Search Episodes (Camp Fire Stories 2)

Demi Lovato Shoots Down Rehab Rumors

Added 01/31/12
1 Views

Demi Lovato Shoots Down Rehab Rumors

Added 01/31/12
0 Views

Occupy DC Celebrates Camping Ban By Erecting Massive Tent

Added 01/31/12
19 Views

Occupy DC Celebrates Camping Ban By Erecting Massive Tent

[LESS INFO] 19 VIEWS | ADDED 14:00:00 01/31/12
A day after an Occupy DC protester was tased in the back by a Park Police officer, the media was out in force at Occupy DC. Monday to cover the Park Police’s noon deadline against camping at McPherson Square and Freedom Plaza, the largest remaining Occupy encampments. Before their arrival the youthful protesters at McPherson draped a massive blue tarp over the statue of Gen. James B. McPherson and moved some of their tents underneath it. They dubbed it the “tent of dreams.” The hope, among the protesters I spoke to, was the tent would force the Park Police into a confrontation, rather than allow them to arrest protesters one by one. At noon, there were just about as many members of the media as there were occupiers. They too were hoping for a confrontation. That’s how the media has covered this movement, a series of confrontations with police: Brooklyn Bridge, Oakland tear-gassing, raid of Zuccotti, UC Davis pepper spray, McPherson “occubarn,” flag burning in Oakland. Around 1 p.m., Park Police Sgt. Schlosser addressed the media horde about their plans. He said the camping ban enforcement will be ongoing, but they have no deadline for police action. Around 2 p.m. most of the cameras were gone. The occupiers attempted to keep the remaining members of the media interested in what they had expected to be a pivotal day. They had a dance party with loud speakers. They mic-checked short speeches. They surrounded a Fox News police van that was blocking a fire hydrant and forced it to move. They chanted "Fox News: slanted and biased" and "Fox News sucks!" But their hyperactivity led them to miss a pivotal moment. With the nation’s media focused on their camp, they had no plan for a symbolic protest, other than to build an even larger tent, to show their defiance of a sleeping ban already upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. They masked their faces, gawked at their massive tent, and speculated about a police invasion that may or may not happen tonight. As of this evening, the rumor on Twitter (#J30) is that Park Police will come in at 11 p.m. But some hope may still exist for two of the nation's last large Occupy encampments protesting against income inequality and money in politics. Today, a Georgia man filed a lawsuit in federal district court in D.C. claims the term "camping" is too broadly defined, according to the Washington Post . > The suit filed Monday by Dane C. Primerano claims that enforcing the ban “will be a de facto prohibition upon the relevant assembly” and says “the term ‘camping’ is defined over-broadly.” His reasoning includes the argument that camping “encompasses activity that is unavoidable for destitute participants in a long-term political assembly, while … implicitly and wrongly suggesting that the behavior is somehow trivial, frivolous or optional.” Destitution, Primerano’s suit alleges, is “the plaintiff’s state in fact.” Primerano said in court papers that he is unemployed and has $225 in a bank account. “We do not condition our sovereign citizens’ fundamental First Amendment rights on a capacity to pay market hotel rates,” the suit says. The story notes that the complaint is similar to another claim by Occupy DC's lawyer Jeff Light. Light said at a General Assembly at McPherson on Friday that he is claiming police don't have the right to take protesters' property under the Fifth Amendment. Both claims will be addressed at a hearing scheduled for 10 a.m. Tuesday.

