Monday, November 28, 2011

Bitch Wisconsin prosecutor

A new low in the criminalization of children

A 6-year-old Grant County boy has been accused of first-degree sexual assault after playing "doctor" with two 5-year-old friends.

Now, a federal lawsuit has been filed against the prosecutor, who attorneys said is trying to force the boy to admit guilt.

The boy's parents had planned to speak with WISC-TV on Monday to discuss the emotional toll the prosecution has taken on their son. But the prosecutor, Grant County District Attorney Lisa Riniker, on Monday morning asked a judge for a gag order in the case and was granted it. The gag order prohibits the boy's parents from talking about the case.

But the attorneys for the parents in the federal suit, which names Riniker as a defendant, can aren't included in the gag order, and they spoke with WISC-TV from Chicago.

Attorneys for the parents of the 6-year-old, who is being referred to as "D," said that Riniker has gone too far by bringing a felony sex charge against a first-grader for touching a 5-year-old girl inappropriately while playing doctor last fall.

"That behavior by a prosecutor is outrageous," said Christopher Cooper, an attorney for the boy's parents.

Cooper and attorney David Sigale filed the federal suit last week, alleging that Riniker wants D to sign a consent decree admitting some level of guilt.

"We're certainly hoping to vindicate D in the eyes of the law," Sigale said.

"He (the boy) says he didn't do it, and the little girl says he didn't do it. The little girl says he touched the back of one of her buttocks," Cooper said.

The attorneys are also asking for about $12 million in damages from Riniker and two co-defendants.

Cooper and Sigale said they are prepared to present evidence that D has been psychologically harmed by the court proceedings and is terrified of going to jail.

"She (Riniker) bypassed the parents and sent a 6-year-old boy a summons, on which is a threat that the 6-year-old will go to jail for failure to appear," Cooper said.

The attorneys said they have sought the opinion of many experts who said that children "playing doctor" is not a sex crime.

"(The experts say) a 6-year-old child is unable to intellectually and emotionally associate sexual gratification with the act that D has been accused of committing," Cooper said.

In justification for the charge, Riniker is quoted in the lawsuit saying "the Legislature could have put an age restriction in the statute ... the legislature did no such thing."

The lawsuit also alleges the charges were brought because the 5-year-old is the daughter of a high-ranking official in Grant County.

Repeated calls to Riniker and an attorney for she and two co-defendants have gone unanswered since Friday, WISC-TV reported.

Riniker went to Judge Bill Dyke, who is handling the case from Iowa County, and he issued a gag order for the parents Monday morning. WISC-TV has not received a copy of the order nor a reason for its issue.


White Air Force Vet Prohibited from Registering to Vote Because of Race

Believe it or not, there is a place where the American flag flies that citizens of particular races are excluded from voting. Citizens not of the chosen race are not allowed to vote in an important election. White and Asian citizens of the United States there are even prohibited from registering to vote for the election. As implausible as it sounds, such is the law on the island of Guam, a territory where the American flag flies and the Voting Rights Act applies, along with the 15th Amendment to the Constitution.

Unless you are a Chamorro (a “native”), you are not allowed to register to vote for a certain election involving the future of Guam. If you are white, or Filipino, you are prohibited from participating.

Even in the Jim Crow south of 1951, some blacks successfully registered to vote after they navigated the nasty maze of character exams and shifting office hours. In Guam, for the plebiscite election, whites (or Filipinos) cannot register to vote, period.

Yesterday, a lawsuit was filed in United States District Court in Guam by the Center for Individual Rights to have this racially discriminatory law declared illegal. Dave Davis, a retired Air Force Major who has lived on Guam since 1977, is the plaintiff. I am also an attorney helping to bring the case. We seek to open up the election to all U.S. citizens, regardless of race.

Many Americans don’t appreciate Guam’s important relationship to America. For starters, more than 1,700 U.S. Marines died liberating Guam from a brutal Japanese occupation in the summer of 1944. I’ve stood on Asan Beach where the Third Marines landed and clawed up sheer beachside cliffs to dislodge the suicidal Japanese firing down on them. More than 18,000 Japanese died in the battle. Guamanians have served in the U.S. armed forces since the island became a territory in 1899, and continue to give their lives for America in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Guam is the tip of the spear for American power in the western Pacific, while at the same time China is challenging American dominance in the region. A nuclear submarine base is on Guam, as well as Andersen Air Force Base, the operating home of B-2 and B-52 bombers aiming west.

But organized anti-American agitators want to throw this essential military presence off Guam. They use the tactics of the European Pershing missile protesters of the early 1980s, but add a native twist — calling the United States the “colonizer” while loudly picketing outside Andersen and the Navy base. They even rely on calls by the United Nations to “decolonize” places like Guam.

Enter the racially discriminatory status plebiscite we are challenging in federal court.

The plebiscite election would decide what Guam’s relationship to the United States should be. The supporters view it as the tool to achieve “decolonization.” One choice would be to sever all ties with the United States. If that choice prevailed (though it is unlikely the federal government would peaceably acquiesce), it would antagonize relations between Guam and the United States.

