here
Officials say drug caused Nigeria polio
By MARIA CHENG, AP Medical Writer Fri Oct 5, 3:55 PM ET
LONDON - A polio outbreak in Nigeria was caused by the vaccine designed to stop it, international health officials say, leaving at least 69 children paralyzed.
It is a frightening paradox in a part of the world that already distrusts western vaccines, making it even tougher to stamp out age-old diseases.
The outbreak was caused by the live polio virus that is used in vaccines given orally — the preferred method in developing countries because it is cheaper and doesn't require medical training to dispense.
"This vaccine is the most effective tool we have against the virus, but it's like fighting fire with fire," said Olen Kew, a virologist at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The CDC and the World Health Organization announced the cause of the polio outbreak last week, even though they knew about it last year.
Outbreaks caused by the oral vaccine's live virus have happened before. But the continuing Nigerian outbreak is the biggest ever caused by the vaccine. It also follows a nearly yearlong boycott of the vaccine in Africa's most populous country because of unfounded fears the vaccine was a Western plot to sterilize Muslims.
Officials now worry that the latest vaccine-caused Nigerian outbreak could trigger another vaccine scare.
Experts say such outbreaks only happen when too few children are vaccinated. In northern Nigeria, only about 39 percent of children are fully protected against polio.
The oral polio vaccine contains a weakened version of polio virus. Children who have been vaccinated excrete the virus, and in unsanitary conditions it can end up in the water supply, spreading to unvaccinated children.
In rare instances, as the virus passes through unimmunized children, it can mutate into a form that is dangerous enough to spark new outbreaks.
In 2001, officials reported that 22 children were paralyzed from polio in the Dominican Republic and Haiti in this way. Subsequent vaccine-caused polio outbreaks have occurred in the Philippines, Madagascar, China and Indonesia.
In the West, the polio vaccine is given as a shot and uses an inactivated virus, but that method is more expensive and requires training.
In Nigeria, the outbreak comes "in the wake of all the other problems they've had in," said Dr. Donald A. Henderson, who led WHO's smallpox eradication campaign in the 1970s.
In 2003, politicians in northern Nigeria canceled vaccination campaigns for nearly a year, claiming the vaccine was a Western plot to sterilize Muslims. That led to an explosion of polio, and the virus jumped to about two dozen countries.
Now, health officials' decision to keep quiet about the cause of the outbreak for so long may look suspicious.
Dr. David Heymann, WHO's top polio official, said that because the organization considered the outbreak to be a problem for scientists and not something that would change global vaccination practices, they thought it was was unnecessary to immediately share publicly.
CDC's Kew added: "The people who are against immunization may seize on anything that could strengthen their position, even if it's scientifically untenable."
Rumors are still rife among Nigerians that the vaccine is unsafe, and several religious leaders continue to lecture on its dangers. Another mass vaccine boycott could lead to further polio spread, derailing long-standing eradication efforts for good.
Nigerian health officials contacted by The Associated Press declined to comment on the situation.
"Convincing the Nigerians to take even more of this vaccine will be a tough sell," said Dr. Samuel Katz, an infectious diseases specialist at Duke University and co-inventor of the measles vaccine.
More than 10 billion polio doses have been given to children worldwide, and the vaccine has been credited with cutting polio incidence by more than 99 percent since 1988. Far more children are paralyzed by the wild polio virus than the virus spread by the oral vaccine. But no vaccine is risk-free.
WHO said that changing the vaccination strategy is unnecessary. "It would be nice if we had a more stable oral polio vaccine, but that's not the way it is today," Heymann said. "We will continue working the way we have been working because we don't want children to be paralyzed anywhere."
Monday, October 8, 2007
aint no stopping ron paul
Ain’t No Stoppin’ Us Now!
by James Ostrowski
by James Ostrowski
Save a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.comSave a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.com Email a link to this articleEmail a link to this article Printer-friendly version of this articlePrinter-friendly version of this article View a list of the most popular articles on our siteView a list of the most popular articles on our site
DIGG THIS
Ron’s Paul’s announcement of his third-quarter fundraising was a major turning point in the campaign. It was the first time he received coverage from the mainstream media befitting a contender.
I just have a few small quibbles and not out of orneriness or ingratitude at the fine coverage.
The MSM actually understated the significance of this accomplishment.
First, the money was raised by a candidate the MSM had given no chance to win and little coverage. Much of the coverage was derisive or dismissive. His poll numbers were in the single digits. Ron Paul supporters evidently don’t care much about today’s poll numbers or MSM conventional wisdom. The Ron Paul Revolution is, among other things, a revolution against the MSM! The Revolution has used the MSM’s rival, the internet, to force its way into contention. This is the first presidential campaign where the internet has been a decisive factor, not just a sideshow.
Second, while money is the heart of the campaigns of the other contenders, official money is the lesser part of the Ron Paul campaign. The heart of Ron Paul’s campaign is a spontaneous, grassroots eruption of real world and virtual activism. This is simply nonexistent with Rudy’s campaign, for example. There is no grassroots Rudy campaign. I would know. I live in the second largest city in his home state and am a close observer of local politics. It just isn’t there.
As has been noted in various places on the web in recent days, the total economic value of the efforts on behalf of Ron Paul is far greater than reflected in his campaign spending. He has 50 paid staffers but tens of thousands of hardcore volunteers spending their own money. I spoke to a volunteer in Albany the other day. He said there were "only" 150 Ron Paul volunteers in Albany. Only 150 in one small city? Other campaigns would kill for that.
Third, it's a mistake to compare contributions to Ron Paul with contributions to Rudy. Rudy collects large donations from the usual suspects, the corporate state elite, rich people who wish to buy political influence. They want something specific and tangible for their money: a judgeship, a subsidy, a pardon, an ambassadorship. In Buffalo, his fundraiser was hosted by a man who did the same for George Bush and coincidentally got an ambassadorship to Malta. A tough job but somebody has to do it.
Those who give to Ron Paul do so mainly out of pure principle. While his supporters expect to benefit from his election, it’s not a specific tangible benefit at the expense of others. On the contrary, they expect an improvement in the general welfare of which they will partake. Concern for the general welfare has rarely provided the basis for substantial political fundraising. Political scientists tell us that people generally do not get heavily involved in politics unless they expect to materially benefit above and beyond the general public. Ron Paul is defying a law of politics known as rational apathy.
