Today, we are waging PEACE! HAPPY PEACE DAY!
Encouraging all to display peace signs!
American Dream Newspaper & Speak Unity National Initiative (Maryland a FREE STATE NOT APOLICE STATE) & As State Delegate primary Winner Rebecca L. Nelson's teams are honored to join with the American Friends Service Committee's call for Peace supporting our President World-wide.
Let's support and encourage our Presidents call for Peace. amerICAN opportUNITY
Peace signs are available at amerdreamnews@hotmail.com
email Nelson's team and we will reply with a peace sign, an original Peace sign created in 2006 for Nelson with honor, respect, one love and Nelson's name utilized for the election.
Rebecca L. Nelson was listed as a murder witness after a shoot-out involving four shooters took place in her parked truck. The charging documents listed her name, and address were given to all of the shooters in the detention center. A 20 year old father of one rolled off the back of her truck with 3 bullets in his head. One shooter was shot in the leg and went to the hospital. A third shooter went to jail given his charging documents with Rebecca listed as a murder witness.
At anytime the shooter could call the fourth shooter and give out Rebecca's information for a drive by shooting. Misdirected anger killed 15 murder witnesses in Baltimore in 2005. The same year the stop snitching video was released. This murder trial was postponed for 18 months.
Rebecca Publishes American Dream Newspaper, since 1999, and did so with her American Indian maiden name, however; the police listed her legal name with no regard to her safety. In all fairness to the Police that was the policy, they were just following their normal operating procedure
She summitted PEACE SIGNS for her photo & for her logo for the election, while working to correct these policies to protect innocent citizens from being put in harms way. Three years later the police & States Attorneys are now NOT releasing witnesses names untill a State's Attorney is assigned these cases, about a month before the trials.
No longer will other citizens have to move and hide for months and years waiting on justice.
In Baltimore the driveby's and numbers of murders have started to decline, finally.
Now, Nelson is addressing the Peace Orders in the State of Maryland that are not worth the papers they are written on. After moving, Nelson closed down an illegal bail bond business in Baltimore and Harford Counties. A handfull of criminals continued to get out after numerous neighbors had called the police. They were arrested, one criminal had 14 charges in one month. Nelson discovered, exposed them and worked to pull the tax numbers of these Bail bondsman, closing down the operation in Baltimore and Harford Counties.
Collectively, neighbors went to the State to file Peace orders. Nelson and her neighbors worked to seek Peace in a military area where we have alot of single and widowed moms, wives and daughters. Several of these Peace Orders were dropped years later when Senator Stone's Son Judge Norman Stone choose to conspire to do so. Judge Stone had no insight as to the danger Nelson was in or maybe he was just playing musical courts to cover or conspire to protect Judge Finifter who did not know how to count to 10. (Nelson has a US Supreme Court case for this one)
Stone put Nelson in harms way, again. For when the criminals left Stones courtroom, after she explained and shared photographs of when she went to serve the Peace Orders it took 5 different Police Officers to find one who knew how to read them, how to serve them, during which time Nelson was hosed, and beaten. The criminals went to the Commissionors the same day and filed lies against Nelson thanks to Judge Stones ineptness; he could of looked up pages of guilty verdicts of this gang and yet he chose to do nothing but dismiss Peace Orders. No wonder his daddy the Senator,(on my Cousin Del Mikie Weirs ticket) wants to clear the dropped Peace Orders!
The Baltimore Sun reported 8000 Peace Orders were dropped, almost half. Most of our sisters are NOT lying and expected the State to care in Baltimore County to no avail in Stones District Court.
Now, that charges are put on the courts web pages while innocent before being found guilty of anything, my clean record, has been marked by their foolishness. And yet, I refuse to let it steal my Peace.
The judges in Baltimore County District Court continue their witch hunt of our sisters of color.
G.Harold Russell, Judge Fletcher, Sally Chester,Judge Bill Evans of the Orphains Court where Nelsons property is registered costing $4600.in fees, a quiet title, a contract to settle good untill a year later, a Specific Performance Case ruled by Judge Levitz that it could not be dismissed, right of certeria for the US Supreme Court for restitution (in Aero Acrea America's 1st planned Community Bi-Laws states 'white only' Nelson has been working to make them 'race nutural): conspired on Oct. 31st (1st day of Gov. O'malleys 'special' General Assembly) to try Nelson on the lies the criminals forged on State documents.