Occupy DC Celebrates Camping Ban By Erecting Massive Tent

Added 01/31/12
7 Views

Occupy DC Celebrates Camping Ban By Erecting Massive Tent

[LESS INFO] 7 VIEWS | ADDED 14:00:00 01/31/12
A day after an Occupy DC protester was tased in the back by a Park Police officer, the media was out in force at Occupy DC. Monday to cover the Park Police’s noon deadline against camping at McPherson Square and Freedom Plaza, the largest remaining Occupy encampments. Before their arrival the youthful protesters at McPherson draped a massive blue tarp over the statue of Gen. James B. McPherson and moved some of their tents underneath it. They dubbed it the “tent of dreams.” The hope, among the protesters I spoke to, was the tent would force the Park Police into a confrontation, rather than allow them to arrest protesters one by one. At noon, there were just about as many members of the media as there were occupiers. They too were hoping for a confrontation. That’s how the media has covered this movement, a series of confrontations with police: Brooklyn Bridge, Oakland tear-gassing, raid of Zuccotti, UC Davis pepper spray, McPherson “occubarn,” flag burning in Oakland. Around 1 p.m., Park Police Sgt. Schlosser addressed the media horde about their plans. He said the camping ban enforcement will be ongoing, but they have no deadline for police action. Around 2 p.m. most of the cameras were gone. The occupiers attempted to keep the remaining members of the media interested in what they had expected to be a pivotal day. They had a dance party with loud speakers. They mic-checked short speeches. They surrounded a Fox News police van that was blocking a fire hydrant and forced it to move. They chanted "Fox News: slanted and biased" and "Fox News sucks!" But their hyperactivity led them to miss a pivotal moment. With the nation’s media focused on their camp, they had no plan for a symbolic protest, other than to build an even larger tent, to show their defiance of a sleeping ban already upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. They masked their faces, gawked at their massive tent, and speculated about a police invasion that may or may not happen tonight. As of this evening, the rumor on Twitter (#J30) is that Park Police will come in at 11 p.m. But some hope may still exist for two of the nation's last large Occupy encampments protesting against income inequality and money in politics. Today, a Georgia man filed a lawsuit in federal district court in D.C. claims the term "camping" is too broadly defined, according to the Washington Post . > The suit filed Monday by Dane C. Primerano claims that enforcing the ban “will be a de facto prohibition upon the relevant assembly” and says “the term ‘camping’ is defined over-broadly.” His reasoning includes the argument that camping “encompasses activity that is unavoidable for destitute participants in a long-term political assembly, while … implicitly and wrongly suggesting that the behavior is somehow trivial, frivolous or optional.” Destitution, Primerano’s suit alleges, is “the plaintiff’s state in fact.” Primerano said in court papers that he is unemployed and has $225 in a bank account. “We do not condition our sovereign citizens’ fundamental First Amendment rights on a capacity to pay market hotel rates,” the suit says. The story notes that the complaint is similar to another claim by Occupy DC's lawyer Jeff Light. Light said at a General Assembly at McPherson on Friday that he is claiming police don't have the right to take protesters' property under the Fifth Amendment. Both claims will be addressed at a hearing scheduled for 10 a.m. Tuesday.

Updated: The Shocking Truth About Naomi Wolf's Factless Assert...

