"Black People should buy rifles and join the NRA"

"They were the Bad Niggers of white America's nightmares come chillingly to life - a black-bereted, black-jacketed cadre of street bloods risen up in arms against the established order."

With that sentence, Newsweek Magazine opened it's February 23, 1970 cover story about the Black Panther Party. Note the past tense used by the writers because it was no accident. At the beginning of 1970, the Panthers were struggling just to survive. Nixon's Justice Department had declared them to be a menace to national security, and Hoover's FBI had successfully executed a counter-intelligence operation against the Panthers, one that had turned it's members against one another. On top of that, law enforcement officials at the local level had been waging war against the Panthers, almost since the Party's inception in 1966.

As of the publication date of the magazine, the Party's top leadership had been effectively neutralized: Huey Newton was in prison charged with killing a cop; Eldridge Cleaver was a fugitive in Algiers along with his wife, Kathleen; Bobby Seale was in jail in San Francisco, awaiting extradition to Connecticut. Meanwhile, local chapters across the country were being decimated by police raids and resultant gun battles. Police viewed the Black Panthers as mortal enemies and proceed accordingly. The Panther's fiery rhetoric, which frequently referred to cops as "pigs" and "motherfuckers", did little to ease tensions between the two groups.

In a remarkable echo of today's headlines, 22 Panthers were charged with conspiring to dynamite Macy's and four other stores, the New York Botanical Garden, the New Haven Railroad tracks and four New York City police stations. It appears that there was some coordination between the Panthers and the Weather Underground during this time. Today, 40 years later, we know just how thoroughly the ranks of the Panthers had been infiltrated by law enforcement. In fact, one wonders if the push to desegregate police departments, during the 1960's, might not have had a less then noble purpose. Meaning that black cops were needed to infiltrate the Party, and there were precious few to be found at first.

One can't help but wonder how many lives might have been spared if the collective power of American law enforcement had been similarly mobilized against the KKK. Conservatives are constantly invoking the heinous deeds committed by the likes of Bill Ayers and other leftist groups, including the Black Panthers, but are strangely silent when it comes to the Klan. It is almost as if "Bombingham" never existed. Blowhards like Rush Limbaugh and his ilk thunder on about the New Black Panther Party and alleged intimidation of voters at the polling places, but you hear not a word about the systematic disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of voters because of felony convictions. That those state laws, unevenly and inconsistently applied, disproportionately effect African-American voters is beyond dispute.

"Don't talk to me about atrocities in war, all war is an atrocity"

As I was reading the gory details of the Song My killings, better known today as the My Lai massacre, I was struck by just how much the war in Vietnam resembled the wars waged against the American Indians a century earlier. In both instances villages, containing mostly non-combatants, became the default target of US soldiers who were unable to locate the enemy that they were seeking. Indian warriors, and Vietnamese guerrilla fighters, had an infuriating tendency to only fight when the conditions were favorable to them. Unable to directly confront the overwhelming firepower wielded by their enemies, they both resorted to stealth tactics, which frequently resulted in days of fruitless chases on the part of the US Army.

A village offered a target of opportunity for frustrated soldiers who were frequently harassed by hit-and-run ambushes and, in the case of Vietnam, booby-trap devices that killed and maimed indiscriminately. Add to that the near-impossibility, on the part of the American soldier, to distinguish between friend and foe, and you have a perfect set of conditions for atrocities to occur. Every Vietnamese becomes an enemy, and "The only good Indian is a dead Indian".

That normal patterns of behavior are going to be distorted by the stresses of combat is a given. The military is also an institution that demands absolute obedience to orders, and individual soldiers are not encouraged to question whether or not an order is rational, or even sane. To expect a single soldier to openly defy a direct order by a superior, given in a combat situation, is not realistic. A soldier cannot simply "opt-out" in a situation such as the one at My Lai. He either turns his weapon on the villagers, as he was ordered to do, or he turns it on his fellow soldiers. What other choice is there at that moment?

The first-hand accounts are so excruciatingly painful that you just want to stop reading. What that helicopter pilot did was heroic beyond words, but that must be qualified with the fact that he was not a member of the unit involved, and he had a helicopter to fly away in. For those ground troops caught up in the massacre, there were absolutely no good options. The same excuse does not apply to those charged with investigating the crime. That the default response was to try and cover the whole thing up is not surprising, but is nonetheless despicable. And, as is so often the case in these things, most of the official outrage was directed at those who dared break the shameful silence surrounding the events.

Second Amendment Remedies?

The charges eventually brought against the students that took over Willard Straight Hall at Cornell University, in April of 1969, did not include any related to the fact that the militants brought a number of guns onto campus. Simply brandishing the rifles was perfectly legal under New York State Law, and they did not use the weapons to occupy the building. The rifles did not appear until after Willard Straight Hall was emptied of students, parents, and faculty. After a tense week of negotiations, the incident was peacefully resolved. Apart from some minor injuries sustained in a fracas between black students and members of a white fraternity, there were no casualties.

What a different outcome from what occurred the following year during disruptions on two other college campuses. On May the 4th of 1970, four students were killed and nine others wounded when National Guardsmen opened fire on the campus of Kent State University in Ohio. The shootings climaxed several days of anti-war protests on the campus sparked by the announcement of the invasion of Cambodia by US soldiers. Ten days later, protests by a large group of Black students on the campus of Jackson State University in Mississippi were met by a barrage of shotgun fire from some 40 state highway patrolmen, who later said they had come under sniper fire. A subsequent investigation turned up no evidence of any snipers. The gunfire killed two students and injured twelve others.

In neither of the 1970 incidents was any evidence produced demonstrating that any firearms, other then those in the hands of military and law enforcement members, were present. That some protesters used rocks and bottles as projectiles is not disputed. The question then becomes why was lethal force used at Kent State and Jackson State, but not at Cornell? At first glance, one would conclude that the difference was that the students at Cornell had armed themselves with guns, while the students at the other two schools had not. The lesson then becomes that the authorities blink in the face of well-armed protesters.

That simply doesn't hold up very well under scrutiny though. The Black Panthers armed themselves quite well, but ended up being decimated by law enforcement. And the fact that some rioters had guns didn't prevent dozens of them from getting shot down during the riots that wracked America's cities during that era. Perhaps what it comes down to is that the people in charge at Cornell exercised much better judgment then the authorities did in the two other examples. The administration at place at Cornell at that time has been flogged ever since for what has been termed a "craven surrender" to the demands of extremists. Would it have been better to call in the Cavalry? In all probability, the incident at Cornell would have become something far uglier then either Kent State or Jackson State. The example of Attica comes to mind. As Winston Churchill once said "It is always better to jaw-jaw then war-war" And he was certainly someone in a position to know...