Judge Russell refused to recuse himself, these motion papers 'disapeared'; however, I have the stamped photographs as proof that a motion had to be summited for them to be stamped!
They shackled Nelson detained for 11 days under a nick name, while they tried to cover up their last conspiracy to invade her home of three years. All evidence had been removed and put in safe keeping before they burnt four generations of Nelson's belongings.
Bill Evans went so far as to threaten me after his sorryness claimed to want to help and never entered his appearance and this is how this State murder witness was treated in Balto. Maryland.
I do want to thank Judge Turnbull for dismissing all the lies after I appealed to Circuit Court, and thank Judge Levitz, also, of the Circuit Court, he ruled that the Specific Performance case will go to court, however; Senator Stone was outside the courtroom when I was assured my case would go to fast trac after I waited 10 months for a date to settle on this property. Still waiting to no avail.
Now, how can I, Nelson lose my Peace while recieving an excellent legal education that some attorneys only dream about -- a case to the highest Court in our land -America's Supreme!
Let's give Peace a chance, Respect, Speak Unity. amerdreamnews@hotmail.com 410 727 3728
Communications is the new frontier. Newspapers are being converted from print to internet. Huge amounts of money are wasted through lack of standardization, redundancy, and difficulty in querying and finding data. We need to standardize not just electronic medical records, to prevent duplicating services and errors, but also utility bills, credit card bills, contracts, court records, prison and jail records, and any communications which are fundamental, frequent, and subject to privacy and security concerns.
Elderly and disabled persons often have difficulty in the area of communications. Changing the format of utility bills causes a problem. Difficult to read credit card bills causes chaos. Incomprehensible contracts are a disaster.
National security is highly dependent on communications - on the battle front, for homeland security, to prevent terrorist attacks, to prevent crime. However the privacy concerns are huge. Intelligence may sometimes compromise privacy. How do we balance these?
Information technology is poorly understood by most Americans. We need increased education in this area.
Mediation, debate, giving and following instructions, about almost anything are necessary skills in society. How can we increase our skills as a nation in this area?
Please give your conerns about what needs to do and why centralizing these concerns in one cabinet level position may be efficient and move us forward quicker or the opposite view.
I want the US Justice Department to do more extensive investigations of corruption in Illinois courts, police departments, prisons and jails. See by blogs for detailed evidence and suggestions:
You might find a lot of new leads about corruption in Illinois on this site. I am adamant about exposing and fighting corruption in Illinois. This is what I hope to be a worthwhile journalistic excursion for me. Enjoy!
http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/The
The blog is devoted to exposing corruption by officials in Illinois and pointing out areas of public policy where changes need to be made. The author will only put factual information on this site, legal pleadings affecting many individuals, and will not allow personal attacks, or allow the site to be a forum to discuss extreme or controversial views, with the exception of the death penalty. The author is firmly against the death penalty as a violation of the ten commandments and the sanctity of life, as well as a recognition that justice is not perfect and we shall avoid irreversible harm to the innocent. The primary issues concern constitutional and statutory rights, failure of officials to enforce them, lack of transparency in government, and criminal conduct of officials in Illinois, particularly the judges, the prosecutors, and the police.
Also: http://drlindashelton.wordpress.com/Hard hitting and intellectual commentary on issues of the day. "Article about Why is Illinois Corrupt?" Suggestions about how to fix political corruption, health care problem, and economy.
The point of this blog is to have a place to publicly express my opinions, give a little reflection, let others educate me, and let others have at me in civil debate.
My interest is primarily people and their opinions, politics, civil rights, medicine, law, self-representation, and most of all right now tearing down corruption in government in Illinois and C[r]ook County. Please read my other blogs, Illinois Corruption and Pro Se Chicago which you can access with links on this site.
“Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.” U.S. v. Olmstead - Justice Brandeis
http://prosechicago.wordpress.com/
http://cookcountyjudges.wordpress.com/
This blog is about judicial misconduct in the Cook County Circuit Court giving details about specific judges.These blogs give information about pro se defense procedures, interpretation of laws, legal procedures, prisoner rights, actions by Dr. Shelton against government corruption including prisoner abuse, and Dr. Shelton's suggestion about how to fix our broken legal, healthcare, prison, and economic systems.Enjoy!Dr. Linda Shelton
We incarcerate more people than does any other Country in the World. Blacks and others of color are disproportionately represented in our jails and prisons. They are also disproportionately represented on the Probation and Community Control rolls. Being sentenced to Probation or Community Control is the first step on the path towards Prison. Thereafter, the ex-offender cannot vote or find a job, never mind a good job. They have no economic or political power. They can never achieve the American Dream, because it truly is only a dream for those who find themselves in and out of the Criminal Justice system regularly.
