Enemy Combatants?

I see a fundamental issue with labeling people "enemy combatants". The phrase implies a state of declared, definable war where we know who is or is not our enemy. The problem with our current situation is our "enemies" have only one thing in common ... they are Muslim. Islam is a religion, not a country. There is no definitive territory from which Muslim's come, no military bases flying a recognized Muslim flag, nothing upon which to declare an absolute target of action.

Labeling those who commit crimes like the attacks on New York and Boston as "enemy combatants" clouds the issue, leading us to argue over how they should be handled. Do we treat them as common criminals, in which case they have rights under our civilian legal system, or do we treat them as prisoners of war, in which case they have rights under the Geneva Convention?

A third possibility does exist: accept them as prisoners of war who, due to their deliberate targeting of non-combatant, civilian populations and targets, are war criminals, subject to military tribunal and trial for war crimes and crimes against humanity. This does, of course, require us to hold our soldiers and leadership to the same standard, hence my opposition to the continued use of "drone strikes" in countries against whom we have no declaration of war, yet continually commit military strikes within their territories, often killing nothing but non-combatant, civilian "targets".

Start thinking people, we already have established rules of law to handle people like this. Let's start using them the way they were designed and honoring them ourselves, otherwise we have no right to call ourselves a "civilized" nation.

A Murdering Stalker's Continuing Revenge

I learned about what I am posting roughly one hour ago, so its going to be a bit sketchy as a lot of the details are still pending. It seems that my eldest nephew's wife was arrested this morning on murder charges relating to the death of her mother in 2008. I'm going to post what details of the event I currently have and will add any corrections as they come to my knowledge.

Before the death of her mother, my niece-in-law had been dating another man. The man exhibited extreme possessiveness that eventually led her to break the relationship off, fearing for her own safety. Three days after she broke off the relationship she awoke in the middle of the night with him standing over her. She screamed, which brought her mother and father running into the room. The man stabbed both of them, killing her mother and seriously wounding her father. She called the police and the manhunt for the killer was on. He was arrested and has spent about three years playing the system with delays and postponements. He recently changed his mind and plead guilty.

Doesn't sound like too bad an ending, until this morning's events. Apparently during his debriefing, her ex-boyfriend suddenly implicated her as having been a part of the murder. Texas Rangers showed up at her work this morning and arrested her in front of her co-workers on charges of capital murder.

My question is, why? All evidence from the original case shows this man is a liar who was stalking an innocent girl and, when jilted by her dumping him, murdered her mother and attempted to murder her father in retaliation. As often as we have seen this scenario in our society, is the prosecutor's office totally incompetent that they can't see through this man's continuing lies? Seems to me he is making a last ditch effort to destroy her life for rejecting him.

Our prayers and support are with her today. We see the truth. I only home the prosecutors office in Texas and any jury she ends up in front of (if it even comes to that) will also see the truth. This girl has already been traumatized with feelings of guilt over her ex-boyfriend murdering her mother. As for her ex-boyfriend, I hope you enjoy general population in prison. They have their own punishment for punk cowards like you.

The one problem in all this is the disappearance of my niece-in-law's father. Sir, if you are reading this (and from this description you probably know I am talking about you), please contact the prosecutor's office as soon as possible. Your daughter needs you now more than ever.

UPDATE 7/5/2012 I've been corrected on one point so far, the second victim in the attack was not her father, but her mother's boyfriend. No one has heard from him apparently in over a year. If you're out there, Sir, please contact the prosecutor's office as soon as possible. Your attacker has again turned his attention on her, accusing her of having been an active participant in her own mother's murder.

A Simple Indictment Against the City and County of Denver, Colorado.

Hmmmm ... Okay, soldiers, judges, police and government leaders all take an oath of office when they become a soldier, judge, etc. Those oaths include a statement that they will uphold the Constitution of the United States (even those that don't say they will uphold the laws of the United States or the State in which they serve and since the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land [U.S. Constitution, Article VI, Clause 2], it is included by indirect reference). Any government official who violates the Constitutional Rights of a citizen are therefore not only violating the law (since the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land), they are in violation of their oath of office.

Article VI, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution is commonly referred to as the '' Supremacy Clause'' and has been recognized as the authority under which State and local laws must comply with the U.S. Constitution and Federal law (as well as any international treaties to which the U.S. is party). So, here is my indictment of the City and County of Denver, Colorado.

Under the Fourteenth Amendment, it is stated that ...

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.

Yet the City and County of Denver has 1) repeatedly and violently interfered with otherwise peaceful protests against government policies and the corruption of our political system by acts of corporate bribery (in the form of ''political'' contributions), along with the devastation of corrupt economic practices by those same corporations and 2) in further oppression against those protests pasted bans on ''urban camping'' which forbid those protesters from even using a blanket to protect themselves from the elements while protesting.