No Peace No Honor

The issue date was December 16, 1968 and obviously the cover story is about the war in Vietnam. Richard Nixon had won the election to be the next US president, and the Johnson administration was in it's final weeks. There was still hope that a breakthrough might be possible in the peace talks that were underway in Paris. President Johnson had ordered a halt to the bombing of North Vietnam on October 31st, and that action had cleared the way for substantive negotiations for a cease-fire and eventual resolution of the conflict. This particular issue deals with the Paris peace talks at length.

At the time, it appeared as though the warring parties were on the cusp of an agreement. Johnson's announcement of a bombing halt at the 11th hour had given Vice-President Humphrey a surge that nearly overtook Nixon in the final days of the presidential campaign. Candidate Nixon also struck a conciliatory pose promising to end the war and bring what he called "peace with honor". Exactly how that was to be accomplished was something that the Nixon campaign never bothered to fully explain. There was vague talk of a "secret plan" to end the war, but that was about all.

So, in late 1968 the conditions seemed ripe for a negotiated agreement to end the war. And indeed, there would be a cease-fire and negotiated settlement. In 1973. The question that begs answering is why did it take another four years to arrive at essentially the same place we were at in 1969? Four more bloody years that saw an extension of the war into neighboring countries Laos and Cambodia, both of which were suffered violent upheavals as a result of the invasions. News of the operations in Laos and Cambodia triggered massive demonstrations on college campuses across America, climaxing with the tragic events at Kent State University in Ohio.

Some 30,000 Americans had died in Vietnam in the years leading up to 1969. More then 20,000 more would lose their lives over the course of the next four years. The circumstances surrounding the failure to end the war in 1969 have never been adequately explained. As I pointed out already, there was nothing of any substance gained by dragging the war out for another 48 months. South Vietnam couldn't stand alone in 1973 any more then it would have been able to in 1969. The regime in the south collapsed entirely in 1975, and the country was unified under a communist government. Quite likely the same events would have transpired had a settlement been arrived at in 1969. What would have been different? Well, more then 20,000 American soldiers would have arrived home alive.

Watergate? That was nothing compared to what Nixon did in order to look "strong" in Vietnam. They impeached him for the wrong set of crimes...

Voices from the Past

Being as I have the Newsweek issue that ran the letters-to-the-editor, generated by Newsweek's cover story on the abortion debate, I thought I'd post them here. So far as I've been able to determine, Newsweek has not yet made it's digital archives available online. As a result, I cannot link to the content that I am writing about. However, since I do have copies of the issues themselves, I can scan and post. The last letter in the column was written by Bob Packwood, a Republican senator from Oregon. His letter is cut-off because it continues on another page. Here is how it concludes: "...Neither should any woman be denied the right have a voluntary abortion. Again, congratulations for a fine effort."

Senator Packwood was consistently pro-choice and, as he points out in his letter, he introduced the senate's first abortion legalization bill. Sadly, if Bob Packwood is remembered for anything today, it is for the allegations of sexual misconduct leveled against him by 10 woman. The charges led to Packwood resigning from the senate in 1995. A distinguished career in public service reduced to tabloid fodder. Senator Packwood represented a species that was dying-off when he left office, and is now officially extinct. He was open-minded and independent to the point of defying his own party, and president, when he felt strongly enough about something. Try finding someone who fits that description in either party today.

I think that the letters give us a fascinating window into what people were thinking about an issue that remains as polarizing today, as it was 40 years ago. Curious that the suggestion made by Ms. Diane Keane of Pittsburgh, Pa never gained any traction...

Back to the Future

"Dorene is like most of the girls who come in here. She has a family problem, a social problem, a religious problem and a legal problem - when all she should really have is a medical problem. One simple five-minute procedure and she has the whole world off her back." Those words were spoken in 1970 at an abortion clinic in Santa Monica, California. The words were spoken by Harvey Karman, a psychologist who conducted interviews of patients at the clinic prior to their undergoing an abortion. Karman was talking with a Newsweek reporter who was working on the April 13, 1970 cover story about abortion, a procedure that was still illegal throughout most of the United States at that time.

In fact, the Santa Monica clinic in question was operating in open defiance of the law. The man who would perform Dorene's abortion was a 28-year-old graduate of the University of Southern California School of Medicine who had trained in obstetrics and gynecology at Los Angeles's Cedars of Lebanon Hospital. Dr. John S. Gwynne had opened his clinic both to challenge the constitutionality of California's abortion laws, and to provide women with the opportunity to safely terminate an unwanted pregnancy. That option scarcely existed within the continental United States in 1970. Hawaii was decidedly the exception to the rule with it's abortion law permitting the procedure, providing that be performed by a licensed doctor in a hospital, and that the patient be a resident of the state for 90 days. That second part was to keep woman from flocking to Hawaii from the mainland to get an abortion.

Woman continued to seek out abortions, and the kind of treatment that they received depended largely on their respective financial situations. For woman of means, there were safe options available. They could fly overseas and have the procedure done, or they could afford to pay a physician here enough money to secure his services. Even so, there were risks involved, but they were nothing compared to what their less-fortunate sisters encountered. All the stories we hear about the bad old days before Roe v. Wade are absolutely factual. Abortions were largely the province of a mixed bag of providers including midwives, medical students, druggists, and other amateur abortionists. A woman was quite literally taking her life and putting it into the hands of a complete stranger. Things could, and very often did, go horribly wrong.

This article was written over 40 years ago, and obviously the abortion landscape has changed considerably. But, it is still far from a settled issue and that perplexes me. Anyone reading this article in 1970 would come away from it with an overall impression that reform was in the air, and that it was only a matter of time before liberalization of the restrictive laws took place. Whether that would occur on a state-by-state basis, or by a ruling of the Supreme Court was still to be decided, but change was coming. And how could that be anything, but a positive development?

Sadly, it appears that the position of the Catholic Church has come to be widely accepted in many quarters. The 1970 article dealt almost exclusively with the legal and health implications of the debate. Refreshingly absent was all of the overcharged emotionalism that has come to define the issue today. Trying to determine the exact moment that a human soul comes to inhabit a fetus strikes me as a very inexact science, to put it mildly. Rather like trying to determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. In my opinion, the Catholic Church effectively forfeited any moral authority that they once had with their handling of the Pedophile scandal. And, since they have no authority whatsoever when it comes to matters of health, science, and the law, I suggest that they remove themselves from the arena entirely, and work to clean up their own house.

Space Age Spear Carriers

In the book I'm reading about the AK-47, there is an entire chapter devoted to the AK's capitalist counterpart, the M-16 rifle. Bearing the title The Accidental Rifle, this particular chapter sheds light on the scandalous circumstances surrounding the introduction of the M-16 rifle to combat troops in Vietnam in the mid-1960's. To say that the M-16 was rushed into production and deployment would be a considerable understatement. The development of the rifle took place almost entirely outside of the normal procurement channels that traditionally controlled the introduction and acceptance of a new weapon. Hence, "The Accidental Rifle".