The Police stop blacks night and day at will for "Field Interviews", which is a euphemism for illegal detention - no probable cause. It is much more rare for a white person to be stopped for no reason. Black men are subjected to illegal searches under one guise or another more often than are whites. When stopped, they are not free to leave, no matter how many times the Police testify to the contrary. Once officially detained, the black man stays in jail for the duration, because neither he nor his family can afford to post the bond, no matter how low it is set.
The attitude in our Criminal Courts is that since a black man was arrested, he must be guilty, they all are. It is assumed that black men want to be drug dealers and thieves. Black men are given longer jail sentences than are white men. Through a lack of social services, racial discrimination, Policing practices and Court attitudes, we are driving young black men away from mainstream paths to progress and success. If the Defendant is sentenced to Supervision, the system requires the Defendants to pay various fines, costs and Supervision fees, and to participate in, and pay for various court ordered classes. It is usually the case that they simply cannot afford to pay for their Supervision, given their hand to mouth existence. Also, the transportation necessary for attendance at the required functions Ordered by the Court is assumed to be availabe. I have trouble getting to my appointments, and I own a car. What job can a man faced with these institutional biases qualify for other than drug dealing or petty crimes.
The term "Supervision" really means that you can be harassed at will, searched without a warrant and must comply with random drug testing, at the Supervisee's expense. It is to the advantage of the Probation and Community Control Supervisors to file a Warrants for Probation Violation that would reduce their case loads. Formality and Rules of Procedure don't exist in Probation Violation Hearings. Jail or Prison is the most likely outcome. The petty crimes add up, and then it's Strike Three, prison for life.
The obstacles that black men face every day of their lives are not acknowledged by any one who works in the System, and the Offender is never given the benefit of a doubt. So black men plead No Contest to charges that could have been beaten at trial by a good lawyer. The Defendants don't trust their Public Defenders since the APDs and ASAs all work for the same government. If the man goes to trial and loses, he is given a much stiffer sentence than he would had he pled out. A huge number of black men are either on Probation or Community Control, or are being housed in our many prisons and jails. In this way they are eliminated, for all practical purposes, from our society. A wide range of domestic dysfunction and hopelessness results from the existence of this double standard. The cycle of arrests, prosecutions and imprisonment goes on with no intervention, until the young man becomes imprisoned for most of his life. His children never have a Father at home, and the children live in poverty, leading them down the same paths trod by their Fathers. Injustice grows into anger and hate, causing young black men to become criminals and to follow in the tragic footsteps of their forebears.
take a forom
I started this blog, because I wanted to talk about my efforts to save my home, and to really just get some thing off my chest.
I finally lost my home to foreclsure sale in June 08, after trying to work with the bank ( countrywide/BOA) for over a year. As a result of this my credit is such that I can't even begin to think about getting a home for at least 5 years. Countrywide and BOA ran me around for over 1 year, just to not help me at all.
I think the problem with all this talk about helping out the homeowners, is that it is up to the bank, they can chose to help or not. If they think that they can get these assest off there books by a sale, or government help, then they are less likely to do anything to help keep the home owner in the house. I found out the hard way that not only do the banks work with each other, so do the courts.
We the homeowner can't win, even if we had money to pay for a lawyer to help us.
Moderates and progressives should be very afraid of what John McCain has in mind for advancing the right-wing judicial agenda in this country. But, as Doug Kendall says in his “Fearing the McCain Supreme Court”, people aren’t paying a lot of attention to the possibility that a McCain Presidency could insure a right-wing Supreme Court “for a generation”:
No one thinks John McCain would nominate ethically-challenged judges. But there is every reason to think that he will nominate ideological conservatives to the Supreme Court and lower federal courts. This is important because federal courts are already dominated by Republican appointees. Seven of the nine Justices, and a sizeable majority of lower federal court judges were appointed by Republican presidents. With the Courts' liberal/moderate judges on average 15 years older than the Court's conservatives, John McCain in the White House could easily deliver the Court to the right wing for a generation.The far right clearly understands this, which is why they have forced McCain to profess ever more stridently his devotion to their Supreme Court cause. As I've argued in more detail here, it's troubling that progressive and moderate voters seem to care so much less about this critical issue. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/doug-kendall/fearing-the-mccain-suprem_b_87101.html
So, why do I feel that some Democrats, Independents, and moderate Republicans are asleep on the critical issue of what the courts in America will look like for the next 30 years? Why do I feel that the Clinton supporters who say they’ll vote for McCain over Obama “throw the baby out with the bathwater”? Why do I think that Ralph Nader and disgruntled progressives who say support him over Obama are in need of a critical dose of reality? I need only look at the answers given by McCain and Obama to a recent question from Rev. Rick Warren on “Who on the current Supreme Court would you not have nominated?”
