Black Sites

It is well-documented that since 2001, American authorities have used overseas black sites and foreign data collection as legal gray areas for things that would clearly be illegal if done to US citizens on American soil. This practice increases the chances that officials, who violate the law or even break its letter outright, will never be prosecuted in an American court. No longer willing to let the United States hide behind national security, the world is beginning to unearth our crimes and try them in open courts.

I am personally repulsed by the information I obtained from the three articles I have read about the SIA’s “Black Sites.” How could something like this be kept so awfully quiet? There is no way that our government has not been aware. Such a widespread global operation requires not only the participation of our government, but other governments as well, and that is where human rights advocates may find new inroads. Foreign leaders and international courts have increasingly begun to step in to inform the public and hold the United States accountable for abuses. But this is AFTER these foreign leaders had played dumb for over 12 years. Foreign leaders knew that these “Black Sites” were located in their countries and they still kept quiet.

                As if the torture tactics were not enough to make American citizens cower, imaging the disgust that they felt that $80 Million of their tax money went to funding just two men to come up with more methods of horrific torture.

                Personally I believe that this torture is not about finding information, it is in some twisted way revenge. These prisoners are interrogated to the point that they could no longer communicate, or that they would give false information to stop the torture. They call these prisoners “medium value suspects,” I cannot even imagine what they do to the ones of high value. They claim that these people are terrorist suspects and could be involved for the killing of Americans, but if we kill and torture them what makes us any less forms of terrorists? Where is our humanity? I am in fear of what the future holds for America’s reputation.

 

 Article of My Choice: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/09/cia-torture-countries_n_6297832.html

Predujuce or Plead?

Recently there have been two high profile cases recently where the grand jury has declined to charge white police officers for the killings of African American civilians. And how, one might wonder, has the United States managed to imprison more than two million people if grand juries can’t find probable cause for murder or even manslaughter in two such straightforward cases, where the identities of those who killed and the means of death were clear?

The first incident that for the most part erupted the recent racism riots was the case of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri where he was shot unarmed by a white police officer. The second major incident was Eric Garner of Staten Island who had repeatedly pleaded that he couldn't breathe while an officer held him in a chokehold, which is itself barred by NYPD rules.

For those hoping to see officers who kill unarmed people at least publicly tried, there are likely more disappointments in store. Tamir Rice was 12 years old when police shot and killed him last month within two seconds of their car's approaching him. Akai Gurley also died last month, shot by a New York officer in what the police say was an accident.

Just a few days ago, a grand jury in Jasper, Texas, declined to indict two white officers who had brutally beaten a black woman on video. They had arrested her for an unpaid ticket, though she had been making monthly payments.

The real question here is: Is this a flaw in our police system and the result of a prejudice society? Or, is this just the kind of thing that black people in the American society have needed for years to express their pleads of unjust? Could this door of racism open two ways?

Much like the case in Ferguson MO, an unarmed man was shot by a police officer. What is the difference between the cases? The officer was BLACK and the victim was WHITE. Therefore, he deserves no media attention right? The victim was 20 year old Dillon Taylor, whom family and friends say was unarmed at the time of the shooting, was shot and killed by a police officer in Salt Lake City, UT. According to Police Chief Chris Burbank, the shooting was caught on the officer’s body camera, but he did not say whether Taylor was armed at the time of the shooting. Police reportedly arrived on scene because of a “man waving a gun around.” Taylor must have matched the description of the suspect, but witnesses claim that he may have been pulling up his pants, causing the officer to think he was drawing a weapon.

Dillon’s brother Jerrail explains in an interview: “He couldn’t hear them,  he had headphones on, so he just kept walking. Then … they had guns pointed at his face. That’s when he turned off the music,” he said. “I saw them point guns at my brother’s face, and I knew what was going to happen.” The officer told Dillon Taylor to get on the ground and to put his hands on his head. “He got confused, he went to pull up his pants to get on the ground, and they shot him,” Jerrail Taylor said. He didn’t have a weapon, he didn’t attack or confront officers in any way, and he just tried to pull his pants up a little bit so he could get on the ground comfortably. Dillon Taylor was shot twice and died at the scene. By law cops need to see a weapon, or at least what they think is one, before they use deadly force.