For a variety of reasons that are spelled out in The Gun, the United States Military completely misread the significance of the AK-47 assault rifle, and initially dismissed the revolutionary weapon as being nothing more then another submachine gun. Testing obtained examples of the rifle merely re-enforced already existing prejudices. It wasn't until American ground troops, and their South Vietnamese allies, encountered AK-47's in the hands of their enemies that it became obvious that this weapon was indeed what we would call a "game-changer". The AK-47 gave the communist fighters a decided edge in the war that was being fought in the jungles and rice paddies of Vietnam.

Armed for the most part with heavy semi-automatic rifles firing a powerful cartridge, the Americans and their allies found themselves outgunned. The AK-47 was inaccurate at long-ranges, but that hardly mattered. Most of the fighting in Vietnam took place at close quarters and the best weapon was the one with the highest rate of fire. Something close to panic set in among the top brass when they realized that the standard infantry arm of the US Military was wholly unsuited for the mission in Vietnam. However, a solution seemed to be at hand.

A private firm called ArmaLite had designed a rifle, designated as the AR-15, and had subsequently sold the rights to the weapon to Colt's Manufacturing Company. The unorthodox-looking weapon already had some support within the military, having been tested and purchased in small numbers by this point in time. How the civilian AR-15 became the M-16 assault rifle is a story that reflects badly on almost everyone involved in the process. And it was the ground troops in Vietnam who would pay the price with their own blood.

Thousands of US soldiers and Marines were sent into combat in Vietnam with a rifle that was completely unreliable. That many of them were killed as a result is beyond dispute. The M-16's that were put into the hands of those troops were impossible to clean, quick to rust and corrode in the jungle environment, and most devastating of all, they were prone to jam at the worst possible moments. Namely, during firefights, when mere seconds could mean the difference between life and death. Infantry troops quickly came to despise the cheap-looking plastic rifle that many derided as a "toy" that was actually built by Mattel. Troops took to buying their own weapons on the black market, or arming themselves with captured AK-47's. Anything to avoid having to carry the M-16 into combat.

And what was the reaction of the high-command when reports of the new rifle's failings began coming back from the field? Well, that is where the real scandal begins. Instead of openly and honestly acknowledging the problems with the M-16 and working to address them, the Pentagon's decision was to try and coverup the entire mess. And when that became untenable, they next tried blaming it all on the soldiers themselves, claiming that they didn't clean the rifles properly. Conveniently forgetting that the first rifles were sent over without either cleaning kits or even instructions on how to clean the unfamiliar weapon. Not that it mattered much. The M-16's were just as likely to jam when they were spotlessly clean.

The difference between the way in which the AK-47 was conceived, designed, and introduced to service, and the way in which the M-16 was rushed into the hands of combat troops is a damning indictment of the US Military. In time, the problems with the rifle were worked out and what ultimately emerged was a decent infantry arm. But, it's reputation was indelibly marred by those first years when it failed at the most important test of all. The book is full of accounts that alternately make you want to laugh or cry. The one that sticks out in my mind is the Marine platoon leader being told to have his men fix bayonets before engaging the enemy. Which was something that he had already ordered them to do. They knew that they couldn't depend on their rifles to do what they were intended to do. So, they resigned themselves to launching a bayonet charge against fighters armed with automatic rifles that fired upwards of 600 rounds per minute. Rifles that functioned exactly as their makers designed them to...

"Spray and Pray"

I am about half-way through The Gun: The AK-47 and the Evolution of War, and thought I'd take the opportunity to put down some of my impressions while they are still fresh in my mind. The author, CJ Chivers, builds his book by telling the story of the long struggle to design and build a successful machine gun. The first true example of the species is generally held to be the Gatling Gun which was the creation of an American inventor named Richard Gatling. The story moves on and introduces other men who would leave their mark on the history of automatic weapons. Hiram Maxim and John Thompson are two of the most prominent, and it is General Thompson's device that concerns me here.

The Thompson submachine gun, or "Tommy gun", has achieved an iconic status in American culture, largely by virtue of what happened during the first decade of the weapon's existence. General Thompson designed a gun that he envisioned to be a kind of "trench broom", that would give American infantrymen the tool they needed to break the stalemate on the Western Front. However, the war ended before his submachine guns were shipped to Europe and Thompson needed to adjust his marketing tactics to reflect post-war realities. The Thompson submachine gun was favorably received by various military officials, but few orders were forthcoming.

Thompson started what he called the Auto Ordnance Company and set about trying to sell his invention to military organizations, police departments, and security services. Again, orders were slow to materialize and Thompson soon realized that he would have to cast his net further if his firm was to remain solvent. Incredible as it may seem today, it was perfectly legal for a private citizen to own a fully-functional machine gun in 1921 America. So, that is the market segment that Auto Ordnance set it's sights on.

What seems blindingly obvious in hindsight was apparently not so apparent at the time. Mainly, that interest in a lightweight, portable, hand-held machine gun would not be limited to the law-abiding members of society. Gangsters, bank robbers, and even the IRA, quickly realized the weapon's deadly potential. And while the mayhem attributed to the Thompson submachine gun has been exaggerated over the subsequent decades, it did change the game, so to speak. Given the twin incubators of alcohol prohibition and the Great Depression, organized and not-so-organized crime exploded across the country. And General Thompson's invention introduced a new dimension to gun violence, one that no doubt distressed it's inventor.

One of the ads that Auto Ordnance used to try and sell the Thompson submachine gun is worth considering. The ad features an image of a cowhand in chaps standing on the porch of what I assume is a ranch building blazing away with a Thompson at a group of horsemen, a number of whom are already on the ground. The horsemen are either Mexican bandits, or Mexican cattle rustlers. Given the current atmosphere of hysteria concerning Mexican immigrants, it is striking to realize how little some things change. There really is nothing new under the sun...

Will Get Fooled Again

How I wish that the Obama being described by his enemies was the man now occupying the White House. We are truly getting the worst of two worlds: Tepid half-hearted measures that are designed not to give offense to anyone, elicit a violent reaction from the irrational Right regardless. Obama staked all on his health care plan and then fumbled the opportunity miserably. The man is on record having declared, on more then one occasion, that he believes that a single-payer plan with a public option was the ultimate goal. Of course, candidates break the promises made on the campaign trail all the time. But, this was to be the new president's signature piece of legislation. The administration effectively put everything else on a back-burner and girded itself for a battle royal.

Well, they got the battle alright, but where is the accomplishment to justify the expenditure of all that political capital? Democrats on the campaign trail this Fall are hard-pressed to point to any tangible signs of accomplishment, and instead are distancing themselves from their own party leaders. At least several Democratic lawmakers running for reelection have decided that it might be more politically popular to run against Nancy Pelosi, then against their actual opponents.

Voters have notoriously short memories and two years already feels like a lifetime ago. And while George W Bush is certainly not being asked to campaign for Republican candidates, a certain nostalgia is beginning to develop for the good old days when we had a white man in the White House. And, let us face the uncomfortable truth, Democratic candidates aren't exactly rolling out the welcome wagon for the president. Out of our last three presidents, it appears that the only one with any real popularity among voters is the guy who got impeached...