Fourth, the average donation to Rudy is many times higher than Ron Paul’s. This means that far more people stand behind those Ron Paul dollars. As the campaign goes on, they can continue to donate while many of Rudy’s influence buyers have maxed out. Also, there’s just more of us plain folk than fat cats, once again pointing to more room for growth for Ron Paul.
The MSM deserves credit for finally noticing the Ron Paul Revolution but they have barely begun to grasp its true strength. Nevertheless, this burst of publicity will generate even more contributions, boost poll numbers, and encourage more volunteers, which in turn will stimulate more publicity. I think the best metaphor for the campaign now is a nuclear chain reaction. That’s why this may be an appropriate campaign theme song:
by James Ostrowski
by James Ostrowski
Save a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.comSave a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.com Email a link to this articleEmail a link to this article Printer-friendly version of this articlePrinter-friendly version of this article View a list of the most popular articles on our siteView a list of the most popular articles on our site
DIGG THIS
Ron’s Paul’s announcement of his third-quarter fundraising was a major turning point in the campaign. It was the first time he received coverage from the mainstream media befitting a contender.
I just have a few small quibbles and not out of orneriness or ingratitude at the fine coverage.
The MSM actually understated the significance of this accomplishment.
First, the money was raised by a candidate the MSM had given no chance to win and little coverage. Much of the coverage was derisive or dismissive. His poll numbers were in the single digits. Ron Paul supporters evidently don’t care much about today’s poll numbers or MSM conventional wisdom. The Ron Paul Revolution is, among other things, a revolution against the MSM! The Revolution has used the MSM’s rival, the internet, to force its way into contention. This is the first presidential campaign where the internet has been a decisive factor, not just a sideshow.
Second, while money is the heart of the campaigns of the other contenders, official money is the lesser part of the Ron Paul campaign. The heart of Ron Paul’s campaign is a spontaneous, grassroots eruption of real world and virtual activism. This is simply nonexistent with Rudy’s campaign, for example. There is no grassroots Rudy campaign. I would know. I live in the second largest city in his home state and am a close observer of local politics. It just isn’t there.
As has been noted in various places on the web in recent days, the total economic value of the efforts on behalf of Ron Paul is far greater than reflected in his campaign spending. He has 50 paid staffers but tens of thousands of hardcore volunteers spending their own money. I spoke to a volunteer in Albany the other day. He said there were "only" 150 Ron Paul volunteers in Albany. Only 150 in one small city? Other campaigns would kill for that.
Third, it's a mistake to compare contributions to Ron Paul with contributions to Rudy. Rudy collects large donations from the usual suspects, the corporate state elite, rich people who wish to buy political influence. They want something specific and tangible for their money: a judgeship, a subsidy, a pardon, an ambassadorship. In Buffalo, his fundraiser was hosted by a man who did the same for George Bush and coincidentally got an ambassadorship to Malta. A tough job but somebody has to do it.
Those who give to Ron Paul do so mainly out of pure principle. While his supporters expect to benefit from his election, it’s not a specific tangible benefit at the expense of others. On the contrary, they expect an improvement in the general welfare of which they will partake. Concern for the general welfare has rarely provided the basis for substantial political fundraising. Political scientists tell us that people generally do not get heavily involved in politics unless they expect to materially benefit above and beyond the general public. Ron Paul is defying a law of politics known as rational apathy.
Fourth, the average donation to Rudy is many times higher than Ron Paul’s. This means that far more people stand behind those Ron Paul dollars. As the campaign goes on, they can continue to donate while many of Rudy’s influence buyers have maxed out. Also, there’s just more of us plain folk than fat cats, once again pointing to more room for growth for Ron Paul.
The MSM deserves credit for finally noticing the Ron Paul Revolution but they have barely begun to grasp its true strength. Nevertheless, this burst of publicity will generate even more contributions, boost poll numbers, and encourage more volunteers, which in turn will stimulate more publicity. I think the best metaphor for the campaign now is a nuclear chain reaction. That’s why this may be an appropriate campaign theme song:
Friday, October 5, 2007
this is their gun propaganda
this is their argument to take away your power. remember: when you give up responsibility you give up your power and you are at the mercy of your overlords! remember that you, the american citizens, are the militia, and therefore must be armed as such.
here
now this site shows you a bit of sarcasm... i think this is right on!
here
as far as gun bans on private property and within privately owned businesses, you cant make rules on private property that violate the citizens rights- period! that is why it is against the law to restrict weapons on a plane (and also to search for weapons). laws are laws whether or not it be a privately owned business or privately owned property. private businesses do not have legislative power in this country. the reason it happens is because we let it happen.
here
here
now this site shows you a bit of sarcasm... i think this is right on!
here
as far as gun bans on private property and within privately owned businesses, you cant make rules on private property that violate the citizens rights- period! that is why it is against the law to restrict weapons on a plane (and also to search for weapons). laws are laws whether or not it be a privately owned business or privately owned property. private businesses do not have legislative power in this country. the reason it happens is because we let it happen.
here
the gotbaum conspiracy
click here
Gotbaum Had Front-Row View Of City Hall Shooting
Public Advocate Reviews Tape Of Incident With CBS 2
by Andrew Kirtzman
NEW YORK (CBS) ― It's a routine start to a City Council hearing. The Public Advocate, Betsy Gotbaum, is getting ready to preside. Councilman Simcha Felder has a chat with a deputy clerk, Vincent Bonavita.
Then, gunshots.
The date was July 23, 2003, the day Councilman James Davis was gunned down inside City Hall by political rival Othniel Askew.
On Friday, Gotbaum re-lived those moments with CBS 2.
"We heard the popping and the parliamentarian on my left said it must be some sort of an act," Gotbaum said. "And the popping kept going and I just remember thinking, 'oh my gosh, duck down.'"
As the video shows, the Council photographer, Dan Luhmann, springs into action as officer Richard Burt, off-camera, fires shots at the assailant. Most duck for cover. Councilman Felder crouches behind the clerk's table.
On the video, a voice is heard screaming out, "It's in the balcony!"
Bonavita tries desperately to warn people where the assassin's shots have come from. Few in this room know whether the shooter is dead, or still alive and dangerous. Even fewer realize that his victim is Councilman Davis.
"It was complete confusion," Gotbaum said. "They knew something happened in balancy, but nobody knew what happened."
Gotbaum was worried about a half-dozen interns from her office who were in the balcony near Davis.
"When I heard them yelling 'it's in the balcony, it's in the balcony,' I was concerned about the kids up there," she said. "You know, they're young kids."
Fortunately, none were hurt, but for Gotbaum the memories are still vivid three years later.