McCain said he would have never nominated Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, David Souter and John Paul Stevens.‘"His nomination should be based on the criteria on a proven record of strictly adhering to the Constitution and not legislating from the bench," McCain added. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/16/warren.forum/index.html
John McCain’s quick response to Warren’s question was meant to send a message to conservatives everywhere of just what a future Supreme Court will look like under a McCain Presidency. McCain certainly tried to make the point with his response that this was a Big Issue with him even though he voted in the Senate to confirm three of those justices* (McCain was not in the Senate when Stephens was nominated). There has been some criticism of McCain from the far-right in the past that he might compromise on Supreme Court nominations because of his association with the “Gang of 14” in 2005, but, according to Neil A. Lewis in an article for the New York Times:
Senator John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican nominee, has already asserted that if elected he would reinforce the conservative judicial counterrevolution that began with President Ronald Reagan by naming candidates for the bench with a reliable conservative outlook.… In his 22 years in the Senate, Mr. McCain has never been a major player in the judicial wars. Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the ranking member on the Judiciary Committee, said Mr. McCain "has never been really interested in judges. It’s sort of something far afield because his interests are otherwise," Mr. Specter said. Like Mr. McCain, neither Mr. Reagan nor Mr. Bush was a lawyer and, adopting the same rhetoric as Mr. McCain is now using, they became enthusiastic instruments of those conservative lawyers who were diligent in choosing conservative judicial nominees. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/28/us/politics/28judges.html?pagewanted=print
Now, back to that interview question about the Supreme Court from Rev. Rick Warren last week: Barack Obama gave a much more measured response to Rev. Warren’s question. He said he would not have nominated Clarence Thomas for the Supreme Court: “I don’t think that he was a strong enough jurist or legal thinker at the time, for that elevation, setting aside the fact that I profoundly disagree with his interpretations of a lot of the constitution.” Obama, a Constitutional lawyer who taught the subject for more than 10 years at the University of Chicago, continued on to state he would not have nominated Anthony Scalia or John Roberts, even though they were highly qualified, even brilliant jurists. Focusing on John Roberts, his remarks were the most revealing of what kind of a President he will be in supporting a strong and independent judiciary branch:
He’s [Roberts] clearly smart — very thoughtful. I will tell you that how I’ve seen him operate since he went to the bench confirms the suspicions that I had, and the reason that I voted against him. And I’ll give you one very specific instance…. One of the most important jobs of, I believe, the Supreme Court is to guard against the encroachment of the executive branch on the power of the other branches. And I think that he has been a little bit too willing and eager to give an administration — whether it’s mine, or George Bush’s — more power than I think the Constitution originally intended. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12582.html [emphasis added]
And THAT, my friends, is reason enough to vote for Barack Obama over John McCain as the next President of the United States of America.
* McCain voted to confirm Supreme Court Justices Ginsberg, Beyer, and Souter: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=103&session=1&vote=00232, http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=103&session=2&vote=00242, http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=101&session=2&vote=00259
A panel of the Appeals Court in the DC Circuit on Monday released the first ever ruling on a habeas habeas-like review for a Guantanamo prisoner under the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (PDF). It's devastating to the Bush administration. The unanimous opinion even mocks Bush & Co.'s argument, comparing it to a nonsense poem by Lewis Carroll.
