Perpetrator of New Bedford Hate Crime a Graduate of City's "Junior Police Cadet Academy"

This morning it was reported on CNN and several other news outlets that a young man walked into "Puzzles", one of the city of New Bedford's two gay bars, asked the bartedner if it was, in fact, a gay bar, then proceeded to attack patrons with a machete, hatchet, and 9mm handgun.

Story Here

The Police named the perpetrator as Jacob Robida, age 18. A quick search of the Standard Times (local newspaper) archives showed that one Jacob Robida graduated from the New Bedford Police Department's Junior Cadet Program in 2001. The program "which is for youths between the ages of 12 and 14, is run like a boot camp, and is designed to teach the value of discipline."


Our Perpetrator, Cuddles

Standard Times Story

This description tells me that this program is for troubled youths. Lt. Joseph Cordeiro, who ran the program when Robida graduated in 2001, was unavailable for comment.

The number for the New Bedford Police Department is (508) 991-6340

I will update as additional information becomes available.

The Virginia Military Institute: Training Tomorrow's Sociopaths Today!

I must confess to being somewhat disappointed at the lack of attention paid to the recent demi-scandal out of the Virginia Military Institute (VMI). Apparently, some photos surfaced of VMI cadets at a Halloween party in costumes that included Nazi soldiers, a "fag sailor" complete with condoms in his cap and a bullseye on his rear, and a cadet in blackface, sucking in his stomach (he's a "starving African", get it?) . These photos and the attitudes they depict garnered scant attention from the mainstream media and really only a passing mention in the blogosphere, but I think they deserve some genuine scrutiny, especially since these young men are training for future careers in the US military.

Before going any further, let me state clearly that I am not looking to demonize VMI (which has posted a press release, promising an investigation of the circumstances behind the photos), or even the young men in question. My concern comes from the line I see leading from these pictures to another set of photos widely available on the net. Its almost a timeline pointing toward the kinds of people these young men may become if they do in fact go on to become our future military leaders.


As a sometime student of war, war crimes, and their underlying causes, I was taught early on that a key component of torture and degradation is the accepted de-humanization of the enemy. Turning our enemies into something less-than-human is seen by many as an integral part of military indoctrination. Turning people into monsters gives our soldiers the psychological free pass they need to be more able to kill, to take life. The Vietnamese were gooks, the Japanese were tojos, and now the Iraqis are ragheads, or sand-niggers. In the biggest red-flag I have seen in my short lifetime, the cadets in these photos are demonstrating a wholehearted embrace of the concept of dehumanization. In fact, they are celebrating it.



Now, is it such a leap to see these young men, reveling in bigotry, growing into the men depicted below, tormenting their less-than-human captives?



The lesson we must learn is that a culture of bigotry is the breeding ground for the Charles Graner's of the world. The all too willing perpetrators of the degradations of Abu Ghraib no doubt started out not unlike the smiling young men at that fateful Halloween party at VMI. Take a second to think about it and surely you'll agree that photos like the ones at the top of this page pave the way for the photos at the bottom.

Inauguration Lifestyles of the Rich and Heartless

Brought to us by the American Progress Action Fund

Due to $17 million worth of inaugural security – paid for by the city of Washington, D.C. – the Progress Report is unable to access its office. Never fear – it takes a lot more than that to keep us down. We put this list together for you ahead of time. Your regularly scheduled Progress Report returns tomorrow.

A look at this week's festivities by the numbers:

• $40 million: Cost of Bush inaugural ball festivities, not counting security costs.
  
  
• $2,000: Amount FDR spent on the inaugural in 1945…about $20,000 in today's dollars.
  
  
• $20,000: Cost of yellow roses purchased for inaugural festivities by D.C.'s Ritz Carlton.
  
  
• 200: Number of Humvees outfitted with top-of-the-line armor for troops in Iraq that could have been purchased with the amount of money blown on the inauguration.
  
  
• $10,000: Price of an inaugural package at the Fairmont Hotel, which includes a Beluga caviar and Dom Perignon reception, a chauffeured Rolls Royce and two actors posing as "faux" Secret Service agents, complete with black sunglasses and cufflink walkie-talkies.
  
  
• 400: Pounds of lobster provided for "inaugural feeding frenzy" at the exclusive Mandarin Oriental hotel.
  
