyone else and she would have to keep ringing the woman.

The Banking Code says banks should “liaise with organisations that are giving the customers advice/support”.

The repeat calls were upsetting. Elaine Molloy, a nurse, said she had been called six times a day at work, which she said made her “stressed and upset”. One man said he had been contacted by Lloyds 10 times despite repeatedly telling the callers the person they were seeking was no longer there.

The trainers said a certain amount of pressure could be put on customers. Homeown-ers could be reminded about repossession and others told that they may be credit blacklisted. One line often used by phone operators was: “[You] wouldn’t get a Blockbuster video card, it’s that serious.”

The reporter was training to work in early collections, dealing with people who had defaulted recently. Nearby was late collections, which dealt with people in arrears for five months or more. They used different tactics to get the bank’s money back. Although they are employed by Lloyds, they told customers they were from Sechiari Clark & Mitchell (SCM), the bank’s solicitors. One was overheard saying they would forward details from the conversation to Lloyds.

A spokeswoman for Lloyds said some of the late collection team operated under the SCM name because they were dealing with cases just before legal action was initiated. However, when speaking to our reporter, one phone operative said it was useful to pretend they were not from Lloyds “because we can blame Lloyds for a lot of stuff”.

Last week Nick Pearson, of Baines and Ernst, which helps people organise their finances, said phoning in the name of solicitors was “custom and practice in the industry”.

The early collection department could, if it acts appropriately, put customers on the road to financial recovery. On the other hand, those who fail to keep up their repayments may end up in the recovery department where there are more serious consequences such as court action and credit blacklisting. Because many of the repayment schedules proved unrealistic, customers were more likely to be passed on to recovery, with an impaired record.

This is not helped by the performance target system that is run in the office. Experienced operatives were expected to collect as much as £1,055 an hour.

It gave the operatives an incentive to set monthly repayment plans for higher amounts, which counted towards their target and their bonus. The rush to reach the targets meant that some operatives did not take time to examine customers’ finances to calculate what they could realistically afford.

Martin acknowledged the problem when addressing the new recruits. “It will be tempting because you get bonuses by collecting more money. Some people are stats-driven and do whatever it takes to collect money but that’s what we are trying to get away from,” he said.

The reporter witnessed the results of this system. One woman could barely pay her bills with her benefit payments of £180 a month and yet she had been put on a repayment plan that she could not afford.

The target system made some operatives very pushy. The reporter overheard one operative saying they would “put the frighteners” on a customer who had defaulted on their repayment schedule for the third month running.

One experienced operative explained to the reporter that keeping the phone calls brisk was one of the tricks of the trade. “Short and sharp – the best way to f*** someone, get their money,” he said.

The recipients of his calls were often left bruised. In a five-day period in the run-up to Christmas, five people were reduced to crying down the phone, he said.

Other operatives had clearly worked out their own system for reaching targets. One team leader boasted that he used to collect £7,000 a day before he became a manager. He described how he and a colleague used to block customers’ bank accounts and cards if they looked like they were not going to make the repayments.

“If they’re not going to pay it, then we’ll try and cancel stuff. We used to put blocks on accounts, everything. Loads of times we did that . . . lucky we didn’t get caught.”

One woman regularly collected more than £200,000 a month, according to Sebastian, the mentor. “Some people here tell me that they’ve listened to calls and she was just putting promises [payments] for accounts she wasn’t even agreeing on. I don’t know why they don’t do anything about it,” he said.

Charities and advice groups such as the CAB, the National Debtline and Baines and Ernst say the problem of setting unaffordable repayment plans goes on throughout the industry. “Lloyds are not alone in this,” Pearson said.

Last week Lloyds defended its collection department, saying that it had been scrutinised by an independent body at the end of last year and was found to be complying with the Banking Code.

The review concluded that “customers were treated positively and sympathetically and were not put under pressure to enter unaffordable repayment plans or to increase offers of repayment where they were unable to do so”.

Lloyds also defended its bonus system, saying that money recovered accounted for only a third of the factors making up the award. It said all repayment plans had to be affordable.

Insight: Claire Newell and Jonathan Calvert

‘It’s horrendous, I’ve never been treated so badly’

According to the Banking Code, customers in financial difficulties should approach their bank early. “We will do all we can to help you to overcome your difficulties,” it states.

But that’s exactly what two families say they did with Lloyds Banking Group and they say they were severely let down.