Nearly all the procedings at Combatant Status Review Tribunals have relied heavily on hearsay allegations whose reliability the Tribunals have admitted they can't assess adequately because of government assertions of secrecy. The Appeals Court found that the Tribunal was wrong to depend on unvetted secret 'evidence' to classify the prisoner, Huzaifa Parhat, as an 'enemy combatant'. It also rejected the administration's preposterous and tortured argument that tried to link Parhat to al Qaeda. From the opinion:
"The documents repeatedly describe those activities and relationships as having "reportedly" occurred, as being "said to" or "reported to" have happened, and as things that "may" be true or are "suspected of" having taken place. But in virtually every instance, the documents do not say who "reported" or "said" or "suspected" those things. Nor do they provide any of the underlying reporting upon which the documents' bottom-line assertions are founded, nor any assessment of the reliability of the reporting. Because of those omissions, the Tribunal could not and this court cannot assess the reliability of the assertions in the documents."[...]We merely reject the government's contention that it can prevail by submitting documents that read as if they were indictments or civil complaints, and that simply assert as facts the elements required to prove that a detainee falls within the definition of enemy combatant. To do otherwise would require the courts to rubber-stamp the government's charges...
"The documents repeatedly describe those activities and relationships as having "reportedly" occurred, as being "said to" or "reported to" have happened, and as things that "may" be true or are "suspected of" having taken place. But in virtually every instance, the documents do not say who "reported" or "said" or "suspected" those things. Nor do they provide any of the underlying reporting upon which the documents' bottom-line assertions are founded, nor any assessment of the reliability of the reporting. Because of those omissions, the Tribunal could not and this court cannot assess the reliability of the assertions in the documents."
[...]
We merely reject the government's contention that it can prevail by submitting documents that read as if they were indictments or civil complaints, and that simply assert as facts the elements required to prove that a detainee falls within the definition of enemy combatant. To do otherwise would require the courts to rubber-stamp the government's charges...
The opinion also declared, "To affirm the Tribunal's determination under such circumstances would be to place a judicial imprimatur on an act of essentially unreviewable executive discretion." The Court bristled at the Bush administration's argument that the accusations against Parhat had credibility just because they'd been repeated in at least three secret documents.
"The government insists that the statements made in the documents are reliable because the State and Defense Departments would not have put them in intelligence documents were that not the case. This comes perilously close to suggesting that whatever the government says must be treated as true, thus rendering superfluous both the role of the Tribunal and the role that Congress assigned to this Court."
It mocked the administration by referring to Lewis Carroll's poem "The Hunting of the Snark". Here is Carroll's lead buffoon exhorting his followers onward in a farcical search for a non-existant prey:
"Just the place for a Snark!" the Bellman cried, As he landed his crew with care; Supporting each man on the top of the tide By a finger entwined in his hair."Just the place for a Snark! I have said it twice: That alone should encourage the crew. Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice: What I tell you three times is true."
"Just the place for a Snark!" the Bellman cried, As he landed his crew with care; Supporting each man on the top of the tide By a finger entwined in his hair.
"Just the place for a Snark! I have said it twice: That alone should encourage the crew. Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice: What I tell you three times is true."
"Lewis Carroll notwithstanding, the fact the government has 'said it thrice' does not make an allegation true," said the ruling (quoting the final sentence above).
The Court ordered the administration either to release Parhat or hold another tribunal in which the reliability of the evidence was assessed rather than simply assumed.
It was the first time a court has reviewed the military's decision-making and considered whether a detainee should be held. The ruling provides guidance to federal district judges, who are about to begin reviewing dozens of such cases now that the Supreme Court says detainees can challenge their detention in federal court..."The big issue now is, can any CSRT decision survive this kind of scrutiny?" Parhat's lawyer, Susan Baker Manning said.
It was the first time a court has reviewed the military's decision-making and considered whether a detainee should be held. The ruling provides guidance to federal district judges, who are about to begin reviewing dozens of such cases now that the Supreme Court says detainees can challenge their detention in federal court...
"The big issue now is, can any CSRT decision survive this kind of scrutiny?" Parhat's lawyer, Susan Baker Manning said.
Bush's system of kangaroo courts could implode.
A lawyer representing other detainees, Marc D. Falkoff, said the evidence against many of the 270 men now at Guantánamo was similar to that in the Parhat case.“This opinion shows that the government is going to have a hard time defending the military’s decision to detain many of these men,” said Mr. Falkoff, a professor at Northern Illinois University College of Law.
A lawyer representing other detainees, Marc D. Falkoff, said the evidence against many of the 270 men now at Guantánamo was similar to that in the Parhat case.
“This opinion shows that the government is going to have a hard time defending the military’s decision to detain many of these men,” said Mr. Falkoff, a professor at Northern Illinois University College of Law.