The investigation in Salt Lake City, Utah into the officer’s conduct will continue without a riot and looters, without distractions from the DOJ, without race baiting. It will be conducted as all investigations are, much like Ferguson, Missouri should have been. While national news media continue to focus on race in Ferguson, Missouri, where a white police officer shot and killed an unarmed black teenager, they apparently don’t think a similar case in Utah with the races reversed is that newsworthy.

In March 2014 a black officer pulled over a white 70 year old disabled war vet, whom he asked to exit the vehicle. The man opened his door reaching for his cane he was shot by the officer who supposedly thought he was reaching for a weapon. Why did nobody hear about this? Unarmed white people who get shot by police just do not become national news.

What do all of these cases have in common? They have everything but the color of the skin between the officers and victims. In all of these cases the police officers felt that their life was in danger.  I don’t care what you watch, hear, or see in the news. You CANNOT and WILL NOT understand what it was like to be in the shoes of those police officers. It is easy to get caught up in the hype of the media and pick a side from the outside looking in. But what was going through those police officers minds will never be understood by the common civilian. If it was your job to protect society, make sure your children’s father, or your wife’s husband came home safely at the end of the day, what would you do to make that happen? What would you do to protect your own life?

I do not feel to the slightest degree that these homicides are an issue of racism by white people or vice versa. This war of prejudice will never end until we let ourselves be enslaved by African Americans. This of course will never happen, so the score will never be completely even. There will ALWAYS be those people who feel like they have been mistreated. All or most of which, don’t know anyone who was a slave, just as we don’t know anyone who owned slaves. We cannot change history or change what our ancestors did, but I guess we can be blamed for it.

 

 

Work Cited:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/political-scandals/

http://www.westernjournalism.com/uh-oh-black-police-officer-shoots-unarmed-white-man-wheres-riot/

 

Taking Chance

The lessons that I learned from this movie are that those who join our military make the ultimate sacrifice, and to have a greater appreciation of the sacrifices made in war. It's a war movie with virtually no war action. It's a movie in which one main character is dead and the other main character hardly speaks. It’s a movie by which you WILL be moved.

This movie was about a volunteer military escort officer taking the body of a 19 year old Marine named Chance Phelps back to his hometown in Dubois, Wyoming. Lt. Colonel Michael Strobl, a veteran himself of service in “Desert Storm” is anxious to get away from an office cubicle, he is surprised when his superiors approve and he receives an assignment to accompany the remains of a Marine Corps PFC named Chance Phelps to his home in rural Wyoming. It was unusual for so senior an officer to fill such a slot.

This movie opened my eyes to the sacrifices that our troops make. When soldiers join our military, they not only sign themselves up, but their families and friends too. In this film we met Chance Phelps family and friends. We saw the impact that he had on all of their lives. He brought joy to everyone he knew, and when he passed away, it affected all of those people.

After seeing this film I believe everyone would have a greater appreciation for our military.  In the movie Strobl marveled at the positive response of airline passengers and others when they learned he was on escort duty. Countless people along the journey spontaneously poured themselves out in love and respect to the memory and the family and loved ones of the fallen soldiers. He receives a seat upgrade to first class, bestowed by an airline ticket agent, and a small silver crucifix the lady on the plane hands him. The cargo handlers at the airport stood at attention and saluted the coffin every time it was presented to show their respects. Dozens of cars lined up behind them and put their lights on to honor him as the body was being transported. It amazed Colonel Strobl that so many people thanked him HIM for his service, when he was nothing more than the caretaker of the remains of a brave Marine who had given the last full measure of devotion for his country. What Strobl came to understand, is that people felt the sacrifice of Phelps demanded that his remains be given the highest respect. Although, Phelps was dead, and it was not possible to thank him, it was possible to thank the man who assured Phelps was transported and buried a fallen warrior and hero.