  
• 3,000: Number of "Laura Bush Cowboy cookies" provided for "inaugural feeding frenzy" at the Mandarin hotel.
  
  
• $1: Amount per guest President Carter spent on snacks for guests at his inaugural parties. To stick to a tight budget, he served pretzels, peanuts, crackers and cheese and had cash bars.
  
  
• 22 million: Number of children in regions devastated by the tsunami who could have received vaccinations and preventive health care with the amount of money spent on the inauguration.
  
  
• 1,160,000: Number of girls who could be sent to school for a year in Afghanistan with the amount of money lavished on the inauguration.
  
  
• $15,000: The down payment to rent a fur coat paid by one gala attendee who didn't want the hassle of schlepping her own through the airport.
  
  
• $200,500: Price of a room package at D.C.'s Mandarin Oriental, including presidential suite, chauffeured Mercedes limo and outfits from Neiman Marcus.
  
  
• 2,500: Number of U.S. troops used to stand guard as President Bush takes his oath of office
  
  
• 26,000: Number of Kevlar vests for U.S. soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan that could be purchased for $40 million.
  
  
• $290: Bonus that could go to each American solider serving in Iraq, if inauguration funds were used for that purpose.
  
  
• $6.3 million: Amount contributed by the finance and investment industry, which works out to be 25 percent of all the money collected.
  
  
• $17 million: Amount of money the White House is forcing the cash-strapped city of Washington, D.C., to pony up for inauguration security.
  
  
• 9: Percentage of D.C. residents who voted for Bush in 2004.
  
  
• 66: Percentage of Americans who think this over-the-top inauguration should have been scaled back.
  

Gonzales Fails on Torture Questions

January 7, 2005

Attorney General-nominee Alberto Gonzales failed yesterday to assure Americans that he has the necessary moral and legal judgment to serve as the nation's highest law enforcement officer. Given repeated opportunities to disavow his past support for torture, Gonzales refused to state categorically that under no circumstance is the President of the United States ever authorized to use torture in violation of U.S. and international law. In fact, his twisted answers left open the possibility of immunity for those who commit these horrible acts of violence that put our soldiers and citizens at risk for similar treatment. Alberto Gonzales is not worthy of serving as the nation's Attorney General.

• Gonzales believes the president has the right to authorize torture in violation of U.S. law and international treaty obligations.
• Gonzales repeatedly dodged questions about whether he believes the president has the power disregard U.S. law and order torture. Pressed to answer, he finally admitted: "I guess I would have to say that hypothetically that authority may exist." Asked whether U.S. personnel could engage in torture under "any circumstances," he stated, "I don't believe so, but I'd want to get back to you on that."
• Gonzales refused to condemn acts of torture. In July 2002, Gonzales held a secret meeting to discuss just how far the U.S. could go in interrogating suspects. The discussion included acts like "waterboarding," or making a suspect think he's drowning, and mock burials. During the hearing yesterday, Gonzales was given the opportunity to stand up and publicly denounce torture techniques. Instead, he demurred, saying only, "it is not my job" to decide if these practices were okay.
  

Senators should strongly oppose the confirmation of Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General. The appointment of Gonzales as Attorney General tells the world that Americans believe they have a right to perform the most despicable acts of torture. As Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said, the White House "dramatically undermined the war effort" by "getting cute with the law," charging, "I think you weaken yourself as a nation when you try to play cute and become more like your enemy instead of like who you want to be." Gonzales' refusal to either take responsibility for these positions or renounce them is a grave disservice to America's honor and integrity.

Gonzales is unfit to serve as the nation's highest law enforcement officer.

Amazingly enough, the lessons from the 2000 election did in fact go largely unlearned. What is not so surprising is that after winning an election fraught with even more irregularities and partisan shenanigans than the first one, the Bush administration feels flush with "political capital", and the word "mandate" has crept into the President's famously limited vocabulary. After running millions of dollars worth of advertisements attacking John Kerry's honor and working double time to let the public know that a vote for Kerry means certain death at the hands of terrorists, the Republicans have managed to convince themselves that this election was won on "the issues". Following Senator Kerry's quick much under-touted party platforms have come out of the closet. One of the first initiatives appears to be the first shot in what I believe will shape up to be George W. Bush's war on The New Deal and Lyndon Johnson's Great Society.

The Bush administration has indicated its willingness to slash Medicaid—the nation's largest health care program for poor and disabled Americans—in order to address the massive budget deficits caused by his tax cuts for the wealthy. Despite sharp increases in poverty, and restricted eligibility and increased co-payments already scheduled for Medicaid in 2005, the Bush administration thinks the poor should do more to help pay for his tax cuts.

• State governments are already slashing health care for the poor to pay for Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy. According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Wisconsin Gov. Jim Doyle, whose own state faces an $800 million Medicaid shortfall this year, says Medicaid funding is "the No. 1 issue among governors." Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen has proposed dismantling his state's popular TennCare program due to cost concerns. And Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour has initiated a cost-cutting measure, currently delayed, that could cut up to 65,000 old and disabled citizens from Medicaid.
  
  
• Americans overwhelmingly reject cutting health care for the poor and disabled. A survey by GOP pollster Linda A. DiVall found that "only 7 percent of Americans…think the government is spending too much on Medicare, and only 6 percent say the same about Medicaid," according to The Union Leader. So how do Americans think President Bush should trim the budget deficit? DiVall found that 59 percent "favor reductions in tax cuts for those with over $200,000 a year in taxable income."
  
  
• Rather than punishing the poor for Medicaid costs, President Bush ought to go after inflated charges by drug companies and pharmacists. At a time when the government complains it cannot afford basic health benefits for the nation's poorest citizens, a congressional investigation found that "drug stores paid an average of 22 cents for seven widely prescribed generic medicines, but received 56 cents in reimbursements from Medicaid," according to the Boston Globe.
  

*Data courtesy of the Center for American Progress

Cities should obey the Governor and the Law

I was stunned to learn that cities and towns like Worcester, Springfield, Provincetown, and my hometown of Somerville were resisting Governor Romney’s demands that they hand over the marriage license applications from out-of-state couples of the same sex who came to Massachusetts seeking equal treatment under the law. I sincerely hope Mayor Joe Curtatone and his peers in other cities will obey the spirit of Governor Romney’s request and turn over marriage license applications. All of them. I hope to read in tomorrow’s papers that copies of every marriage license application ever issued in the history of Somerville, Worcester, Springfield, and Provincetown were boxed up and shipped to the Governor’s office. Since the law being applied was originally designed and enacted to prevent interracial marriage, perhaps the applications should be filed alphabetically, so Governor’s Romney’s dedicated workers can sift out any suspicious-sounding name combinations (I’m sure they can spot “black” names and “white” names when they see them). The Governor’s staff can make a truly thorough search through all licenses and, in the spirit of equal treatment under the law, seek out any applications that were filed in violation of it.

The Inheritance Tax: As American as Apple Pie

Following the midterm elections of 2002, Republicans have been downright gleeful over the prospect of putting into effect their vision of America. One of the widest planks of the Republican platform has long been the reduction in almost all taxes, and the total abolition of the Estate Tax. GOP strategists nicknamed the estate tax the “Death Tax”, an oversimplification that suits their purpose in steering the limited thinking and short attention spans of the average listener. Proponents of an estate tax repeal base their argument almost wholly on the slogan-like idea that the inheritance tax is a form of double taxation. Opponents of the tax love to look into the faces of listeners and say “you’re being taxed twice on the same money!” This argument is false on its face. The individual who earns wealth is taxed as the money is attained, then the inheritor, a completely different person who has not earned any of the money but is simply being given this fortune, is taxed upon receipt of the wealth. Each person is taxed on their income, earned or inherited. Though the money is being taxed twice, it is misleading to suggest that it is being taxed twice while in the hands of a single person (the “you” in their argument falsely intimates that one person sees this tax burden twice)

The idea of a family dynasty, sitting atop a fortune, passing it down through generations, is anathema to the vision our founding fathers put forth during the formation of our republic. Americans reject the idea of a landed aristocracy, hoarding the nation’s resources and hanging on to vast fortunes in perpetuity. We are a nation built upon the idea of earning one’s own fortune. The self-made man is hero in our culture, a culture where the “poor little rich boy” is disdained by the self-styled hard working masses who strive day in and day out to provide for themselves and their families. Our nation is also home to the most entrepreneurial people in the world. With a plethora of ideas, backed by hard work and sacrifice, many Americans have risen from obscure backgrounds to financial greatness.