In any corporation, employees violating corporate policy would be terminated on the spot. So explain to me why are we letting our officials (political and corporate) keep their jobs when they are so clearly in violation of our laws?

Justice for Trayvon!

Interesting ... going over the news reports and posted audio files of the Martin-Zimmerman situation at the moment. I'm not liking what I am thinking.

Zimmerman was supposedly on neighborhood patrol and spotted Trayvon Martin walking through an apartment complex. Zimmerman called 911 to report this as he was following Trayvon. Trayvon, by Zimmerman's own words, started running away after noticing he was being followed by Zimmerman. Zimmerman was told by police NOT to pursue. He was suppose to wait by the mailboxes of the complex for a patrol car. This was at this point in time that, according to Trayvon's girlfriend, Trayvon was on the phone with her saying he was being followed and heard the confrontation starting between Trayvon and Zimmerman before the phone went dead. In another 911 call (from a female resident of the complex), you can hear a young male voice in the background screaming for help, then a gunshot.

$100 says when the tapes are evaluated, the one screaming for help was Trayvon and not Zimmerman. This audio needs to be compared to Zimmerman's voice and (if available) a recording of Trayvon's to determine who was screaming for help. At very least, this will force a full investigation into this incident instead of the sloppy mess we have witnessed over the past month. If the voice is Zimmerman calling for help, that would support his claim of self defense. If not, Zimmerman needs to be arrested and charged with murder and the police officers who failed to conduct a proper investigation need to be seriously disciplined for dereliction of duty.

Unhealthy Fantasies and Misunderstandings

Its been a while since my last post. Afraid my occupation as a freelance writer has kept me busy.

Today I want to talk about two issues that, though separate, have become linked in a way I did not anticipate ... those of "unhealthy sexual fantasies" and "inadvertent misunderstandings."

Let me lay out the situation I found myself in.

-------------------------------------------------------------

A few weeks ago, I began research on the issue of what child pornography is. According to Federal law, child pornography is any visual media (photos, videos, etc) that shows or depicts sexual acts (oral, anal, vaginal) with anyone under the age of majority. In some states, this can be interpreted as anyone under a certain age as high as 21 ... technically.

But does this definition go far enough?

Sex offenders, during sexual offense therapy, learn that sexual offenses begin with a fantasy phase. An attractive girl walks down the street or across the room; men fantasize about her. A man views a Playboy magazine and has fantasies. Men view pornographic films and have fantasies. Normally, these fantasies are nothing to worry about, but for a small percentage of men, they can be a real danger.

But during my research I realized that not all materials that trigger such fantasies are visual. Some of these materials are written stories, called erotica.

On Usenet (accessible through Google Groups) there are a number of erotic short story groups, most under the alt.sex.stories category. The groups, typically, are plagued by frequent advertisements for sexually explicit videos, photos and manipulated graphics. But when these are weeded out, there is still a great deal to be concerned about.

Mixed in with the typical hetero/homosexual fantasies about your neighbor's girlfriend/wife, your best friend's girlfriend/wife, etc. are erotic stories about sex with under aged girls (one story I found the victim was under eight years old), violent rape (including a gang rape of a white bride by black men as her new husband was forced to watch), and even snuff-rape where the victim is slain while being raped.

It made me realize how dangerous the written word can be, and this isn't just available online. In many porn shops there are novels about teen sex with peers and adults with names like "Mandy's Slick Panties."

Now my question is this: If all sexual offenses (rape, molestation, etc) start with a fantasy, aren't these stories just as dangerous? And if we are going to prosecute child pornographers and molesters, shouldn't the manufacture of pedo-erotica be included in our actions?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now to the misunderstanding part. During my research, I downloaded and printed two examples of these type articles for my research files. Unfortunately, my fiance found them on my desk while I was in the kitchen getting something to eat. Needless to say, she was VERY concerned. The discovery by her of these definitely did not give her the context in which they had been printed and, to put it lightly, did not look good.

My mind goes back to an incident a friend of mine had to deal with when his parents found links to bomb-making information on the Internet. He was astonished by news reports of how easy such information was to find on the web and decided to check it out for himself. Not only did he find information on making pipe bombs, but also information on making plastic explosives and even an atom bomb. This was shortly after the Columbine High School incident and needless to say, his parents pretty much freaked out on him.

My advice is, if you are doing research on ANYTHING sensitive, make sure you don't leave things laying about. You never know what people might think or what kind of consequences it might cause unnecessarily.

The Cost of Standing Up

Most people don't consider the effects their actions have on others. As advocates and activists, we have to consider everything. Every idea we generate, every cause we fight for, will have effects far beyond our simple circle.

Take for example Colorado's institution of the CICP (Colorado Indigent Care Program). Initially the program was to be a safety net for those who for one reason or another were indigent, unable to pay for their medical care.

I have been speaking to a young lady who's experience tells another tale.

Recently she broke her arm when she fell while running for a bus. It was a homeless man who helped her up and out of the street to prevent her getting run over. Chalk one up for a marginalized citizen being there for another when needed, first of all.

The problem is this, she was turned away from several facilities because her broken arm was not life threatening, thus in their definition, not an emergency condition.

Excuse me?

They went further by stating the would not treat her without prepayment.

Say what?

That's right, she was turned away because she did not have insurance, cash up front, or a CICP card. Education time, boys and girls.

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (42 U.S.C. § 1395dd, EMTALA) is a United States Act of Congress passed in 1986 as part of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act. It requires hospitals and ambulance services to provide care to anyone needing emergency treatment regardless of citizenship, legal status or ability to pay. There are no reimbursement provisions. As a result of the act, patients needing emergency treatment can be discharged only under their own informed consent or when their condition requires transfer to a hospital better equipped to administer the treatment. (Source: Wikipedia.org)

This law is not abrogated or mitigated by ANY state or subsequent Federal law.

Of course, in at least one case, it doesn't surprise me. University Hospital (one of the above guilty parties) had another incident years ago. A man was working for the hospital and had a heart attack. His supervisor from the hospital came to his INTENSIVE CARE room and informed him he could either take early retirement from the hospital or he would be fired immmediately.

Understand, University Hospital is a part of the University of Colorado educational system. If student nurses and doctors are seeing their instructors and residents making illegal decisions like there is nothing wrong with them, they too are learning to ignore the law. This is not the kind of scenario I would want my niece to learn from, and she wants to be a pediatrician.

God help us if this kind of criminal conduct is allowed to pass unchallenged.

Eviction of a Criminal

The news this week has unfolded the story of an illegal immigrant who was finally apprehended and deported to Tijuana, Mexico. The problem? An 8-year-old child left behind in the U.S. in the care of a church pastor and his wife.

For some time, Elvira Arellano has hidden behind the sanctuary of the church to avoid being deported as an illegal immigrant. If she had stayed in the church, she might still be there, but she came out trying to speak publicly for the right of all illegal immigrants to stay in the United States without fear of deportation, particularly if they have had the good fortune of giving birth to a child in the United States.

What is wrong with this picture?

Everyday fathers and mothers are arrested, jailed and even imprisoned for criminal activities, often with their children ending up either in the care of other family members or of the foster care program. Why should illegal immigrants be treated any differently? Because their 'punishment' for their crime is deportation instead of imprisonment? I think not.

The fact is an illegal immigrant is one who has violated American law by entering our country without permission. They have commited a crime and simply having a baby does NOT exonerate them for that. They are STILL subject to arrest and punishment for their crime. All-in-all, they get off lucky. In many countries entering without official permission carries the penalty of lengthy imprisonment in rat-infested hell-holes or even summary execution.

It is unfortunate that the illegal immigrants put children into the middle of this, but we do not let criminals out of punishment just because they have kids. If we did, most of our prison population would still be on the streets, unpunished for their crimes.

The only way to eliminate situations like this, if illegal immigrants continue to insist on putting themselves and their children into them, is to completely do away with our immigration limitations, throw open our borders, and risk anyone and everyone entering our country from Mexico, potentially including would-be terrorists, which would make us even MORE vulnerable to 9/11-type attacks.

Many advocates for the illegal immigrants (the Council on Foreign Relations, for example) try to argue that the illegal immigrants do not enter the United States because of abject poverty in Mexico, claiming that Mexico has a robust and thriving economy of its own. But they also claim that people migrate to where there is greater development. Excuse me? If Mexico's economy is so robust and thriving, why are there thousands of women and children scrounging in the city dumps, looking for anything and everything that might be of any value to sell or living in make-shift structures that do not meet even the basic qualifications to be called a home?

Their response to that is a claim that it is because Mexico does not have a viable mortgage industry. Again, this proves my point. Mortgage lenders tend not to invest in impoverished areas, even within the United States. If Mexico's economy is so great, why have banking companies not extended their mortgage businesses there?

It takes people within their own country and communities to build hope for the future. Siphoning capital from other regions is NOT a long-term answer. The illegal immigrants would do better working in their own country to fight corruption and make sure the funds and resources that ARE in Mexico are used more wisely and effectively. We routinely grant scholarships to students from countries like Ethiopia and Bangladesh to educate them on how to develop their own countries, with an increasing level of success. Yet Mexico still lags behind, despite the significant amount of foreign aid, tourism income, business investments, trade payments, and personal earnings of illegal immigrants being transferred to their country from the United States.

Could there be a problem with this picture?