Elaine and Paul Molloy from Cheshire were struggling to pay the mortgage after a temporary rift in their marriage. “When we went into the bank and said we’d got a problem, they said there’s nothing they can do for us until we go five months behind in the mortgage payments,” Paul Molloy said.

Now they are now back together, their debt has grown to arrears of three months, which they can no longer repay and they now fear they will lose their home of 11 years.

Elaine Molloy, a nurse, says she is being harassed by the collection team. She said: “It’s horrendous, I’ve never been treated so badly by the bank and I’ve been with them since I was 17. I get six calls a day [from the collections department]. They were ringing me at work. I get dead stressed out and upset at work when they call, which doesn’t help my job, looking after patients.”

The family of Alan Wells in Swansea suffered a dramatic drop in their income when his overtime was cut because of the economic downtown. Finding himself £900 worse off a month, the construction worker approached Lloyds for help paying back a debt of £350.

“I was told there was nothing they could do for me. They told me it had to be ‘critical’ before they would help me,” he said.

Britain blocking Pakistan from helping vet student visa applicants

You stopped us from vetting people, says Pakistan envoy

4.11.09 / Richard Ford / UK Sunday Times Online

Phil Woolas, the Immigration Minister, has rejected claims that Britain was failing to co-operate with Pakistani authorities on checking applicants for student visas in Britain.

He was reacting to an assertion by the Pakistani High Commissioner in London that the British authorities would not allow Pakistan to help to carry out background checks on applicants for student visas.

The number of Pakistanis given visas to study in Britain has more than doubled in the past seven years. In 2001, 4,860 visas were issued to Pakistanis wanting to study in Britain, a figure that rose to 10,600 in 2007.

A Downing Street spokesman said that Gordon Brown had spoken to President Zardari of Pakistan on Wednesday evening after the arrests in the North West. “They agreed that the UK and Pakistan share a serious threat from terrorism and violent extremism, and committed to work together,” the spokesman said.

Earlier the High Commissioner had said that Britain was not doing enough. “It is at your end you have to do something more,” Wajid Shamsul Hasan said. Asked if there was a problem with the British system for student visas, he replied: “Yes. If they allow us to make inquiries first, if they ask us to scrutinise those people who are seeking visas we can help them. But the thing is they have their own regime — the regime that vets these people.”

Mr Woolas rejected the claim. “It’s naive to think that we don’t check. We do work very closely with the Pakistan authorities, indeed we’ve been criticised for doing so,” he told The World at One on BBC Radio 4.

“We do have these systems of checking these people to the best of our ability and we are acknowledged as being one of the best in the world.”

Disgustingly, Tony Blair launches religious organization

Tony Blair Launches Religious Organisation

Tony Blair has launched a new organisation about religion and God – called the Tony Blair Faith Foundation.

4.10.09 / Sky News

The former PM launched the organisation as he admitted that he did not pass a “single day” without reflecting on the aftermath of the Iraq war.

In a lengthy interview Mr Blair said he hoped the group would promote understanding about the world’s major religions.

He spoke of his own religious faith being a “comfort” to him at all times and said faith was “a powerful force for good in the modern world”.

In the radio interview ahead of Easter, Mr Blair also denied that his foreign policy had helped recruit terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan.

180 blair in Iraq baghdad

Blair meets Basra troops

He described acts of terrorism as “utterly evil”.

He told BBC Radio 3’s Belief programme his decision to go to war in Iraq had not been taken lightly.

He said: “I do not pass a single day in which I do not reflect on this and think of the responsibility.

“I think these decisions are the most difficult you ever take, and you cannot and should not take them incidentally because you believe that you have some religious conviction that’s superior to anyone else.”

The consequences of action were “serious” but so were the results of inaction, he said.

Mr Blair, now Middle East Quartet envoy, denied that Britain had “provoked” terrorism with conflicts abroad.

He announced he was converting to Roman Catholicism after leaving Downing Street in 2007 and said his religious faith was a “comfort to me all the time”.

He said: “In the end you accept there is a higher power than yourself and that is both something that should make you fearful, but something that also is a source of comfort.”

Mr Blair also revealed his first spiritual experience, as he remembered praying with his headmaster at school when he was 10 years old.

His father – “a kind of militant atheist” – had just had a stroke and was rushed to hospital.

Mr Blair said: “I remember actually praying with the headmaster of the school.

“I said to him: ‘Before we pray, I should tell you that my father, he doesn’t believe in God.’

“And I always remember the headmaster saying to me: ‘Well that doesn’t matter, because God believes in him’.”