The Anderson Papers

The investigative reporter Jack Anderson is largely forgotten today. Yet, the role he played in Richard Nixon's eventual downfall stretched all the way back to Nixon's days as vice-president, and continued right up to the Watergate scandal. Anderson isn't remembered for Watergate, however, because he only had a minor role in the political scandal that launched two Washington Post reporters to stardom. But, in his heyday, Jack Anderson was without peer, and a new book titled Poisoning the Press: Richard Nixon, Jack Anderson, and the Rise of Washington's Scandal Culture by author Mark Feldstein brings Anderson back to life in vivid detail.

Jack Anderson passed away in 2005 after struggling with Parkinson's disease for some 20 years. His New York Times Obituary provides a broad and useful look at his life and career. One of the biggest surprises that I got from the book was the fact that a young Brit Hume worked for Jack Anderson from 1970-1972, during which time Anderson broke some of his biggest stories. Brit Hume's most recent employer is Fox News, and that certainly points to quite a radical departure from his journalistic roots. Granted, we are talking about a time frame covering decades. But still, the fact that one of Fox News' most prominent personalities once worked for a man who resided at the very top of Richard Nixon's famous "enemy's list" strikes me as fascinating.

Prison-Industrial Complex

It certainly doesn't surprise me to learn that corporations essentially drafted the Arizona immigration law that has generated so much controversy. Because if you are in the business of building and operating for-profit prisons, it stands to follow that you are going to need prisoners to fill those jail cells. Enter Arizona State Senate Bill 1070, which requires Arizona police to lock up anybody that they stop, if said person cannot provide proof that they entered the country legally.

This came to light largely because of investigative reporting done by none other then NPR. If those letters sound awfully familiar, it is probably because National Public Radio has been getting hammered by the Right in the wake of the Juan William's firing. Of course, the Right's hatred of NPR goes back much further then two weeks. There have been calls to cut off the funding for public radio and television for decades now. To understand why that is the case, you need look no further then this report.

Rachel Maddow is as good at what she does as anyone in the business. Here she is getting right to the heart of the matter...

What luck for the rulers that men do not think

Chris Hedges, who is an American journalist, author, and war correspondent, does a remarkable job of pinpointing exactly how the country ended up at this juncture. In his essay, Hedges reveals a truth that many on the left will find profoundly unsettling, but will be unable to effectively counter. In effect, what Hedges is saying is that the collapse of liberalism is to blame for the extreme candidates, and violent rhetoric, that currently infect our political system. Or, to be more precise, liberals allowed themselves to be Co-Opted by the corporate state and, in the process, betrayed the tens of millions of working-class and middle-class voters who made up their constituency.

Now, many of those same voters are angry at what they correctly view as their abandonment by the leaders, and the party, that once championed their cause. Decades of outsourcing, union-busting, and deregulation have combined to shred the social contract that kept the peace between labor and capital. The right is poised to capitalize on this situation in a big way, despite the fact that their policies are even more unfair to those disenfranchised by the current system. The result of this is not pretty.

Liberals seem weak and ineffectual, while the right offers up simplistic remedies peddled by demagogues who at least seem to understand, and share, the sense of betrayal and anger felt by so many. Both major parties have colluded to create this disastrous state of affairs, and the day of reckoning is coming. The situation that now exists practically cries out for a strong leader who will sweep aside all the useless politicians, along with our democratic institutions. I predict resistance will be scant. In fact, the leader will most likely be elected in a democratic election. Possibly the last one we'll see for a long time.

Thrilla from Wasilla

Levi Johnston made an appearance on Bill Maher's show and it is worth watching. Towards the end of the six minutes that Johnston was on, Maher pointed out something very interesting. In an article for Vanity Fair, Levi Johnston said that Sarah Palin quit her job as governor of Alaska for the money. Meaning that she could make a boatload more money giving speeches, working for Fox News, and writing books. Well, it would appear that Levi's insight was "on the money". To the tune of some 12 million dollars, which is what Palin has raked in since then. And does she really deserve to be addressed as "Governor Palin"? She served less then 20 months of her first term before walking away from the job. Calling her"Governor" gives Palin an air of gravitas that is completely unsupported by the facts. She is a shallow mean-spirited person who wears her ignorance like a badge of honor. As the panelist on the show remarked "He (Levi) has more courage then most of the Republican Party". Meaning that he is not afraid to speak the truth about this woman...

Organized Crime: The Banksters

Watching this video reminded me of a book that I read some 5 years ago. Predatory Bender: A Story of Subprime Finance perfectly exposed the workings of the global financial system by focusing on one of it's ugliest, and most profitable, manifestations...

High Tide

The man whose San Francisco non-profit organization, The Tides Foundation, was targeted by a gunmen this past July is convinced that Glenn Beck's repeated on-air denunciations of the organization led to the aborted assault.

Byron Williams, whose mug shot is shown on the left, got into his pickup truck armed with three firearms and plenty of ammunition to, in his words, "start a revolution by killing people at the Tides Foundation and the ACLU.

He never got there thanks to the interventions of CA Highway Patrol officers who spotted him speeding and weaving in and out of traffic. In the ensuing gun battle, Williams and two officers suffered gun shot wounds.

Drummond Pike, CEO of Tides, has released the text of a letter that he sent to the companies that advertise on Beck's show asking them to pull all of their ads.

You would think that the following companies, good corporate citizens that they are, would move quickly to divorce themselves from any association with someone whose reckless and irresponsible use of language inspired Byron Williams to set out on his murderous mission.

Rupert Murdoch may not have a heart or a soul, but he sure knows how to count: Let's hope that common sense prevails and they all pull their advertising dollars from this man's hate-filled program:

P Morgan Chase, Geico, Zurich Financial, Chrysler, Direct Holdings Americas (Time-Life), GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, Lilly Corporate Center, BP and The Hartford Financial Services Group.

The Most Dangerous Man In America

According to news reports, Byron Williams consumed something like 18-20 beers before stealing 3 firearms from his mother and setting off on his mission. He got in his pickup truck along with the guns and plenty of ammunition to, in his words, "start a revolution by traveling to San Francisco and killing people of importance at the Tides Foundation and the ACLU." The unemployed Williams, 45, was on parole for a 2002 robbery. He didn't reach his destination because his erratic driving attracted the attention of the California Highway Patrol, and he was pulled over. A gun battle ensued that saw two police officers wounded, and Williams himself receiving 5 bullet wounds. The body armor that he had donned before leaving the house likely saved his life.