"Every time I go through the chambers of the City Council I remember it," she said. "You just remember it. You remember that feeling."
(© MMVI, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.)
here
Gotbaum: Daughter-In-Law 'Manhandled' By Police
Public Advocate Questions Treatment Of Carol Gotbaum
Featured Slideshows:
Incredible Fighter Jets
Jessica Simpson Then To Now
Openly Gay Celebrities
Best Movie Bloopers
Reporting
Andrew Kirtzman
NEW YORK (CBS) ―
Still grieving her daughter-in-law's untimely death, the public advocate has launched a blistering attack upon a police department thousands of miles away.
Betsy Gotbaum says she wants to know why Carol Anne Gotbaum died in a police holding cell at a Phoenix airport.
"Carol, who was only 5-foot-7 and 105 pounds, appears to have been manhandled by the Phoenix Police Department," Betsy Gotbaum said.
"She cried out for help at the airport, but her pleas appear to have been met by mistreatment."
At the same time the family revealed Gotbaum was headed to an alcohol rehabilitation center when the incident began Friday night.
On Monday, the Phoenix P.D. seemed to back-pedal from their initial report that Gotbaum strangled herself to death while struggling alone with her handcuffs.
"The Medical Examiner will have to be the one who rules on the cause of death," Phoenix Police Lt. Andy Hill said.
The incident began Friday night, when Gotbaum missed her flight from Phoenix's Sky Harbor Airport to Tucson. Police say she started yelling and screaming, and had to be wrestled to the ground and handcuffed.
She died soon afterwards when police noticed that things had become strangely quiet in her cell.
"This has been a horrible tragedy for my family, for my stepson and my three grandchildren," Betsy Gotbaum said.
Security consultant Patrick Brosnan is a former NYPD detective. He's mystified by assertions that a handcuffed woman could strangle herself.
"I've actually never heard of a documented case where this set of facts caused someone to die," Brosnan said.
As Brosnan demonstrated, it would be impossible for someone to pull her arms over her head from behind. More likely, she could have run her handcuffs under her feet.
"I dont have great range of motion, but it's extremely difficult," Brosnan said.
Gotbaum lived on a quiet, Upper West Side street, which is lined with trees and expensive brownstones. She lived on the street with her three children.
One neighbor says Gotbaum's case frightens her.
"I think we can all look and say this can happen to me," Jonna Espey said. "This is amazing. This is really frightening."
Gotbaum's family has now hired an attorney to monitor both the autopsy and the inquiry into her untimely death.
The Phoenix Medical Examiner is expected to rule on a cause of death as early as Tuesday.
here
Passenger Describes Gotbaum Incident In Phoenix
Woman: 'She Was Screaming, 'You're Hurting Me!''
Featured Slideshows:
Incredible Fighter Jets
Jessica Simpson Then To Now
Openly Gay Celebrities
Best Movie Bloopers
Reporting
Andrew Kirtzman
NEW YORK (CBS) ―
CBS 2 HD has learned more about the wild confrontation between a Manhattan woman and police inside an Arizona airport. Other passengers are now describing what they saw minutes before Carol Anne Gotbaum was found dead inside a holding cell.
CBS 2 HD spoke to one woman who was there, but did not want to be identified.
"She got her cell phone, broke it on a couple of customers and she threw it on the floor, hit them," the woman said.
Gotbaum, the daughter-in-law of New York City Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum, was on her way to an alcohol rehabilitation clinic Friday when she missed her plane and started to scream. Police handcuffed her and put her in a holding room.
"She was screaming, 'You're hurting me! The handcuffs are too tight on me!'" the woman said.
The Phoenix medical examiner is attempting to learn whether she strangled herself with her handcuffs, as police say. Autopsy results have yet to be released, but critics of the police are already crying foul.
"One has to wonder whether there was not some over-reaction, some excessive force and entirely inappropriate response to the problem here," said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union.
After the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks security was intensified at airports around the country. The question in this case is whether all that new security did more harm than good.
"They come there with weapons. They come there with an orientation towards force -- that's what police officers do," John Jay College Professor Eugene O'Donnell said. "And they should be reserved, absolutely reserved, for situations where they are needed and where there really is a genuine breach of the peace, not the kinds of scenes that are repeated all over the country every day in airports."
Phoenix police have insisted they were following procedure in the case. And reports of Gotbaum's alcoholism and even two suicide attempts suggest she's had an unstable past.
Until a cause of death is determined, the case will continue to remain a mystery.
Two autopsies were performed Tuesday, one by the local medical examiner and a second by an independent pathologist hired by a Gotbaum family attorney.
here
Gotbaum Autopsy: Bruises Indicate Struggle
Results Inconclusive However, Toxicology Results Needed
PHOENIX (AP) ― A private investigator observing an autopsy of a woman who died after being detained at the Phoenix airport said bruises were scattered across her body, indicating there was a struggle, an attorney for the woman's family said.
The autopsy conducted Tuesday on Carol Anne Gotbaum was inconclusive, and toxicology results needed to determine a cause of death will not be available for a few weeks, a county medical examiner said.
Gotbaum's family accuses police of manhandling the New York woman when they arrested her Friday. They have hired the private investigator, an attorney to monitor the police investigation and a pathologist who performed a second autopsy Tuesday night.
Authorities have said Gotbaum, who was handcuffed and shackled to a bench, may have accidentally strangled herself Friday. David Boyer, the acting director of the Maricopa County Medical Examiner's Office, would not say whether the official autopsy supports or refutes that theory.
"The doctor in this case is waiting for all testing to be done before she would rule on the cause and manner" of death, Boyer said. He said it will be a few weeks before toxicology tests are completed on Gotbaum, who was arrested for disorderly conduct after she was kept off a flight at Sky Harbor International Airport.
Michael Manning, who was hired by the family to monitor the police investigation, said the private investigator who watched the official autopsy said numerous bruises were scattered across Gotbaum's body.
"The body shows signs of a struggle," Manning said. "There are ligature marks, and some of those ligature marks match the chain that they used to chain her to the bench."
Manning said renowned forensic pathologist Cyril Wecht, whom the family hired to conduct the second autopsy, was "going to prepare his report and get back with us in a week or so."
Gotbaum, 45, was on her way to an alcohol treatment program in Tucson when police stopped her. Authorities said she was late for a flight and became angry when a gate crew wouldn't let her on the plane.