Added 11/26/11
5 Views

Updated: The Shocking Truth About Naomi Wolf's Factless Assertions

[LESS INFO] 5 VIEWS | ADDED 17:30:07 11/26/11
In an article for The Guardian , Naomi Wolf wrote this: > In other words, for the DHS to be on a call with mayors , the logic of its chain of command and accountability implies that congressional overseers, with the blessing of the White House, told the DHS to authorise mayors to order their police forces – pumped up with millions of dollars of hardware and training from the DHS – to make war on peaceful citizens. This follows the ongoing meme that DHS has coordinated the Occupy crackdowns on a national level; that they are orchestrating the violence behind the clearing of Zuccotti Park and others. Wolf carries this to her conclusion: > So, when you connect the dots, properly understood, what happened this week is the first battle in a civil war; a civil war in which, for now, only one side is choosing violence. It is a battle in which members of Congress, with the collusion of the American president, sent violent, organised suppression against the people they are supposed to represent. Occupy has touched the third rail: personal congressional profits streams. Even though they are, as yet, unaware of what the implications of their movement are, those threatened by the stirrings of their dreams of reform are not. It's a factless, incendiary assertion dripping in hyperbole, grounded in speculation that's been going on for a couple of weeks now. It began with a tweet. A tweet from Michael Moore speculating that the coordination seemed like something being coordinated by DHS and sanctioned, nay, possibly even requested, by the Obama administration. Here are the two links Wolf provides as evidence: One to Wonkette ; the other to Washingtonsblog.com . Both articles point back to this absurd article on the Examiner.com site (a very, very right-wing Phil Anschutz, write-out-of-your-butt-with-no-evidence kind of site). Washingtons Blog goes one step further, updating with this: > (And for those who are understandably doubtful about Examiner.com as a news source, here’s an AP story from a couple hours ago that verifies everything except the specific mention of DHS coordination. ) Got that? The headlines on both of these stories (Wonkette and Washingtons Blog) were splayed across the sites in very large heading fonts: “Homeland Security Coordinated….” and yet the AP confirms everything BUT DHS coordination. Still, that didn’t stop Wolf from ignoring the AP story entirely and writing a piece for the Guardian that included links to bolster her argument that are as factless as her hyperbole, and stem from right-wing sites with anonymous sources. No one has a source, no one has any evidence, and the originating story which Michael Moore and now Naomi Wolf breathlessly spread quotes an anonymous source with the promise of still more to come in the future, from a "reporter" for Examiner.com who no one seems to know . Miraculously, this "reporter" got a tip from DHS that no national reporter received, and even though Mr. Ellis walks back his original accusation, he promises updates in the future. Well, it’s the future. It’s two weeks later and crickets from Mr. Ellis. Mission accomplished, though. Ask people who are paying attention to the OWS movement and they’ll swear up and down that yes, it was coordinated by DHS because MICHAEL MOORE and now NAOMI WOLF say so. Truth: We don’t know. It isn’t completely out of the realm of possibility for mayors to consult with DHS. After all, that’s what they’re there for. To help local and state governments deal with threats, real, rumored or perceived. At best, one can conclude that maybe they did, and maybe they didn’t coordinate, and if they did coordinate, no one knows to what extent they did or whether there was any sort of "blessing" and/or mandate from DHS to what they ultimately chose to do. The best anyone can say is "maybe". But if Wolf were not trying to stoke an international narrative she has chosen, she would have had a look at Portland, where there is some evidence that DHS was consulted because the occupiers were adjacent to federal land. > There is another line of thinking out there that runs directly counter to the federal-coordination theory: Ruiz wouldn’t comment on this, but one well-placed city source said, in fact, that the feds were mostly inclined to leave Schrunk Plaza open. It was city officials who cajoled them into getting on board—lest they watch most of Occupy’s camp merely move several hundred feet south onto federal land. Which would have been awkward for the city. But also interesting. Should you accept as fact the idea that the feds were reluctant and the city pushed them along? NO. Why? Because it’s attributed to an anonymous source with nothing to back it up, which makes this theory as worthy as the DHS coordination theory, or just speculation with no facts behind it. Josh Holland at AlterNet also notes: > Ironically, the occupation that arguably maintains the best relationship with local officials is Occupy DC, and the Washington, DC government is directly overseen by Congress. Look, if DHS somehow instructed these cities to dress up their cops in riot gear, pepper spray kneeling protesters, use billy clubs to keep them from crossing imaginary borders, and ultimately throw the lot of them out, then yes, by all means shake your fist. But it's irresponsible for Wolf to publish such incendiary accusations -- accusations of real, physical civil war -- in an international publication, to cite magical articles with unsourced accusations and call it fact. Some might actually call it a lie. Wolf's hyperbole does harm to the OWS movement and those honest people out there conducting themselves peacefully and with clear intent, because she intentionally tried to stir the fires of anger and discontent and anti-government sentiment on an international level. She should have to either retract or clarify her accusations. Update Joshua Holland has written his own excellent response to Wolf's specific accusations. > When you don’t “connect” wholly disparate “dots,” what you get is far less dramatic. Mayors in a handful of cities, responding to local political pressures, decided to break up their local occupations — decisions that were announced to the press well in advance — and were advised as to how best to do so. One doesn’t have to like that fact to recognize that it’s hardly shocking, and anything but a sinister assault on local communities’ autonomy. Also, regarding PERF's* involvement, an interview with the director in The Boston Phoenix : > But what is PERF? And what role, if any, did it play in the police actions? According to PERF Executive Director Chuck Wexler, not the one he had hoped. His organization is more concerned with improving police practices and policies, he said. He cited a report PERF published in June, which gives advice that runs exactly counter to how Occupy has been handled in most cities — emphasizing communication, respect for the First Amendment, and avoidance of violent methods at nearly all cost. "Over the years, we've taken on racially biased policing, violent crime, the Gates-Crowley thing in Cambridge," he said. "It's not always pretty, and it's not easy, but I think we owe it to the public to identify best practices." * PERF is the Police Executives' Research Forum, a group who views themselves as a progressive organization dedicated to reducing police brutality and establishing best practices for police officers in various situations. Until recently, they've been a big target of the right wing for their support of gun control laws.

Updated: The Shocking Truth About Naomi Wolf's Factless Assert...

Added 11/26/11
2 Views

Updated: The Shocking Truth About Naomi Wolf's Factless Assertions

[LESS INFO] 2 VIEWS | ADDED 17:30:07 11/26/11
In an article for The Guardian , Naomi Wolf wrote this: > In other words, for the DHS to be on a call with mayors , the logic of its chain of command and accountability implies that congressional overseers, with the blessing of the White House, told the DHS to authorise mayors to order their police forces – pumped up with millions of dollars of hardware and training from the DHS – to make war on peaceful citizens. This follows the ongoing meme that DHS has coordinated the Occupy crackdowns on a national level; that they are orchestrating the violence behind the clearing of Zuccotti Park and others. Wolf carries this to her conclusion: > So, when you connect the dots, properly understood, what happened this week is the first battle in a civil war; a civil war in which, for now, only one side is choosing violence. It is a battle in which members of Congress, with the collusion of the American president, sent violent, organised suppression against the people they are supposed to represent. Occupy has touched the third rail: personal congressional profits streams. Even though they are, as yet, unaware of what the implications of their movement are, those threatened by the stirrings of their dreams of reform are not. It's a factless, incendiary assertion dripping in hyperbole, grounded in speculation that's been going on for a couple of weeks now. It began with a tweet. A tweet from Michael Moore speculating that the coordination seemed like something being coordinated by DHS and sanctioned, nay, possibly even requested, by the Obama administration. Here are the two links Wolf provides as evidence: One to Wonkette ; the other to Washingtonsblog.com . Both articles point back to this absurd article on the Examiner.com site (a very, very right-wing Phil Anschutz, write-out-of-your-butt-with-no-evidence kind of site). Washingtons Blog goes one step further, updating with this: > (And for those who are understandably doubtful about Examiner.com as a news source, here’s an AP story from a couple hours ago that verifies everything except the specific mention of DHS coordination. ) Got that? The headlines on both of these stories (Wonkette and Washingtons Blog) were splayed across the sites in very large heading fonts: “Homeland Security Coordinated….” and yet the AP confirms everything BUT DHS coordination. Still, that didn’t stop Wolf from ignoring the AP story entirely and writing a piece for the Guardian that included links to bolster her argument that are as factless as her hyperbole, and stem from right-wing sites with anonymous sources. No one has a source, no one has any evidence, and the originating story which Michael Moore and now Naomi Wolf breathlessly spread quotes an anonymous source with the promise of still more to come in the future, from a "reporter" for Examiner.com who no one seems to know . Miraculously, this "reporter" got a tip from DHS that no national reporter received, and even though Mr. Ellis walks back his original accusation, he promises updates in the future. Well, it’s the future. It’s two weeks later and crickets from Mr. Ellis. Mission accomplished, though. Ask people who are paying attention to the OWS movement and they’ll swear up and down that yes, it was coordinated by DHS because MICHAEL MOORE and now NAOMI WOLF say so. Truth: We don’t know. It isn’t completely out of the realm of possibility for mayors to consult with DHS. After all, that’s what they’re there for. To help local and state governments deal with threats, real, rumored or perceived. At best, one can conclude that maybe they did, and maybe they didn’t coordinate, and if they did coordinate, no one knows to what extent they did or whether there was any sort of "blessing" and/or mandate from DHS to what they ultimately chose to do. The best anyone can say is "maybe". But if Wolf were not trying to stoke an international narrative she has chosen, she would have had a look at Portland, where there is some evidence that DHS was consulted because the occupiers were adjacent to federal land. > There is another line of thinking out there that runs directly counter to the federal-coordination theory: Ruiz wouldn’t comment on this, but one well-placed city source said, in fact, that the feds were mostly inclined to leave Schrunk Plaza open. It was city officials who cajoled them into getting on board—lest they watch most of Occupy’s camp merely move several hundred feet south onto federal land. Which would have been awkward for the city. But also interesting. Should you accept as fact the idea that the feds were reluctant and the city pushed them along? NO. Why? Because it’s attributed to an anonymous source with nothing to back it up, which makes this theory as worthy as the DHS coordination theory, or just speculation with no facts behind it. Josh Holland at AlterNet also notes: > Ironically, the occupation that arguably maintains the best relationship with local officials is Occupy DC, and the Washington, DC government is directly overseen by Congress. Look, if DHS somehow instructed these cities to dress up their cops in riot gear, pepper spray kneeling protesters, use billy clubs to keep them from crossing imaginary borders, and ultimately throw the lot of them out, then yes, by all means shake your fist. But it's irresponsible for Wolf to publish such incendiary accusations -- accusations of real, physical civil war -- in an international publication, to cite magical articles with unsourced accusations and call it fact. Some might actually call it a lie. Wolf's hyperbole does harm to the OWS movement and those honest people out there conducting themselves peacefully and with clear intent, because she intentionally tried to stir the fires of anger and discontent and anti-government sentiment on an international level. She should have to either retract or clarify her accusations. Update Joshua Holland has written his own excellent response to Wolf's specific accusations. > When you don’t “connect” wholly disparate “dots,” what you get is far less dramatic. Mayors in a handful of cities, responding to local political pressures, decided to break up their local occupations — decisions that were announced to the press well in advance — and were advised as to how best to do so. One doesn’t have to like that fact to recognize that it’s hardly shocking, and anything but a sinister assault on local communities’ autonomy. Also, regarding PERF's* involvement, an interview with the director in The Boston Phoenix : > But what is PERF? And what role, if any, did it play in the police actions? According to PERF Executive Director Chuck Wexler, not the one he had hoped. His organization is more concerned with improving police practices and policies, he said. He cited a report PERF published in June, which gives advice that runs exactly counter to how Occupy has been handled in most cities — emphasizing communication, respect for the First Amendment, and avoidance of violent methods at nearly all cost. "Over the years, we've taken on racially biased policing, violent crime, the Gates-Crowley thing in Cambridge," he said. "It's not always pretty, and it's not easy, but I think we owe it to the public to identify best practices." * PERF is the Police Executives' Research Forum, a group who views themselves as a progressive organization dedicated to reducing police brutality and establishing best practices for police officers in various situations. Until recently, they've been a big target of the right wing for their support of gun control laws.