By his own account, Byron Williams watched Glenn Beck's show on Fox News. It seems beyond a reasonable doubt that if not for Beck, Williams would never have heard of an organization called The Tides Foundation. While I suppose it is possible that he might have decided to launch his revolution anyway, I suspect that he would have settled for something less grandiose. Like knocking off a liquor store. Glenn Beck filled his head with a toxic stew of nonsense day after day and the result was mayhem. Beck doesn't happen to like what The Tides Foundation stands for, and felt free to attack it repeatedly employing language that seemed designed to provoke a reaction. A violent reaction.

Of course, Beck will throw up his hands and express astonishment that someone actually took him seriously. After all, Beck is nothing, but a "rodeo clown". His words. However there is nothing even remotely entertaining, much less enlightening, about what Glenn Beck does. He is a hate-filled demagogue who will surely inspire more Byron Williams before he is done.

"Ersten rein und Letzten raus!"

In the spring of 1985, as part of a trip to West Germany, US President Ronald Reagan paid a brief visit to a German military cemetery to lay a wreath. The cemetery, which is located near the city of Bitburg, contains the remains of German WWII soldiers, including members of the Waffen SS. The visit was surrounded by much controversy, and became a major public relations debacle for the administration. The whole thing was immortalized in song by The Ramones, who famously named their song "Bonzo goes to Bitburg", in homage to Reagan's role in the movie "Bedtime for Bonzo".

I bring this history up now because of some recent revelations about the man running as the Republican nominee for the seat in Ohio's 9th congressional district. The politician, Rich Iott, participates in historical military reenactments. Which would not seem to present much of a problem, except for the fact that Mr. Iott belonged to an organization called Wiking. Now, the fact that he has left the organization, doesn't list it on his resume, and the Wiking web site has taken down his name and photographs of him in uniform, definitely point to a certain awareness on Mr. Iott's part that this could be a major headache for a politician.

How big a headache is not yet clear, but suffice to say Mr. Iott will have his work cut out for him explaining this away. House minority whip Eric Cantor, who is the GOP's sole Jewish house member, moved quickly to distance himself from Iott. Past history would dictate that Iott will not be able to survive revelations of this nature. But, this is no ordinary election year and I wouldn't count him out just yet. Much more interesting then the fate of a Ohio congressional candidate is the fact that an organization like Wiking exists at all in this country.

In Germany, Austria, and perhaps France as well, wearing an SS uniform would get you arrested. There are quite strict laws pertaining to the symbols of the Third Reich and violations are treated seriously. Obviously, similar laws do not exist in the United States. However, there was a time when someone wearing a Nazi uniform in this country would be subject to scorn and abuse. They would need the protection of police and the interventions of the ACLU in order to assemble publicly. American Nazis were a fringe element given about the same amount of respect accorded the KKK.

What has changed? Well, for starters, Wiking is careful to draw a distinction between the Nazi Party, and the combat units that made up the German Army. In fact, the Waffen SS division that they glorify was largely made up of non-German volunteers from countries that Germany had conquered. They signed up to go and fight the Bolshevik threat from the east. Wiking stresses the fact that the division never fought against the Americans, only the Soviets. Given the fact that we engaged in a half-century long "Twilight Struggle" against the Soviet Union, such a distinction becomes quite useful.

Suffice to say, I doubt very many angry protesters are going to throw eggs and tomatoes at men armed with automatic weapons, even if they are firing blanks. Holocaust survivors are dying off at the same rate as are WWII combat veterans. Memories are fading and the constant name-calling on the part of pundits and politicians has effectively diluted whatever meaning words like "Nazi" and "Hitler" once had. If there is to be a resurgence of Nazi ideology, it will be here in America, not in Europe.

Torches of Freedom

"I never smoked a cigarette until I was nine." - H. L. Mencken

I just finished reading a book titled The Cigarette Century by author Allan M. Brandt. The sub-heading on the book's cover describes it thusly: The Rise, Fall, and Deadly Persistence of the Product That Defined America. It is certainly no exaggeration to argue that the cigarette was indeed the dominant consumer product of the American 20th Century. Indeed, by the mid-point of the century more then half of all American adults were habitual cigarette smokers. That by itself is quite remarkable when you consider that the cigarette was scarcely in evidence when the century began.

A century ago, the cigarette was widely viewed as a "dirty habit", and a disreputable form of tobacco consumption. A mechanical means of rolling cigarettes, all of a uniform quality, was only the first step in the process of turning them into the preferred method of consuming tobacco. Just as important, was the campaign to change the public perception of cigarettes. In fact, that campaign marked the birth of modern advertising and marketing. The tobacco companies were aided immensely by the advent of the First World War. When asked what the nation could do to assist in the war effort, General Pershing famously answered "You ask me what I need to win this war. I answer tobacco, as much as bullets.". And by "tobacco", he meant cigarettes.

Once they had secured the rights of male smokers, the tobacco interests turned their attention to the "disenfranchised" half of the population. Consequently, in the hands of shrewd marketers, cigarettes became "torches of freedom". It was considered socially unacceptable for woman to smoke in public, right up through the 1930's, and the industry set out to knock down those barriers. In an era that saw woman struggling to attain equal status with men, the very act of smoking in public became a powerful statement of equality. The result was an astonishing increase in cigarette sales.

Throughout the first-half of the 20th century, the tobacco industry enjoyed a period of sustained growth that was literally without precedent. The cigarette, and smokers, became ubiquitous. The industry spent liberally on advertising, and the ads always featured happy and attractive people enjoying the good life, of which the cigarette was an integral part. Hollywood pitched in with the result that you could hardly find a movie in which the stars didn't smoke cigarettes. The cigarette quickly became an indispensable prop in cinema, an object that could be employed to convey any number of meanings. In 1950, the outlook couldn't have been brighter for the industry.

Then, came the fall. Over the course of the second-half of the 20th century, the tobacco industry went from being respected and admired, to being castigated as lying "merchants of death". The industry fought back ferociously with every tool at it's disposal, legal and otherwise to create and sustain a "controversy" over the scientific evidence. The industry managed, in the face of overwhelming evidence that their product poisoned and killed it's users, to continue promoting and selling cigarettes.

The list of crimes that one can level at the tobacco industry is a long one. Topping it of course, would be the deliberate addicting of generations of children, many of whom would be consigned to a slow and painful death by way of lung cancer, emphysema, or any one of a host of other serious medical conditions, all attributable to years of smoking cigarettes. One would be hard-pressed to find a more convincing case of corporate malfeasance. And yet, they are still in business. The story of how that came to be would take up much more space then I am willing to dedicate to it right now. Maybe another time...

Brown is the New Green

Pray Baby Pray

Quite a few of us are wondering why Obama hasn't
moved to take control, of the response to the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster, away from BP. Certainly by now, over a month into it and with no end in sight, the president must be aware that BP is making this up as it goes along. They had no plan for one simple reason: the arrogant bastards never thought that they would need one. And no one demanded that they have one.

Admiral Thad W. Allen from the Coast Guard says, in effect, that only BP has the expertise and the technology to respond to something of this magnitude. But, BP has clearly demonstrated that they haven't a clue. So what Allen is really saying is that our government does not have the capability to step in and replace BP. And you know what? He is absolutely correct.

Of what use is an aircraft carrier in an emergency like this? Or, a nuclear submarine? Can we bomb the hole that BP punched in the ocean floor and stop the geyser of crude oil that is killing the Gulf? I read that we don't have the kinds of submarines that BP is using to try and shut of the flow. No, the kind of submarines that we possess are expensive, dangerous, and utterly useless in a situation like this one.

It would seem that our best brains, and most of our budget, is directed at producing ever more exotic and lethal ways to destroy ourselves. A half-million dollar piece of equipment that might have stopped the leak before it began was deemed both expensive, and unnecessary, by BP. At this point, no one can estimate just how much this will eventually cost. But, rest assured that if the cost is too high, BP will not hesitate to declare bankruptcy and walk away from the mess they created. Only the most naive of fools believes that a corporation would put the welfare of animals and human beings ahead of it's own interests.

Governor McDonnell's Rebel Yell

Virginia Governor Robert F. McDonnell is being said to have "stumbled" badly with his decision to announce that April would be "Confederate History Month" in Virginia. McDonnell's office issued a proclamation to that effect, one that, unbelievably, managed to omit any mention whatsoever of slavery. The governor then, when confronted with an entirely predictable uproar, tried to rationalize the omission by explaining that "There were any number of aspects to that conflict between the states. Obviously, it involved slavery. It involved other issues. But I focused on the ones I thought were most significant for Virginia." He then dug himself in deeper by mentioning tourism as being a significant factor in his calculations.

I am wrestling with this a bit as I try to decide how to approach it. First of all, I am not at all convinced that McDonnell was in any way surprised by the reaction to his proclamation. The governor, or at least someone in his office, had to know that there would be a ferocious backlash almost immediately. That they chose to go ahead, regardless of the consequences, leads me to almost believe that they welcomed the controversy. It is not exactly a secret that McDonnell is being outflanked on his right by Virginia's attorney general Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II. So, what better way to shore up your conservative bona fides then by invoking the glorious "Lost Cause"? It really is quite ingenious. First you issue a proclamation that is sure to provoke a strong reaction from just about everybody. Then, weather the storm for a day or two before making the obligatory apology, followed up by calls to various civil-rights leaders.

My decision to use images of both the Confederate Battle Flag, and the battle flag of the Third Reich, is obviously designed to provoke an emotional response. Southerners will undoubtedly cry foul, and condemn any association with a government as odious as Hitler's. The point that I'm trying to get across is simply that both flags stand for things that are basically repulsive to a good many people. During the Civil Rights Era, the rebel flag was used by opponents of desegregation as a symbol of defiance, and it is impossible to ignore that history. My thinking is that both flags should be consigned to museums where they can be used for educational purposes. They should not be flying over government buildings in either the United States or Germany. Yes, they are a part of history, but it is not a history that anyone should be celebrating.

Sons of Anarchy

I just finished reading a rather astonishing call-to-arms from a blogger who is fond of historical allusions, yet is either oblivious or dismissive of the more recent history of mobs breaking glass. The blogger, Mike Vanderboegh of Pinson, Alabama, calls upon the "modern Sons of Liberty" to "Break their windows. Break them now". What he is doing is inciting individuals to go to the homes and offices of members of Congress, specifically those who voted for what he labels as "Nancy Pelosi's Intolerable Act" (Health Care Reform), and then break the windows of the buildings. Now the first thing that comes to mind is whether or not Mr. Vanderboegh himself intends to cast the first stone in defense of liberty. My guess would be probably not, but you never know.

Exactly where were all of these "modern Sons of Liberty", or Three Percenters, over the eight long years of George W Bush's Reign? They didn't find anything "intolerable" about any of his acts? Vanderboegh invokes the sacking and burning of Massachusetts Lt. Governor Thomas Hutchinson's home in August of 1765 by the original Sons of Liberty, presumably to lend some heroic luster to what amounts to acts of vandalism. Nice try Mike, but chucking a brick through Nancy Pelosi's window and then running off like a common thief is not going to transform you into Sam Adams. Of course you could always use an empty Sam Adams as your projectile, but then you'd have to forfeit the 5 cent bottle deposit. Whoever said "Freedom isn't Free" must have anticipated your splendid rebellion.

My suspicion is that a couple of centuries, and much mythologizing, have combined to scrub away the sins of those original Sons of Liberty. Thomas Hutchinson, whatever his failings as a man and as a governor, was a learned man who had been working for years on a history of the Bay Colony. He home contained a valuable library and things of beauty, not to mention his family. A family that was forced to flee for their lives as a drunken mob attacked their home and proceeded to pillage and burn it down. The first thing they went for was the wine cellar. After it was over, the manuscript for his book lay trampled in the mud. To me, the sacking of Thomas Hutchinson's home was an act of barbarism.

Patriot leaders, like the aforementioned Sam Adams, sought to harness the power of the mob to incite a revolution. But the last thing they wanted to see happen was a social revolution, one that might threaten the sanctity of property and their own privileged positions. As a result, most were horrified by the spectacle of mobs of rabble putting elegant homes to the torch. It was all to easy to imagine their own homes meeting the same fate. Instead, they wanted a revolution that would leave the existing social structure intact. A conservative revolution, if you will. And that is exactly what they achieved.

Urban Cowboys

I've been working through all of my accumulated hours of videotape these past weeks. This video is a highlight reel of Andrew's baseball season from the Spring of 2005. I was working at Hill Holliday New York at the time, and one of my coworkers put this terrific video together. I have since taught myself how to make movies, but my efforts never seem to quite measure up to the always excellent results that Annie achieved.

The location of the baseball field is Murphy Brothers Park, on the East Side of Manhattan, nestled alongside the FDR Drive at 18th Street and Avenue C. The brick buildings behind the field are Stuyvesant Town, and you can also see the ConEd Plant looming behind the fences. It may not look like a Norman Rockwell painting, but it is baseball just the same.

Wise Guys

Earlier today a viewer made a rather unexpected comment regarding one of my youtube videos. The video in question is titled "PS 40 5th Grade Play", and is exactly what the name implies. I taped the entire play, trimmed it down to about 7 minutes, and then uploaded it to my youtube channel. Anyway, the viewer's comment was "This was the school that mob boss Lucky Luciano attended". And, lo and behold, it appears that he is correct.

Did anyone know that NYC has a museum dedicated to organized crime? I made that discovery while attempting to verify my viewer's claim. The grandly named Museum of the American Gangster is housed in a former speakeasy, and is located at 80 St. Marks Place in Manhattan. If you follow this link to their web page about Mr. Luciano, then you will see that he did indeed attend the same school as my son Andrew. It would seem that the famous Jewish gangster Meyer Lansky attended PS 40 as well, and the school is where the two boys began a life-long friendship.