Officers handcuffed Gotbaum behind her back, shackled her to a bench and left her alone in a detention room. Police said she was later found unconscious and not breathing with the chain from the shackle pulled against the front of her neck. It appeared that Gotbaum got tangled as she tried to manipulate the handcuffs from behind her to the front, police said.
Police spokesman Sgt. Andy Hill said officers followed established policy while detaining Gotbaum. Police also said their procedures for arresting someone at the airport haven't changed since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
The Phoenix Police Department's Professional Standards Bureau is conducting an internal investigation, a standard procedure following an in-custody death.
Manning said Gotbaum started drinking heavily about three years ago, and her family noticed a serious problem with alcoholism about a year ago, Manning said. He said she left her three children with her husband, Noah, and headed to Tucson to get better.
"When she landed in Phoenix, she talked with her husband," Manning said. "She said, `I want to do this for us. I want to do this for our kids. I'm committed to this. I'm so happy....' Everything was going swimmingly well when she landed."
Manning said he's still interviewing witnesses and the family hasn't decided whether to sue Phoenix police.
Gotbaum Had Front-Row View Of City Hall Shooting
Public Advocate Reviews Tape Of Incident With CBS 2
by Andrew Kirtzman
NEW YORK (CBS) ― It's a routine start to a City Council hearing. The Public Advocate, Betsy Gotbaum, is getting ready to preside. Councilman Simcha Felder has a chat with a deputy clerk, Vincent Bonavita.
Then, gunshots.
The date was July 23, 2003, the day Councilman James Davis was gunned down inside City Hall by political rival Othniel Askew.
On Friday, Gotbaum re-lived those moments with CBS 2.
"We heard the popping and the parliamentarian on my left said it must be some sort of an act," Gotbaum said. "And the popping kept going and I just remember thinking, 'oh my gosh, duck down.'"
As the video shows, the Council photographer, Dan Luhmann, springs into action as officer Richard Burt, off-camera, fires shots at the assailant. Most duck for cover. Councilman Felder crouches behind the clerk's table.
On the video, a voice is heard screaming out, "It's in the balcony!"
Bonavita tries desperately to warn people where the assassin's shots have come from. Few in this room know whether the shooter is dead, or still alive and dangerous. Even fewer realize that his victim is Councilman Davis.
"It was complete confusion," Gotbaum said. "They knew something happened in balancy, but nobody knew what happened."
Gotbaum was worried about a half-dozen interns from her office who were in the balcony near Davis.
"When I heard them yelling 'it's in the balcony, it's in the balcony,' I was concerned about the kids up there," she said. "You know, they're young kids."
Fortunately, none were hurt, but for Gotbaum the memories are still vivid three years later.
"Every time I go through the chambers of the City Council I remember it," she said. "You just remember it. You remember that feeling."
(© MMVI, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.)
here
Gotbaum: Daughter-In-Law 'Manhandled' By Police
Public Advocate Questions Treatment Of Carol Gotbaum
Featured Slideshows:
Incredible Fighter Jets
Jessica Simpson Then To Now
Openly Gay Celebrities
Best Movie Bloopers
Reporting
Andrew Kirtzman
NEW YORK (CBS) ―
Still grieving her daughter-in-law's untimely death, the public advocate has launched a blistering attack upon a police department thousands of miles away.
Betsy Gotbaum says she wants to know why Carol Anne Gotbaum died in a police holding cell at a Phoenix airport.
"Carol, who was only 5-foot-7 and 105 pounds, appears to have been manhandled by the Phoenix Police Department," Betsy Gotbaum said.
"She cried out for help at the airport, but her pleas appear to have been met by mistreatment."
At the same time the family revealed Gotbaum was headed to an alcohol rehabilitation center when the incident began Friday night.
On Monday, the Phoenix P.D. seemed to back-pedal from their initial report that Gotbaum strangled herself to death while struggling alone with her handcuffs.
"The Medical Examiner will have to be the one who rules on the cause of death," Phoenix Police Lt. Andy Hill said.
The incident began Friday night, when Gotbaum missed her flight from Phoenix's Sky Harbor Airport to Tucson. Police say she started yelling and screaming, and had to be wrestled to the ground and handcuffed.
She died soon afterwards when police noticed that things had become strangely quiet in her cell.
"This has been a horrible tragedy for my family, for my stepson and my three grandchildren," Betsy Gotbaum said.
Security consultant Patrick Brosnan is a former NYPD detective. He's mystified by assertions that a handcuffed woman could strangle herself.
"I've actually never heard of a documented case where this set of facts caused someone to die," Brosnan said.
As Brosnan demonstrated, it would be impossible for someone to pull her arms over her head from behind. More likely, she could have run her handcuffs under her feet.
"I dont have great range of motion, but it's extremely difficult," Brosnan said.
Gotbaum lived on a quiet, Upper West Side street, which is lined with trees and expensive brownstones. She lived on the street with her three children.
One neighbor says Gotbaum's case frightens her.
"I think we can all look and say this can happen to me," Jonna Espey said. "This is amazing. This is really frightening."
Gotbaum's family has now hired an attorney to monitor both the autopsy and the inquiry into her untimely death.
The Phoenix Medical Examiner is expected to rule on a cause of death as early as Tuesday.
here
Passenger Describes Gotbaum Incident In Phoenix
Woman: 'She Was Screaming, 'You're Hurting Me!''
Featured Slideshows:
Incredible Fighter Jets
Jessica Simpson Then To Now
Openly Gay Celebrities
Best Movie Bloopers
Reporting
Andrew Kirtzman
NEW YORK (CBS) ―
CBS 2 HD has learned more about the wild confrontation between a Manhattan woman and police inside an Arizona airport. Other passengers are now describing what they saw minutes before Carol Anne Gotbaum was found dead inside a holding cell.
CBS 2 HD spoke to one woman who was there, but did not want to be identified.
"She got her cell phone, broke it on a couple of customers and she threw it on the floor, hit them," the woman said.
Gotbaum, the daughter-in-law of New York City Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum, was on her way to an alcohol rehabilitation clinic Friday when she missed her plane and started to scream. Police handcuffed her and put her in a holding room.
"She was screaming, 'You're hurting me! The handcuffs are too tight on me!'" the woman said.
The Phoenix medical examiner is attempting to learn whether she strangled herself with her handcuffs, as police say. Autopsy results have yet to be released, but critics of the police are already crying foul.
"One has to wonder whether there was not some over-reaction, some excessive force and entirely inappropriate response to the problem here," said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union.
After the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks security was intensified at airports around the country. The question in this case is whether all that new security did more harm than good.