The organizers have rigged the plebiscite election by prohibiting any whites or Asians from participating in the vote. Only native “Chamorros” are allowed to register and participate. Once enough Chamorros are registered to vote, the election will take place. The government promises to ratify the results of the racially discriminatory election however they can.

In an echo from a nasty bygone era, the plaintiff, Dave Davis, literally had his voter registration form rejected because he is white. Filipinos have been rejected also.

Unfortunately for the activists, the United States Constitution applies on Guam. The 15th Amendment prohibits racial discrimination in voting and the Organic Act of 1950 (the federal law which serves effectively as Guam’s constitution) incorporates the Amendment. The Voting Rights Act also applies on Guam, and strictly prohibits racial discrimination in voting.


745 youngsters are out of work in a British town, but a craftsman can't find a British apprentice there

The result of a welfare State

Skilled crafts are dying out in Britain because our failing schools are producing a generation of youngsters ill-equipped for working life. That is the view of one master cabinet-maker, who is struggling to recruit a new apprentice despite the fact there are 745 jobless young people in the small market town where he works.

Piers Hart said British teenagers had a poor work ethic, and blamed the education system for failing to prepare them for employment.

When he advertised for a young trainee three years ago, the only applicant willing to work for apprentice wages while he learnt his craft was an 18-year-old Lithuanian who spoke little English.

Now he is looking for more help – and has hit the same difficulties.

His experiences echo an influential survey, reported in The Mail on Sunday last week, which said firms were being forced to recruit foreign workers – despite one million 16 to 24-year-olds being out of work – because the British education system was not equipping teenagers with basic skills.

Mr Hart, 63, said that when he offered a job to a local youngster in Thetford, Norfolk, he lasted just one week. ‘He did not turn up on the second Monday so I rang his mother to check he had not been hurt in an accident on the way to work,’ he said. ‘She said her son had decided “he did not like it”. That’s typical of the attitude. ‘Young people rarely apply to join us, and when they do they’ve had no preparation for the job and don’t know what a day’s work is.’

Yet the Lithuanian he took on, Paulius Gelezauskas, was delighted with the job, which pays £8 an hour now he is qualified. ‘I would recommend it to anyone,’ he said. ‘We make such beautiful things. If I wasn’t here with my craft, I’d be in a chicken factory.’

Mr Hart said the job market had changed substantially in the 37 years he has been in business, with schools turning their backs on vocational training. ‘Twenty years ago I would write to the schools’ careers masters and ask for suitable candidates,’ he said. ‘They identified people and the process was well-handled.

‘We would regularly get 20 applicants for one apprenticeship. We found really good people and in fact my first apprentice came to me at 16 and is still with me – he’s 50 now.’

But now he says he gets no response from schools, adding: ‘Either they have no interest in advertising the jobs or woodworking is of no interest to young people.’

He has also given up on Jobcentres, saying: ‘They have no idea who is a realistic applicant. Jobcentres will send you someone who has once cut a piece of wood with a saw and think that will make a woodworker. ‘Or we get people who apply for jobs just to get their benefits, but have no interest in the job at all.’

Mr Hart is offering £3.50 an hour (the minimum wage for apprentices is £2.60) but said Government red tape was holding him back. His company operates on four ten-hour shifts a week, but health-and-safety laws prevent a 16-year-old from working more than eight hours a day.

Last week, Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg unveiled measures to try to tackle the unemployment crisis among young people, including a £1,500 incentive for small businesses taking on their first apprentices.

But Mr Hart believes the money would be better spent on vocational training, saying his recruitment efforts have been impeded by Suffolk College in Ipswich scrapping the three-year, one-day-a-week NVQ cabinet-making course, due to lack of demand. Woodworking is still on the curriculum, but it is geared towards the building trade and does not teach the craftsmanship that is needed for high- quality goods.

A spokesman for the National Apprenticeship Service said Mr Hart should advertise his position online.



Taliban paid £100 a month to stop fighting. It didn't work in the 10th century and it won't now either

Members of the Taliban who give up their fight are being paid £100 a month and will be allowed to keep their guns in a new initiative to end the insurgency.

The “reintegration” programme, which has the full support of Nato, is intended to keep them from attacking troops from the International Stabilisation and Assistance Force (ISAF).

Those who have attacked and killed British forces are also effectively given an amnesty, which means they will never be put on trial.

The amnesty extends to all Taliban fighters, including those who have taken part in atrocities, such as murdering children, beheadings and hanging women.

The agreement is part of a policy signed by the British Government in which insurgents are being allowed to “walk off the battlefield” and enter a “reintegration” scheme.

Taliban joining the programme are not interrogated but instead are asked to complete a questionnaire explaining their reasons for joining the insurgency.

The strategy has been designed to encourage rank and file Taliban to stop fighting and instead return to their communities with “dignity and honour”.

More than 2,700 insurgents have been reintegrated into mainstream Afghan society since October 2010, with 800 now described as “showing interest in leaving the Taliban”. Of those, about 90 are from Helmand, where nearly 400 British troops have been killed and more than 5,000 injured.