The administration's maltreatment of the Uighur prisoners is notorious. They fled to Afghanistan in 2001 to escape Chinese oppression. Though nobody disputes that they've never taken up arms against the US, Bush agreed to salt the Uighurs away at Gitmo as a favor to China at a time he was seeking Chinese support for the invasion of Iraq. Secret (very likely Chinese) allegations that the Uighurs support al Qaeda served as the basis for imprisoning them. So it's highly fitting that the first, devastating habeas habeas-like challenge to Bush's CSRTs should come from a Uighur prisoner.
(Update): As kenm points out, the DTA created an ambiguous habeas-substitute review in the US Court of Appeals in DC in lieu of a standard habeas review. That provision was struck down recently by SCOTUS in Boumediene. I've changed the wording from "habeas" to "habeas-like" to reflect that ambiguity.
+++
See also this diary by Deep Harm.
Tags: Guantanamo, Huzaifa Parhat, Parhat v. Gates, Detainee Treatment Act, Uighurs, Lewis Carroll, CSRT (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions
Blue Majority Candidates
Daily Kos homepage
© Kos Media, LLCSite content may be used for any purpose withoutexplicit permission unless otherwise specified.Privacy Policy
Powered by Scoop.
Greetings, all!
I'm pleased to be here, and look forward to meeting many of you, online and in our communities.
First, congratulations to Senator Obama on being the "presumptive" nominee (when can we just say "nominee"?). Why anyone would want this job, given the gigantic pile of garbage we have to clean up after 28 years of conservative rule, I'm not sure. But props to him for his willingness to tackle it.
I want to be clear about something. While I support Senator Obama for President, my policy preferences tend to be much more libertarian/left than he is. I don't hold this against him; I understand that "official" American politics is much more conservative than in other countries (see the chart at www.politicalcompass.org), and in fact, more conservative than most American citizens (see this poll from the good people at PIPA).
My point is that I'm not here because I think he's the end-all, be-all of America. I'm not here because I love his speeches (although the man absolutely DOMINATES that stage, surpassed only by Michelle Obama). I'm not here because I have faith in the Democratic Party or liberals (as the saying goes, Democrats are "10 degrees to the left of center when times are good, 20 degrees to the right of center when it threatens their interests").
I'm here because our country is in shambles. Because wages and salaries have been stagnant or declined since 1970. Because our courts are increasingly acting on behalf of the elite, and not the people. Because Americans have little or no control over their economy. Because education is obsolete at the K-12 level, and unaffordable at the college level. Because our foreign policy is imperialistic and profit-driven. Because workers lack the basic human right of association - the right to organize.
I'm here because while one person can't fix all of these things, a Democrat in the White House and a Democratic majority in the House and Senate will make it much easier for us to make these things happen. Every great change in American history, every expansion of democracy came not because our leaders woke up one day and decided, benevolently, to expand or protect our rights - it happened because we the people organized and struggled and MADE it happen. The greatest changes were in the 1930s and the 1960s, and it's no coincidence that Democrats controlled the government during both periods. It's easier for progressive citizens to get something done under Democrats than under Republicans.
With Obama in the White House, our job as citizens becomes a lot easier. That's why I'm here.
Among the things that Barack talks about in his Plan to Rebuild the Gulf Coast is an ambitious approach to fighting crime.
It should surprise no one to discover that disreputable elements are creeping into the area, trying to take advantage of the disarray and confusion sown by the inadequate responses of the present administration.
However, in addition to the idea presented of "COPS for Katrina" we need to remember one of the biggest problems that came out of the break down of order in the area-- the collapse of the courts.
In order to have a functioning court system, however, you need more than cops and prosecutors, or even judges, you need competent and dedicated defense lawyers. This is more than a little difficult when you realize, at least in Louisiana, the law of the land literally is not the same as the law of most of the rest of the country.
Sad to say, Louisiana has long had a shortage of criminal defense lawyers able and willing to struggle against the problems which have long existed in the system there.
I am proposing a plan as aggressive as any other part of Barack's plan, to recruit and train attorneys to work in the criminal justice system in the Katrina-affected areas. There should be loan forgiveness and tax incentives for people who might be inclined to join the struggle, but might not otherwise be able to afford to live and work in NOLA and its environs.
I want to see somebody doing something about this. And if they already are, and I just haven't heard about it, clue me in because nobody in the rest of the country seems to know about it. I will donate, as will others I know, to help promote the restoration of public defender services to those residents of the area how find themselves in legal difficulty.