"They come there with weapons. They come there with an orientation towards force -- that's what police officers do," John Jay College Professor Eugene O'Donnell said. "And they should be reserved, absolutely reserved, for situations where they are needed and where there really is a genuine breach of the peace, not the kinds of scenes that are repeated all over the country every day in airports."
Phoenix police have insisted they were following procedure in the case. And reports of Gotbaum's alcoholism and even two suicide attempts suggest she's had an unstable past.
Until a cause of death is determined, the case will continue to remain a mystery.
Two autopsies were performed Tuesday, one by the local medical examiner and a second by an independent pathologist hired by a Gotbaum family attorney.
here
Gotbaum Autopsy: Bruises Indicate Struggle
Results Inconclusive However, Toxicology Results Needed
PHOENIX (AP) ― A private investigator observing an autopsy of a woman who died after being detained at the Phoenix airport said bruises were scattered across her body, indicating there was a struggle, an attorney for the woman's family said.
The autopsy conducted Tuesday on Carol Anne Gotbaum was inconclusive, and toxicology results needed to determine a cause of death will not be available for a few weeks, a county medical examiner said.
Gotbaum's family accuses police of manhandling the New York woman when they arrested her Friday. They have hired the private investigator, an attorney to monitor the police investigation and a pathologist who performed a second autopsy Tuesday night.
Authorities have said Gotbaum, who was handcuffed and shackled to a bench, may have accidentally strangled herself Friday. David Boyer, the acting director of the Maricopa County Medical Examiner's Office, would not say whether the official autopsy supports or refutes that theory.
"The doctor in this case is waiting for all testing to be done before she would rule on the cause and manner" of death, Boyer said. He said it will be a few weeks before toxicology tests are completed on Gotbaum, who was arrested for disorderly conduct after she was kept off a flight at Sky Harbor International Airport.
Michael Manning, who was hired by the family to monitor the police investigation, said the private investigator who watched the official autopsy said numerous bruises were scattered across Gotbaum's body.
"The body shows signs of a struggle," Manning said. "There are ligature marks, and some of those ligature marks match the chain that they used to chain her to the bench."
Manning said renowned forensic pathologist Cyril Wecht, whom the family hired to conduct the second autopsy, was "going to prepare his report and get back with us in a week or so."
Gotbaum, 45, was on her way to an alcohol treatment program in Tucson when police stopped her. Authorities said she was late for a flight and became angry when a gate crew wouldn't let her on the plane.
Officers handcuffed Gotbaum behind her back, shackled her to a bench and left her alone in a detention room. Police said she was later found unconscious and not breathing with the chain from the shackle pulled against the front of her neck. It appeared that Gotbaum got tangled as she tried to manipulate the handcuffs from behind her to the front, police said.
Police spokesman Sgt. Andy Hill said officers followed established policy while detaining Gotbaum. Police also said their procedures for arresting someone at the airport haven't changed since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
The Phoenix Police Department's Professional Standards Bureau is conducting an internal investigation, a standard procedure following an in-custody death.
Manning said Gotbaum started drinking heavily about three years ago, and her family noticed a serious problem with alcoholism about a year ago, Manning said. He said she left her three children with her husband, Noah, and headed to Tucson to get better.
"When she landed in Phoenix, she talked with her husband," Manning said. "She said, `I want to do this for us. I want to do this for our kids. I'm committed to this. I'm so happy....' Everything was going swimmingly well when she landed."
Manning said he's still interviewing witnesses and the family hasn't decided whether to sue Phoenix police.
Thursday, October 4, 2007
Seized At Gunpoint For Looking At Cops
click here
Seized At Gunpoint For Looking At Cops
Disabled men entered onto terrorism database indefinitely after detention and questioning
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Thursday, Oct 4, 2007
Two disabled men from Bournemouth, England were seized from a pub at gunpoint by police under the terrorism act, taken to the local police station and questioned for 45 minutes after one of them opened his mail and the other looked at a police officer.
The Bournemouth Daily Echo reports that Bob Hamlen, 47, and Michael Burbidge, 31 were dumbfounded when approached by officers in a beer garden overlooking the security checkpoint at the entrance to the Highcliff Marriott Hotel where top British politicians are currently staying for the annual Labour Party conference.
Mr Hamlen told reporters:
"We were treated like terrorist suspects.... It was so over the top, there were about eight officers around us asking questions which was very frightening.
"We told them we lived round the corner and this was our local pub. But, while an armed officer pointed his gun at us from the other side of the street, they made us empty our pockets and put all our possessions on the table. Then they checked all our credit cards and documents.
"I was carrying my disabled bus pass but it didn't make any difference. I needed to go to the toilet and an officer went with me in case I escaped. After radioing through the information, they asked us to accompany them, in separate police cars, to the police station."
Mr Hamlen also made it clear that he has arthritis and brittle bone disease and has been registered disabled for five years, while Mr Burbidge has been paralysed all his life and relies on a wheelchair and crutches to get around.
The two men hardly fit the description of hardcore Al Qaeda terror suspects, but then that does not matter because everyone is now a suspect under the 2000 terrorism act.
Mr Hamlen continued:
"They said the reason I was being taken to the police station was because I had been seen passing a white envelope.
"But all I did was take my post out of my jacket pocket and open an electricity bill.
"On Michael's stop and search form they said they wanted to speak to him, under the Terrorism Act, because he had been looking at a police officer.
"That area of town is saturated with police officers and, from where we were sitting, it would have been impossible not to be watching one."
The men were then taken to the police station and questioned for 45 minutes. After this the police asked the two men to take them to their flat so they could search it. When the search turned up nothing out of the ordinary police decided the two men posed no threat and returned them to the pub.
Mr Hamlen and Mr Burbidge, who have lived in the area for many years, say they feel violated and are demanding an official apology.
Though the two were not arrested or charged they were issued with stop and search records which will be placed on the UK stop and search database and kept there indefinitely, as per standard procedure.
Under section 44 of the terrorism act of 2000, police were granted the power to stop and search anyone without the need to show that they have "reasonable suspicion" an offence is being committed, providing the stop takes place in an area designated as a potential terrorist target.
Currently, however, the whole of London is covered by the powers, meaning the stops can happen anywhere in the city.
Furthermore section 45 states:
45. - (1) The power conferred by an authorisation under section 44(1) or (2)-(a) may be exercised only for the purpose of searching for articles of a kind which could be used in connection with terrorism, and
(b) may be exercised whether or not the constable has grounds for suspecting the presence of articles of that kind.