 This film does an excellent job portraying an accurate image of military protocol. I feel that it gives the audience a better visual understanding. For example, the extraordinary grace and tender devotion of the military detail at Dover tasked with preparing the bodies of the dead. It traces each step without sentiment, the soldiers loading ice into coffins, and coffins into planes, and the care shown to follow every one of the guidelines that are there to govern the process.

This movie is truly a lesson of honor. Taking Chance is a profoundly emotional look at the military rituals taken to honor those dead by war. The audience can gain so much by watching this film. This film has the power to broaden the horizons of respect and appreciation for every viewer including myself.

"I didn't know Chance Phelps before he died," Strobl says when his own mission is over. "But today, I miss him." So will you after watching this film.

Work Sited:

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/feb/20/entertainment/et-marine20

Bowling for Columbine

After watching bowling with Columbine I now realize more than ever that America has a serious problem with guns. There are many different beliefs as to what actually causes these problems. People blame sources such as Gun Laws, the 2^nd amendment, and media.

Gun laws in the United States are put in place to regulate the sale, possession, and use of firearms and ammunition. However, maybe that is not enough. Carrying a concealed handgun in public is permitted in all 50 states. Gun laws though, vary by state. Some states do not even require a state permit for purchasing, allowing whoever wants to buy a gun. Other states are much stricter and require state permits, concealed to carry permits, firearm registrations, and extensive background checks. Some stores now have a limitation of how much ammunition you can buy. But is all that enough with the gun crime rate still soaring in the United States?

The 2nd Amendment's "right of the people to keep and bear arms" purposes a diverse conflict within America. Our forefathers made it a right for us to legally have and carry guns so that our nation does not become too powerful and overexert its right of control on the people. Those against the Amendment say most violent crimes are committed with guns; thus, restricting gun ownership will likely reduce the number of such crimes. But arguably enough, those for the right to bear arms say criminals will always find a way to obtain their guns, leaving law-abiding citizens without any weapons to use in defense if guns become illegal for citizens to own. Many citizens feel like Obama is overstepping his boundaries in his latest two executive orders for new gun control laws. Not only is he violating our 2^nd amendment to bear arms but under 4^th amendment it is stated that “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.” According to Obama’s newest unconstitutionally enacted law, health care professionals now have to violate HIPPA privacy laws and submit medical data to the government.  They then will use the illegally obtained data as justification for gun confiscation by the federal government.

A large amount of blame is placed on media for gun violence. Today’s video games, television shows, movies, and magazines all contain a large amount of violence. Parents say that they are sending subliminal messages to their children. Subliminal messages such as: violence is heroic, or leading them to believe that killing is a game. According to the Center for Media Education, by the time children complete elementary school, they will witness more than 100,000 acts of violence on television, including 8,000 murders. These numbers double to 200,000 acts of violence and 16,000 murders by the time they complete high school. Exposure to gun violence can traumatize children and youth not just physically, but emotionally as well. Exposure rates such as these are believed to be a cause of children’s aggressiveness and school shootings.

Do guns kill people or do people kill people? I semi believe in the 2nd amendment. We as Americans should exercise our right to bear arms. But what type of firepower is really appropriate for the average American trying to protect himself? Certainly not things like assault rifles, such as the M-16. I believe that people kill people mostly because: guns don't kill people just like pencils do not misspell the words on your paper. Guns cannot load themselves with deadly bullets. Guns cannot aim their barrel at a target and pull their own triggers. People do the actual killing; guns just make it so much easier.

We as Americans need to start taking measures to make our schools and streets safer for our children. Parents cannot always control what children are exposed to outside of the home, so they need to take more action at home such as not allowing violent video games or movies and blocking certain television channels. President Obama has introduced a four step common sense plan that includes: Closing background check loopholes, banning military-style assault weapons, making schools safer and increasing access to mental health services.

The future of America’s right to bear arms doesn’t look so bright. I believe that catastrophic shooting massacres will continue to happen until our society feels so unsafe that we will run straight into the direction of where our government wants us. To make guns illegal for ordinary citizens.

Work Cited:

1. futureofchildren.org

2. debate.org

3. secondamendment1.weebly.com

4. ed.gov