I recall reading something several years back about efforts to build an organized crime museum out in Las Vegas. And I remember thinking that a museum like that belongs in New York City. Nearly all of the iconic mob figures hailed from NYC, including Chicago's Al Capone, who was born in Brooklyn. I'm not certain what happened with the Vegas project, but I am very much looking forward to paying my first visit to that former speakeasy.

Andrew is quite impressed that such a infamous character attended the same school that he just graduated from this past year. Andrew has heard of Al Capone, but not Charles "Lucky" Luciano. I told him that Luciano helped us with the invasion of Sicily in WWII by establishing contact with his counterparts in Italy, and urging them not to cooperate with the Germans and Italians defending the Island. Whatever he did was deemed valuable enough to spring him from prison, but he was deported to Italy immediately. Meyer Lansky is an equally fascinating character. I think that he was the inspiration for the Jewish mob boss in The Godfather movies.

Andrew took on the role of President Kennedy in the play and delivered a condensed version of his inaugural address. He enjoyed playing the president, but I suspect that if we had known this sooner, Andrew would have made a pitch for including the school's most notorious alumni in the play. He already had the dark suit; all that was missing was the fedora and violin case.

The Bronx Is Up and The Battery's Down

Through trial and error, I have been steadily teaching myself the intricacies of transferring video footage from analog to digital. Providing one has the correct hardware and software, the process is not that difficult. The problem is knowing what to buy and making sure it is compatible with my operating system. Connecting a VCR machine to a computer struck me as alchemy at first - it seemed impossible that it would actually work. But, the video embedded below stands as happy testimony to my success.

My obsession with all things NYC-related remains undiminished. This video sat for years in an analog format collecting dust, until I decided to bring it into the light of day via the magic of youtube. The footage provides a window that affords us a rare glimpse of the city as it appeared more then a half-century ago. And, even more remarkable, it is in full-color. We can be thankful that the producers of this film had the foresight to capture that world before it disappeared forever.

Embedded below is "The Vanishing El"...

Funny Money

A North Carolina Congressman has introduced legislation to replace Grant's likeness, with that of Ronald Reagan, on the $50 bill. I must confess that I was indifferent to this idea initially, but that changed when I read this op/ed piece by historian Sean Wilentz, posted on the NYT's web site. Wilentz does a terrific job of setting the record straight as concerns the much-maligned reputation of Ulysses S Grant. And, in the process, he exposes this proposal as both a travesty and an injustice.

Let them name another ship, freeway, or airport after Reagan, if they must. But, leave him off our currency please. Doesn't anyone see the irony of putting this man's face on a bank note? He ran up record deficits throughout his two terms in the White House. The Right's repeated efforts to deify Ronald Reagan grow ever more tiresome. These characters just can't get over the fact that FDR was the greatest American president of the 20th century, and nothing they do can change that. Roosevelt liberated Western Europe from the Nazis, while simultaneously crushing the Japanese Empire. And Reagan? Well, Reagan did dispatch a fleet to tiny Grenada to chase away some Cuban construction workers, and at the same time, gave Clint Eastwood a neat idea for a movie.

ICE, ICE, BABY

It seems inexplicable to me that this country is unable to build even a modest version of a true high-speed rail service, one that measures up to the ones found in a half-dozen other countries. The closest thing we have is the Amtrak Acela service between Boston and Washington, DC, and that would be considered a regional express service, at best, if compared to what exists elsewhere in the world. In order to have true high-speed trains, you need dedicated right-of-ways, free of slower moving trains, like the freight trains that share the rails with Amtrak.

The author of the opinion piece that I link to above has the right idea. If you only going to allocate 8 billion dollars to promote high-speed trains (a pittance if ever there was one), then your best bet is to spend it all on upgrading the one rail corridor we have that approaches world-class standards. Instead the money is being dispersed among 31 states, only two of which have so far come up with concrete proposals. The Amtrak Northeast Corridor is not even included in the dispersal of funds.

As you view the slideshow that I set up to the right of this post, question why it is that we lag so far behind the rest of the world when it comes to high-speed rail service. And particularly think about it the next time you are forced to take a plane to travel less then 500 miles, a trip that typically involves more time getting to and from the airports, then actual time spent in the air. There is a better way, and all that is lacking is the national will to make it happen.

ACTA NON VERBA

I came across an hour-long interview that Robert Moses gave in 1977, when he was close to 90 years old. I couldn't detect even a hint of decrepitude in the man; his mind was razor-sharp and all of the personality traits typically associated with him came across clearly. Moses was by turns witty, defensive, erudite, cruel, and above all else, remorseless. Listening to Moses school the youngster interviewing him was great entertainment. You've heard the expression "trying to nail jello to a wall"? Well, that is a pretty good way of describing what I just watched. Time and again, the interviewer, Robert Sam Anson, would gamely attempt to steer the dialogue where he wanted it to go, and each time Moses would deftly fend him off. It was clear to me that, regardless of what Anson might have thought of his subject going in, by the end of the hour he was visibly awed by the defiant octogenarian sitting across from him.

ESPRESSO SHOTS, NOT GUNSHOTS

I just finished reading an AP article about how retailers, specifically the coffee chain Starbucks, are finding themselves caught in the middle of the gun control debate. The trouble stems from the increasingly militant stance that members of the so-called "open-carry" movement have adopted in recent months. 43 states now have laws permitting gun-owners to brandish loaded guns in public, and many of them have interpreted that right to include carrying the weapons into places like stores and restaurants. And, if local laws do permit open-carry, the law does extend to retailers and the like, unless the business decides to ban the weapons from their establishment. But, that is a position that many retailers are reluctant to take, presumably out of fear of offending some well-armed potential customers.

Starbucks attempted to take the mushy middle of the road approach (we obey all local laws), and predictably, ended up pleasing neither side. Gun-owners insisted on bringing their weapons into the coffee shops, and gun-control activists began pressuring the chain to ban customers carrying guns. And while I find the idea of armed customers sipping their coffees around me, as I get my morning cup, somewhat disconcerting, I did think of a specific gun-related incident that took place in a coffee shop and that got me to thinking.

This past November, a man walked into a Lakewood, WA coffee shop and methodically gunned down 4 local police officers as they sat drinking coffee and working on laptop computers. I do seem to recall that one of the officers managed to return fire and wounded the gunman, but the officers essentially didn't stand a chance. They were totally unprepared for what happened and all 4 were killed. Now, would the outcome have been any different had there been an armed customer on the premises when the shooting started? That is impossible to answer obviously, but it is worth considering. A lot of variables come into play. If 4 trained and armed law enforcement officers were unable to save themselves, how likely is it that a plumber with a pistol strapped to his hip would have fared better? My personal opinion is that our hypothetical armed customer would have become victim number 5 in short order, had he tried to intervene.

Let's Go To The Fair

I've always been fascinated by the 1939 World's Fair which was held on the site of an ash dump in Queens New York, a landmark immortalized in the pages of F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby. The dump was miraculously transformed, for the Fair, into what is today Flushing Meadows-Corona Park, an oasis of greenery and fresh water in the middle of Queens. The park also served as the site of the 1964 World's Fair, and the iconic landmarks that remain today date from the later Fair. For fairly obvious reasons, the '64 Fair does not invoke anywhere near the level of affectionate nostalgia that is typically associated with the '39 Fair.

The 1939 World's Fair took place against the backdrop of the looming Second World War, the shadow of which was inescapable. It also coincided with the Great Depression, which had been going on for a decade by that point, and full economic recovery was still several years in the future. So understandably, people were eager for anything that might take their minds off of their immediate concerns, while simultaneously holding out the promise of a better tomorrow. The 1939 Fair fulfilled both of those desires, as demonstrated by the two gentlemen offering their own memories of the Fair in the videos that I am embedding at the bottom of this post.

As you watch the wonderful color footage of the Fair, pay attention to a couple of things. First, notice the almost-total absence of any litter or trash blowing about on the ground. 1939 predates the birth of our modern packaging industry, an industry that is a decidedly mixed blessing. We pay a heavy price for convenience, as one look at our blighted landscape of today will quickly show. And it isn't just the Fairgrounds that are free of trash. The footage of the city streets that you will see shows the same thing.

Next, notice how well-dressed everyone at the Fair is. I firmly believe that there is a strong correlation between the way people dress, and how they conduct themselves in public. When citizens dressed in a civilized manner, they tended to behave accordingly. Today, when you have the spectacle of people attending church in t-shirts and sweatpants, it is no wonder that our society has suffered a complete breakdown in so many respects. The plain truth is that most people today dress exactly the same for almost any occasion, a deplorable trend if ever there was one.

HEY, TAXI!

I came across a delightful video on youtube called "Driving Around New York City - 1928". It is great fun and wait until you see who the cabbies second passenger is...

NY Post Stuyvesant Town Video

I just came across a youtube video, posted a year ago, that is narrated by the NY Post's Max Gross. It is a useful, if brief, look at the history of the development up to the present day, or at least 2008. The video touches on the massive relocation of people that preceded construction, and it also mentions Met Life's initial policy of not renting apartments to African-Americans. Gross then makes the rather astonishing claim that Stuyvesant Town is now "one of the most diverse communities in Manhattan. I lived there for 15 years and have no idea what he is basing that conclusion on.

Nevertheless, the video is interesting and informative, and well worth a viewing. I will embed the youtube video below:

Glory Days

There was a time, in the not-too distant past, when the New Jersey Nets actually looked like a real basketball team. We attended a Nets-Celtics game on January 25, 2004, and watched the final game that Bryon Scott coached for the Nets before being fired. The Nets turned in a strong performance and came away with a decisive victory. My camera work was a bit shaky at times (I was still getting used to filming), but it is remarkable how steady a hand I had when filming the cheerleaders half time show. Sadly, the cheerleaders are the only thing worth watching at a Nets game these days...

Sound of Silence

I uploaded a video of my son's graduation to youtube last year, and used Simon & Garfunkel's song "Sound of Silence" as the soundtrack. The video uploaded, but youtube disabled the audio either because of copyright issues, or perhaps someone working there has a finely-developed sense of irony. I left it up, and at some point they changed the status of my video because the audio is now fully restored. But, the video does have an interesting disclaimer attached saying something to the effect that "This video is blocked in some countries"

Now, when you drag a cursor over the graduation video, a pop-up message prompts you to download the song from the itunes store. So, they have figured out a formula that seems to allow a happy outcome for all parties, but it obviously does not apply to everything as evidenced by the two videos that I just uploaded. They are muted on youtube, and I have no good options at the point. I visited youtube's copyright infringement resolution page and quickly learned that the "appeal" process is probably hopeless.

This video opens with the 2009 PS 40 graduating class filing out of the auditorium after the diploma ceremony. I fully understand that much of this will be of scant interest to anyone not related to a child, but if you join it at the 1:55 mark the song comes in and the video assumes that bittersweet quality that is the inevitable companion to memory. The photo slideshow opens with images of the children on the day of graduation, and then gradually the images change to photos taken over the six-year span. The video following the slideshow is of a 1st grade school concert, and the viewer sees the same children as they appeared five years earlier.

Boob Tube

The video sharing site youtube obviously does not have a coherent policy as regards their enforcement of copyright infringement. For example, the video that I have embedded in this post was also uploaded to youtube. Once the upload was complete and I went to view it, I discovered that youtube had disabled the audio because of my song choice. Well, the song that I chose is John Fogerty's 'Centerfield", an altogether appropriate track for the video. I then did a search on youtube and there were at least 50 hits for Fogerty's ode to springtime. All with perfectly functional audio. Did they all obtain permission from Warner?

This is the second time they have disabled the audio for one of my videos. It is more then frustrating because of the time and effort that go into synching up the video clips with the song choice. Obviously, no other song will work at that point so it is either back to the drawing board, or you post a silent movie. Youtube desperately needs to come up with a better system for allowing or disallowing content because this is unworkable.

The video in question is the highlight reel made from video I shot of my son Andrew's travel baseball team, during the Fall 2005 season. The players, known affectionately as the Pip Squeaks, were 6 or 7-years old at the time. The team was composed of players drawn from the Peter Stuyvesant Little League Program in Manhattan, and we played all our games either in Brooklyn, or out on Long Island.

Million Dollar Slaves

I haven't been paying a great deal of attention to the story of the captive Orca that drowned it's trainer earlier this week. The couple of things that I did read about it left me disgusted. Not because of what the animal did, but because of the moronic way the incident was being interpreted by most commentators. For example, one of the articles described the whale as having a "troubled background", presumably because of it's involvement in several earlier incidents of a similar nature. The overall tone of the article conveyed the impression that Tilikum (the whale) was somehow behaving in a abnormal manner when it seized the girl by her ponytail and dragged her underwater repeatedly.

I will allow that the behavior exhibited by the animal would certainly be considered abnormal, or perhaps unexpected, on the part of a whale living in the wild, given that wild orcas are not considered a danger to humans. However, one could certainly make the case that any of the behavior displayed by captive orcas is abnormal, in the sense that they are essentially captive slaves forced to endlessly perform tricks in order to be fed. And if you accept the premise that these creatures are indeed slaves, then the idea of rebellion does not seem so far-fetched. In fact, given that these are highly intelligent animals that work together when hunting, even the concept of organized resistance becomes at least credible.

I have never attended a Sea World show, but expect that I would be entertained by the sight of these awesome animals performing mere yards away from where you sit. And now there is an added attraction, albeit a macabre one. I have always heard that most of the people that attend auto-racing events in person, do so in the hope that they will be rewarded with a spectacular wreck. Will they now flock to Sea World hoping to see an Orca kill it's trainer?