Under the rules, officers have been told to avoid “racial profiling” and “not to focus on specific groups”. The advice adds: “Be aware that there is no specific racial, ethnic, sexual or religious profile for terrorists.”
Christopher Gill, chairman of the Freedom Association, has previously commented: "These laws are terrifyingly wide ranging, and fail even to demand suspicion in order to stop someone and thus list them for life.
"They are being over-used, and innocent people are having their records marked as a result. The police are supposed to protect the innocent from the guilty, not smear their records arbitrarily."
Incidents of Stop and search have risen dramatically recently in the UK, so much so that senior police officials are now questioning the validity of the law.
Last December the UK's senior counter terrorism police officer questioned the value of stop and search powers, noting that very few arrests or charges arise from searches.
In February, Met Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair vowed to review the use of terror stop and search powers after a Metropolitan Police Authority report said it was causing "untold damage" to certain communities.
Police even refused to accept enhancements to stop and search powers earlier this year, declaring them "unnecessary" and arguing that such measures were counter-productive as they erode public trust. Such enhancements would have given police the power to ask an individual who they are and where they are going. Under the proposed legislation, withholding such information would be an offense punishable with a £5,000 fine.
Even the United Nations has warned that it fears the Counter-terrorism laws are rapidly turning the United Kingdom into a police state.
The case of Bob Hamlen and Michael Burbidge, just one of thousands, clearly demonstrates that terrorism laws are being grossly misused by police in the UK. If there really were such a huge concern over terrorism we would see an effort to protect our freedoms and enhance our open society, rather than the all out attack on civil liberties and the erosion of rights that we continue to face.
YOUR RIGHTS UNDER SECTION 44 (Courtesy Liberty):
• The police can only give you a pat down, remove outer clothes (eg jacket, hat), search your bags and have you empty your pockets
• You do not have to give your name and address
• You do not have to explain why you are there
• You are not allowed to flee the search, but you are not required to be actively compliant. You are allowed to 'go limp' as passive resistance during the search if you wish not to comply
• There is no permission to collect DNA data during the search
• You do not have to comply with any attempt to photograph or record you
• Women cannot be touched by male police during these searches
• Make notes about the officers searching you - name, number and police force
• Note the time and the events preceding the search
• Note the specific wording used by the police to explain their authority to search you
• Ask the police for the reason that they are searching you. Specifically, are they searching for terrorists or are they simply trying to deter, delay or inconvenience you?
Seized At Gunpoint For Looking At Cops
Disabled men entered onto terrorism database indefinitely after detention and questioning
Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Thursday, Oct 4, 2007
Two disabled men from Bournemouth, England were seized from a pub at gunpoint by police under the terrorism act, taken to the local police station and questioned for 45 minutes after one of them opened his mail and the other looked at a police officer.
The Bournemouth Daily Echo reports that Bob Hamlen, 47, and Michael Burbidge, 31 were dumbfounded when approached by officers in a beer garden overlooking the security checkpoint at the entrance to the Highcliff Marriott Hotel where top British politicians are currently staying for the annual Labour Party conference.
Mr Hamlen told reporters:
"We were treated like terrorist suspects.... It was so over the top, there were about eight officers around us asking questions which was very frightening.
"We told them we lived round the corner and this was our local pub. But, while an armed officer pointed his gun at us from the other side of the street, they made us empty our pockets and put all our possessions on the table. Then they checked all our credit cards and documents.
"I was carrying my disabled bus pass but it didn't make any difference. I needed to go to the toilet and an officer went with me in case I escaped. After radioing through the information, they asked us to accompany them, in separate police cars, to the police station."
Mr Hamlen also made it clear that he has arthritis and brittle bone disease and has been registered disabled for five years, while Mr Burbidge has been paralysed all his life and relies on a wheelchair and crutches to get around.
The two men hardly fit the description of hardcore Al Qaeda terror suspects, but then that does not matter because everyone is now a suspect under the 2000 terrorism act.
Mr Hamlen continued:
"They said the reason I was being taken to the police station was because I had been seen passing a white envelope.
"But all I did was take my post out of my jacket pocket and open an electricity bill.
"On Michael's stop and search form they said they wanted to speak to him, under the Terrorism Act, because he had been looking at a police officer.
"That area of town is saturated with police officers and, from where we were sitting, it would have been impossible not to be watching one."
The men were then taken to the police station and questioned for 45 minutes. After this the police asked the two men to take them to their flat so they could search it. When the search turned up nothing out of the ordinary police decided the two men posed no threat and returned them to the pub.
Mr Hamlen and Mr Burbidge, who have lived in the area for many years, say they feel violated and are demanding an official apology.
Though the two were not arrested or charged they were issued with stop and search records which will be placed on the UK stop and search database and kept there indefinitely, as per standard procedure.
Under section 44 of the terrorism act of 2000, police were granted the power to stop and search anyone without the need to show that they have "reasonable suspicion" an offence is being committed, providing the stop takes place in an area designated as a potential terrorist target.
Currently, however, the whole of London is covered by the powers, meaning the stops can happen anywhere in the city.
Furthermore section 45 states:
45. - (1) The power conferred by an authorisation under section 44(1) or (2)-(a) may be exercised only for the purpose of searching for articles of a kind which could be used in connection with terrorism, and
(b) may be exercised whether or not the constable has grounds for suspecting the presence of articles of that kind.
Under the rules, officers have been told to avoid “racial profiling” and “not to focus on specific groups”. The advice adds: “Be aware that there is no specific racial, ethnic, sexual or religious profile for terrorists.”
Christopher Gill, chairman of the Freedom Association, has previously commented: "These laws are terrifyingly wide ranging, and fail even to demand suspicion in order to stop someone and thus list them for life.
"They are being over-used, and innocent people are having their records marked as a result. The police are supposed to protect the innocent from the guilty, not smear their records arbitrarily."
Incidents of Stop and search have risen dramatically recently in the UK, so much so that senior police officials are now questioning the validity of the law.
Last December the UK's senior counter terrorism police officer questioned the value of stop and search powers, noting that very few arrests or charges arise from searches.
In February, Met Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair vowed to review the use of terror stop and search powers after a Metropolitan Police Authority report said it was causing "untold damage" to certain communities.
Police even refused to accept enhancements to stop and search powers earlier this year, declaring them "unnecessary" and arguing that such measures were counter-productive as they erode public trust. Such enhancements would have given police the power to ask an individual who they are and where they are going. Under the proposed legislation, withholding such information would be an offense punishable with a £5,000 fine.
Even the United Nations has warned that it fears the Counter-terrorism laws are rapidly turning the United Kingdom into a police state.
The case of Bob Hamlen and Michael Burbidge, just one of thousands, clearly demonstrates that terrorism laws are being grossly misused by police in the UK. If there really were such a huge concern over terrorism we would see an effort to protect our freedoms and enhance our open society, rather than the all out attack on civil liberties and the erosion of rights that we continue to face.
YOUR RIGHTS UNDER SECTION 44 (Courtesy Liberty):
• The police can only give you a pat down, remove outer clothes (eg jacket, hat), search your bags and have you empty your pockets
• You do not have to give your name and address
• You do not have to explain why you are there
• You are not allowed to flee the search, but you are not required to be actively compliant. You are allowed to 'go limp' as passive resistance during the search if you wish not to comply
• There is no permission to collect DNA data during the search
• You do not have to comply with any attempt to photograph or record you
• Women cannot be touched by male police during these searches
• Make notes about the officers searching you - name, number and police force
• Note the time and the events preceding the search
• Note the specific wording used by the police to explain their authority to search you
• Ask the police for the reason that they are searching you. Specifically, are they searching for terrorists or are they simply trying to deter, delay or inconvenience you?
misunderestimating ron paul
click here
Misunderestimating Ron Paul's Support
by Rick Fisk
by Rick Fisk
DIGG THIS
The media, neoconservatives and some Democrats just don't understand why Ron Paul's supporters are so excited, dedicated and diverse. At the most recent PBS debate in Baltimore, the camera panned to catch the first African-American female fighter pilot in U.S. history applauding enthusiastically when Dr. Paul suggested we should bring the troops home from Iraq and every other country they currently occupy. Neoconservative bloggers are aghast at Ron Paul's increasing success as are the neoconservative gatekeepers. This is a truly satisfying result since it was the neoconservative hijacking of the Republican Party which has helped to further decimate our once-great Republic.
In one comment, written as a response to a post at the quintessential neoconservative and freedom-hating blog, Red State, a reader unsupportive of Paul points out the obvious for most neoconservatives, that Ron Paul's ability to raise a million dollars in seven days is "[expletive deleted] scary."
The neoconservative movement is now officially in its dying throes and yet neoconservatives do not take notice. A good example of this can be witnessed in Newt Gingrich's threat to join the crowded field of GOP Presidential candidates. (Eye of) Newt has been touting his ability to bring together a goodly number of intellectuals who will help solve America's problems. What is at the forefront of those problems? Why, it is the threat of Islamic law being instituted in the United States if we were to pull out of Iraq. Seriously, that is what he's saying.
The neoconservatives are banking on a strategy that has worked for them since 1994 (and all governments since the dawn of civilization). If they just pull the kids 'round the campfire and tell them a scary enough story, the kids will flock to their skirts and demand protection. If the story isn't scary enough, then it has to be modified until it becomes sufficiently scary. But at some point, the story becomes so far-fetched that even the true believers have to scratch their heads.
With Ron Paul's entry into the field of Presidential contenders, that tactic is no longer going to work. Ron Paul's early support was made up of those who were either never fooled by this claptrap or have come to understand that they were being manipulated. It only becomes more apparent to them with every utterance by neoconservatives that the scare stories have no basis in reality. Rather than offer something truly different, the neoconservatives are simply upping the ante and labeling it "different." They have discounted Ron Paul's support by claiming that it is much smaller than it appears. This is just another side of the same reality-denying tactic that is killing their movement. Because they cannot acknowledge reality, their influence will completely wither away, sooner rather than later.
Ron Paul's grass roots support is growing daily. Each time he is given a national forum in which to speak, a new flood of supporters joins the cause and his coffers grow (as opposed to Mitt Romney who's coiffeur's coffers grow). In the spaces between these national appearances, the growing body of supporters reaches out to their neighbors and spreads the word.
The neoconservatives on the other hand, believe that they are the keepers of all intellectual truth and that they have enemies both domestic and foreign. The domestic enemies are "liberals" or those whom they label so. The list of "liberals" keeps growing however and their blindness to reality prevents them from realizing that a list of enemies, increased by spite and action and drawn from a static pool of voters, is causing the number of "allies" to dwindle.
If you are thinking that I'm giving away some secret that will tip off neoconservatives and cause them to mend their ways long enough to torpedo Ron Paul's candidacy, don't worry. As Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton (ret.) told the San Diego Tribune recently, "this administration is immune to good advice."
The neoconservatives are immune to good advice. Their arrogance and hubris knows no bounds. Even if they were to read this, they would discount it as irrelevant nonsense from a wacko Paul supporter. Since it is only they who have the answers to America's problems, there are no qualified observers who can offer worthwhile advice. Their inability to give criticism any serious consideration is the source of their failures in every policy. Iraq is a great example of this but there are others that can be pointed out such as FEMA's reaction to hurricane Katrina.
We are at the "fight" stage in Gandhi's oft-quoted statement. The neocons are beginning to fight, but they are using the very tactics that do nothing to diminish support for Ron Paul and everything to decrease their own ranks. They think that non-neoconservative voices emanate from brainless liberals, but this isn't why their ranks dwindle. They are incapable of honest self-assessment – the very thing of which they accuse their enemies – thus, neoconservative influence continues to wane. Their knack for projecting their own problems onto others is similar to their knack for projecting U.S. military power all over the globe. It is not "terrorists" who would convert the U.S. to a nation ruled by draconian dictates but the neoconservatives themselves.
Ron Paul's support grows because he is the anti-neoconservative candidate. Where neoconservatives deride those who don't buy their solutions, Ron Paul always assumes the best of both detractors and the merely ignorant. When Bill Maher asked him "Why are Americans so stupid?" he responded, "We're Americans," to point out that all Americans aren't stupid and his task is to inform and enlighten rather than make enemies. What a concept. The most obvious truism for a politician is that he should be expanding his influence rather than alienating voters. This is lost on neoconservatives.
Ron Paul refuses to convert disagreements into personal arguments which create animosity. His tactic is to merely present his side of the argument while acknowledging that this is part of his core belief system and not an indication that those who disagree are stupid or evil. This has trickled down to his supporters who, for the most part, avoid political arguments and instead implore the uninitiated to simply discover for themselves what Ron Paul is saying. This tactic has worked brilliantly. Ron Paul's message is genuinely compelling and his defense of these views has been consistent and dogged over the past 30 years; no matter what obstacles are thrown before him. That is the basis for his supporter's enthusiasm. He truly means what he is saying. Unlike his counterparts, he does not have to waste any words explaining why his votes do not match his rhetoric. His supporters do not have to suffer the nagging feeling that something different would occur if they were to elect him. He has always voted in a manner that matches his speech.
The neocons have no candidate in the race remotely showing the same level of integrity though they appear to be certain that nobody will notice this. They prove by their actions that any talk of truth, honesty or values is just empty, pandering, rhetoric. The number of Paul supporters is increasing because, contrary to neoconservative belief, Americans are not stupid. They just haven't had a decent alternative in 30 years. Well....now they do.
Misunderestimating Ron Paul's Support
by Rick Fisk
by Rick Fisk
DIGG THIS
The media, neoconservatives and some Democrats just don't understand why Ron Paul's supporters are so excited, dedicated and diverse. At the most recent PBS debate in Baltimore, the camera panned to catch the first African-American female fighter pilot in U.S. history applauding enthusiastically when Dr. Paul suggested we should bring the troops home from Iraq and every other country they currently occupy. Neoconservative bloggers are aghast at Ron Paul's increasing success as are the neoconservative gatekeepers. This is a truly satisfying result since it was the neoconservative hijacking of the Republican Party which has helped to further decimate our once-great Republic.
In one comment, written as a response to a post at the quintessential neoconservative and freedom-hating blog, Red State, a reader unsupportive of Paul points out the obvious for most neoconservatives, that Ron Paul's ability to raise a million dollars in seven days is "[expletive deleted] scary."
The neoconservative movement is now officially in its dying throes and yet neoconservatives do not take notice. A good example of this can be witnessed in Newt Gingrich's threat to join the crowded field of GOP Presidential candidates. (Eye of) Newt has been touting his ability to bring together a goodly number of intellectuals who will help solve America's problems. What is at the forefront of those problems? Why, it is the threat of Islamic law being instituted in the United States if we were to pull out of Iraq. Seriously, that is what he's saying.
The neoconservatives are banking on a strategy that has worked for them since 1994 (and all governments since the dawn of civilization). If they just pull the kids 'round the campfire and tell them a scary enough story, the kids will flock to their skirts and demand protection. If the story isn't scary enough, then it has to be modified until it becomes sufficiently scary. But at some point, the story becomes so far-fetched that even the true believers have to scratch their heads.
With Ron Paul's entry into the field of Presidential contenders, that tactic is no longer going to work. Ron Paul's early support was made up of those who were either never fooled by this claptrap or have come to understand that they were being manipulated. It only becomes more apparent to them with every utterance by neoconservatives that the scare stories have no basis in reality. Rather than offer something truly different, the neoconservatives are simply upping the ante and labeling it "different." They have discounted Ron Paul's support by claiming that it is much smaller than it appears. This is just another side of the same reality-denying tactic that is killing their movement. Because they cannot acknowledge reality, their influence will completely wither away, sooner rather than later.
Ron Paul's grass roots support is growing daily. Each time he is given a national forum in which to speak, a new flood of supporters joins the cause and his coffers grow (as opposed to Mitt Romney who's coiffeur's coffers grow). In the spaces between these national appearances, the growing body of supporters reaches out to their neighbors and spreads the word.
The neoconservatives on the other hand, believe that they are the keepers of all intellectual truth and that they have enemies both domestic and foreign. The domestic enemies are "liberals" or those whom they label so. The list of "liberals" keeps growing however and their blindness to reality prevents them from realizing that a list of enemies, increased by spite and action and drawn from a static pool of voters, is causing the number of "allies" to dwindle.
If you are thinking that I'm giving away some secret that will tip off neoconservatives and cause them to mend their ways long enough to torpedo Ron Paul's candidacy, don't worry. As Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton (ret.) told the San Diego Tribune recently, "this administration is immune to good advice."
The neoconservatives are immune to good advice. Their arrogance and hubris knows no bounds. Even if they were to read this, they would discount it as irrelevant nonsense from a wacko Paul supporter. Since it is only they who have the answers to America's problems, there are no qualified observers who can offer worthwhile advice. Their inability to give criticism any serious consideration is the source of their failures in every policy. Iraq is a great example of this but there are others that can be pointed out such as FEMA's reaction to hurricane Katrina.
We are at the "fight" stage in Gandhi's oft-quoted statement. The neocons are beginning to fight, but they are using the very tactics that do nothing to diminish support for Ron Paul and everything to decrease their own ranks. They think that non-neoconservative voices emanate from brainless liberals, but this isn't why their ranks dwindle. They are incapable of honest self-assessment – the very thing of which they accuse their enemies – thus, neoconservative influence continues to wane. Their knack for projecting their own problems onto others is similar to their knack for projecting U.S. military power all over the globe. It is not "terrorists" who would convert the U.S. to a nation ruled by draconian dictates but the neoconservatives themselves.
Ron Paul's support grows because he is the anti-neoconservative candidate. Where neoconservatives deride those who don't buy their solutions, Ron Paul always assumes the best of both detractors and the merely ignorant. When Bill Maher asked him "Why are Americans so stupid?" he responded, "We're Americans," to point out that all Americans aren't stupid and his task is to inform and enlighten rather than make enemies. What a concept. The most obvious truism for a politician is that he should be expanding his influence rather than alienating voters. This is lost on neoconservatives.
Ron Paul refuses to convert disagreements into personal arguments which create animosity. His tactic is to merely present his side of the argument while acknowledging that this is part of his core belief system and not an indication that those who disagree are stupid or evil. This has trickled down to his supporters who, for the most part, avoid political arguments and instead implore the uninitiated to simply discover for themselves what Ron Paul is saying. This tactic has worked brilliantly. Ron Paul's message is genuinely compelling and his defense of these views has been consistent and dogged over the past 30 years; no matter what obstacles are thrown before him. That is the basis for his supporter's enthusiasm. He truly means what he is saying. Unlike his counterparts, he does not have to waste any words explaining why his votes do not match his rhetoric. His supporters do not have to suffer the nagging feeling that something different would occur if they were to elect him. He has always voted in a manner that matches his speech.
The neocons have no candidate in the race remotely showing the same level of integrity though they appear to be certain that nobody will notice this. They prove by their actions that any talk of truth, honesty or values is just empty, pandering, rhetoric. The number of Paul supporters is increasing because, contrary to neoconservative belief, Americans are not stupid. They just haven't had a decent alternative in 30 years. Well....now they do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