AP Top Stories

Added 11/10/11
0 Views

AP Top Stories

Added 11/10/11
0 Views

Soldiers Tricked into Firing on Tiananmen: WikiLeaks

Added 09/30/11
3 Views

Around the Air Force - April 5 (long)

Added 04/05/11
11 Views

Video: State claimed list of appointees leaving jobs didn't exist

Added 11/20/10
3 Views

Video: State claimed list of appointees leaving jobs didn't exist

[LESS INFO] 3 VIEWS | ADDED 04:59:38 11/20/10
tonight we have our hands on an official list from the state--- of governor bill richardson's political appointees who have changed jobs so they can keep working even after richardson is gone. the list was released less than 24 hours after we broke the story. antoinette antonio is here with the list..in tonight's big story. antoinette. this list was given to us -- even though we were told earlier this year that no list existed of political appointees who took state jobs, allowing them to stay on the state's payroll after governor richardson leaves office. last night we showed you documents that were leaked to our santa fe bureau chief gadi schwartz. they showed 45 richardson appointees -- or exempt workers .... who had transferred into state jobs -- or classified positions. the list released to us tonight is updated as of october 31st -- showing 49 transfers. we have left numerous messages... and sent a number of emails to governor ricahrdsons office trying to get answers. specifically -- why we were told this list didn't exist... and if the incoming administration was given the list. so far, we have not heard back the list of transfers released to us tonight does not include those who have switched since susana martinez won the governor's race. the martinez transition team says any exempt employee caught switching jobs since the day after the election could be fired. back to you. as antoinette mentioned... today governor elect susana martinez sent a strong message to any richardson appointee who's had their job classifications changed to stay on the pay roll. today martinez transition team leader heather wilson notified the so-called exempt workers that they should submit resignations effective december 31st... the last day of richardson's term. wilson says incoming cabinet secretaries may ask some richardson appointees to temporarily remain in their jobs to help the new administration. wilson also reiterated that appointees moving to civil service jobs will be fired on january first unless those shifts are approved by the martinez administration.// in response to our story that aired last night about an unqualified spokesman now running state police search and rescue - martinez's camp said- "news that people with questionable qualifications continue to receive high-paying jobs in the richardson/denish administration is deeply troubling. taxpayers are the victims of these decisions." if you didn't get a chan to see our investigation last night you can log onto kob- dot-com for the full story