The reintegration policy has already produced some startling results. In northern Afghanistan, about 900 former Taliban have left the insurgency and violence has decreased by 30 per cent.

But it is not without risk. Maj Gen David Hook, the director of the Joint Force Integration Cell in Kabul, admitted in an interview with The Sunday Telegraph that the programme would be difficult for many British families to accept but insisted that reintegration was vital if peace was to be achieved.

The British general, who previously served as a commander in southern Afghanistan, said he saw some horrendous examples of Taliban brutality, which he said he would have “personally found difficult to forgive”.

The general confirmed that even if the insurgent who murdered five members of the Grenadier Guards battlegroup at a check point in Nad e’Ali in November 2009 entered the scheme, he would not be prosecuted. “This is an Afghan process which the international community signed up to,” said Maj Gen Hook.

“My role is to support the Afghans in that process. This idea of forgiveness has been agreed by the international donors and the UK has given £6.5  million and helped design the programme to deliver peace at the local level.

“We accepted large numbers of IRA back into our own society because we wanted peace in Northern Ireland and I don’t see it any different in Afghanistan.”

Taliban who want to leave the insurgency enter a three-month training programme of “de-indoctrination” where they are taught the values of good citizenship and must vow to severe all links with al-Qaeda, take no further part in violence and uphold the laws of Afghanistan.

Islamic scholars also provide lessons explaining that the true path of Islam is non-violent. During this period volunteers are paid a stipend of about £100 a month. “We’ve had more than 2,700 Taliban come across and only five have returned to the insurgency,” said Maj Gen Hook.

He said many of those who joined the Taliban had simply had enough of fighting and wanted to return to their families. “General John Allen [the American commander of the ISAF] talks about three natural ways of leaving the Taliban – killed, captured or reintegrated,” he said.

“The prospect of death is a great motivating force. The insurgents are feeling the pinch after a very effective summer of fighting by Nato. The insurgents know that if they continue fighting they will be killed.”

The money — there is a total of £98 million — is handed out by the Afghans who run the scheme, which is under the supervision of Maj Gen Hook.

Those who complete the process are offered a period of vocational training and efforts are made to establish whether they will be welcomed back by their communities.

Maj Gen Hook said: “It’s not a case of, 'Come in and we’ll give you £100 a month.’ Some of these negotiations take weeks while people try to resolve the grievances that are keeping them in the insurgency. Once their grievance has been addressed it’s another powerful reason why they won’t become recidivistic.”

He said it was important to distinguish between draining the Taliban of its numbers and surrendering to them. “This programme is about an individual coming back and seeking forgiveness from his community and the community willing to accept them back,” he said.

“It is not surrender. That forgiveness provides a strong bond between the individual and the community, which is perhaps better than some of the previous attempts [to get men to leave the Taliban] where people have been paid to stop fighting but return to the fight once the money has gone.”

The idea is based on a concept of “afwra”, part of the code that governs behaviour among Pashtuns, the ethnic group from which the Taliban tends to be drawn. “Afwra is about forgiveness, so both sides have to forgive for it to work and when that forgiveness is given by both sides they lock into each other, which makes it less likely to break down,” he said.

Contact is made with the Taliban by Afghan “outreach” teams venturing into rural areas and trying to establish the reasons why young men are joining the insurgency.

Research had shown that many join the insurgency because of a grievance that is not addressed by central government. Some Afghan men turn to the Taliban for help. In Helmand, for example, the governor of the province believes that the insurgency could be reduced by 25 per cent if disputes over land rights could be resolved. Maj Gen Hook said: “If you address the grievance then those young men don’t want to fight because there is no reason to fight.”

Despite the relative success of the programme, he admitted that the number of Taliban leaving the insurgency had not been as high as expected. “There was an expectation that the programme was going to be more successful than it has been and that it is one of the challenges we face,” he said.

“It was designed by people whose experience was Iraq, which from a tribal aspect was far simpler and there was a degree of optimism at the start of the programme but the tribal dynamics in Afghanistan are such that the programme was never going to be the silver bullet that perhaps people thought. “I see it as a slow process which will eventually reach a tipping point.”

However, critics of the scheme have warned that too few of those defecting are actual insurgents, and that it is failing to undermine the rebels in their southern heartlands.

Hanif Atmar, a former interior minister, said last week: “Of around 30,000 insurgents, only eight per cent have reconciled so far — and 99 per cent of them are not from the south.

“Frankly speaking, it does not work. The eight per cent that are reconciled, most of them are not genuine insurgents, particularly not from the regions that matter.”



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of other countries. The only real difference, however, is how much power they have. In America, their power is limited by democracy. To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges. They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did: None. So look to the colleges to see what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way. It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, GUN WATCH, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS, DISSECTING LEFTISM, IMMIGRATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL and EYE ON BRITAIN (Note that EYE ON BRITAIN has regular posts on the reality of socialized medicine). My Home Pages are here or here or Email me (John Ray) here. For readers in China or for times when is playing up, there is a mirror of this site here.


No comments: