Paterno deserves better.

I'm not really big on sports, I don't like, play or watch football.  But Penn State, Joe Paterno and Jerry Sandusky has been in the news a lot lately and I'd like to include a little note about it here on my blog.

Joe Paterno was with the Penn State University for 61 years and was head coach for 46 of those years.  The bottom line here, as I just finished an article that he's 85, in the hospital just upgraded to serious condition with lung cancer, and possibly not long for this world, is that he deserves better than to die fired and disgraced from another man's actions.

The old axiom, a team is like a chain and only as strong as it's weakest link, holds true and in this case it isn't Joe Paterno or even Jerry Sandusky, its the people and Penn State U itself, who fired Joe to protect themselves and the Penn State image, in the end, I see no honor or compassion in their actions, just a bunch of weasily rats trying to cover their asses.

From what I've read in all the articles recently, Joe Paterno doesn't deserve to be remembered in this way and he shouldn't be punished for something someone else did.  No one will probably ever really know why it took so many years for Jerry Sandusky to finally be arrested and charged when its so obvious those ten young men accusing him are most probably the tip of the iceburg.  You simply don't have ten people accusing you of the same crime if you're innocent.  But when I read about the career this Joe Paterno guy has had I just cannot reconcile him being remembered as fired for allowing someone to molest boys.  It makes me think they are using Joe Paterno as a scapegoat because he reported what he'd heard to his bosses and then his bosses turned around and fired him for not reporting it to the police.  I think Penn State is hoping in firing Joe, that everyone will forget Joe DID report it, even if he didn't do it properly, and that nothing was done about it by Penn State U.

I just wish someone with some compassion and a sense of fairness would try to look at it from Joe Paterno's perspective.  He grew up in a time where sexual misconduct like Sandusky's wasn't handled publicly by calling the press and the police.  In his time, everyone got together and had a meeting and solved the problem themselves, they either beat the S.O.B. senseless or told everyone very quietly by taking them aside and explaining the situation so everyone would know not to leave children alone with the guy.

Joe also gave his entire life to Penn State an it was a rewarding life for both parties.  He coached and inspired thousands of people, made them want to go to college and win with honor.  He's got statues of him...how many people have statues made honoring them?

Now in the twilight of his life, he's been fired and shunned by the university to serve their own purposes.  I believe the university in tarnishing Joe's career has tarnished themselves far worse and set an example of passing the buck when it comes to blame, the one man above Joe who stood up for him was fired as well.  Penn State is teaching all of its faculty, students and alumni that when you do a wrong, you play hot potato, and never accept the consequences of your actions if you don't have to.


Jerry Sandusky is the one who molested the boys.
Jerry Sandusky is the one who expertly hid this for so many years.
Jerry Sandusky is the one who was so bold as to start a charity for boys, so he could have his "pick of the litter".


Joe Paterno found out about Jerry Sandusky, Joe Paterno relayed this information to his superiors.  People all have their own opinion about the technicalities, but he did the right thing, just not in the right way.  Joe didn't witness anything, he reported what was reported to him and trusted that his superiors would handle the situation in the most appropriate manner.  Well, they didn't.

I think Penn State U should offer to restore Joe Paterno to his position and retire him with the full dignity that he deserves.  Penn State should accept full responsibility for..


I hate saying it in the most politically correct way: 
not properly educating it's staff and coaches on proper procedure for reporting sexual misconduct with a child,


People understand the true nature of it better when you say it nitty gritty, Anti-Politically Correct: 
Penn State, those higher up than Joe found out about Jerry Sandusky in 2002 and did nothing but continued to allow him to bang little boys in the ass for nearly a decade before he was finally caught.

Remember, if Penn State had properly educated everyone, the guy who witnessed Jerry Sandusky abusing the child would have called the police directly that day, Joe Paterno's conduct..or Penn States would never have been an issue.

So unless I missed something Joe Paterno didn't hush ten more years of Jerry Sandusky coaxing boys in perverted acts, Penn State did, Penn State is to blame, not Joe Paterno.

Follow up notes:


After coming back and reading this a short time later, I have a few updates to this.  First off, I wrote this saturday night, within hours of Joe Paterno's death later on Sunday morning.  Since writing this, I've read an article on Joe's death and I've also read the Washington Post article of the last interview given by Joe Paterno.

The most important thing I'd like to note here is that law enforcement authorities, after speaking with Joe Paterno who voluntarily cooperated, they not only didn't charge him with any crimes, they said he did his job and fulfilled the requirements of the law by reporting it to his superiors.  Authorities are going after his superiors with criminal charges.  Yet the university spinelessly fired him anyway, using Joe Paterno as a scapegoat in hopes it would assuage the scandal.

I still believe Penn State owes Joe Paterno posthumous amends and an apology for the weasily, ratty thing they did to him.  I think anyone who reads his last interview would agree with me.  He made $1.08 million at Penn State when the average salary for a head coach is $4 million.  (He turned down an offer greater than that early in his career to stay at Penn State and continued to make just $35,000 back in the 60s).  I believe that alone says a lot about the kind of man Joe Paterno was.  While lung cancer was the clinical reason for his death, it's no coincidence he died just shortly after being disgraced and fired, we all know what really killed him and he didn't deserve that.

I'm just shaking my head at the whole situation honestly people, if Jesus ever came back we really would throw him into "an appropriate mental health facility", and ban crucifixes because they "depict graphic violence and torture".

Protecting the internet, our privacy and our freedom.

Here's an article that reflects some of my views on protecting the internet...

Should We Amend the US Constitution to Protect the Internet? by Brian O'Conner

All this SOPA and PIPA talk lately along with the Justice Department's well timed shutdown of megaupload.com, has got me thinking as well as fired up on getting the idea across of how important it is to have a free and open internet.  

I believe we need to create a digital bill of rights as an amendment to the constitution.  

• The primary intention of this amendment should spell out exactly what our rights are in the "virtual" world as well as greatly limit the intrusion and laws the government can make to govern internet usage and traffic. 
• Certain rights should be never be considered waived by way of the fact that you are on the internet, (for example, those lengthy user agreements we often just click accept without readying completely, should never be viewed by the law as a given that we waive our right to privacy).  

These rights should include:  

An extended digital right to privacy.  

If you haven't really thought it through before, you may not think privacy is such a big deal, but just as our forefathers created a bill of rights to speak to generations not yet lived, we need to do the same with the advent of the digital age.  We need to make ethical considerations to protect the rights and lives of the people living today and for generations to come.  

Consider this, if there were enough storage space, between the NSA and the patriot act it would be possible to document and log every single website you've ever visited for your entire life.  This includes every keystroke you've ever typed, every photo or video you've uploaded, any game you've ever played online, or for those playing games like the sims, where you live in a "virtual world", all movements, words and actions could be recorded and kept stored indefintely for hundreds of years.  If you work and type documents online for work, school or personal use, for example google docs or Microsoft Office 365, cloud services that are just now catching on, right now all that information can be taken without your knowledge and stored against your will, forever.  Don't forget every phone call you've ever made, and now with gps on phones it'd be possible to have an accurate tracking of your movements for your most of your life(and don't forgot gps also tells how fast you're going, should police be allowed access to your gps records to see if you've been speeding?). (lets ignore for the moment, the fact that it is always possible for the mics and cameras on your phone to be turned on and listened to or watched at any time without your knowledge). Don't forgot money, the debit cards are pretty handy but now our every transaction is logged digitally as well.  Oh and we can't forgot about all the public video cameras and facial recognition software, if you combine that with your gps data, and perhaps with more advanced satellites in the future, you could not only tracked but also watched every second you're out of your home, especially in urban areas.  

All of the above is very startling because at some point in time it will be possible to gather all of this information into a single database for every man, woman and child in the entire world.  Only an ethically minded privacy law, will protect us and our future generations and ensuring any information gathered is used in an ethical manner.  If the right laws aren't made, whoever controls this database will have a lot of power whether its government, corporations or both.  And of course anyone with enough money to influence the owners of this database can backtrack your entire digital life.

Who would you want to be able to access this information?   A potential employer?  A new girlfriend/boyfriend?  Your neighbors?  The police?  You could say you don't care, or it's not that big of a deal, but when you really start to imagine the implications, you really do need develop an opinion about it.  Any who has access to website history, phone calls, every place you've went, everything you've bought.  

It can be quite dangerous, as with the help of forensic and statistical computer software it will be possible to track and trend your life with ease and quickly tell people at a glance who you are.  

• Do your want your purchasing habits tracked and known by anyone over the last 40 years?  When you go to buy a car, do you want the car dealer to know the last 3 vehicles you've owned are the brand he's selling so when you ask for that free options package, he can smile and say no because he knows you're going to buy the car regardless and doesn't need to provide you with a further incentive?  
• Do want virtual reality software in place that would allow anyone to jump to any day in your life and relive that day through phone calls, website visits, keystroke entries on game websites, gps records, financial transactions, cameras?  
• What if you found out you didn't get that job because a computer algorithm tracked your purchases over the last 20 years and found you making purchases at the local bar every weekend and reported a 'yes' to a potential employer that you were a habitual drinker?  
• What if you found out you were fired from your job because an employee who didn't like you tracked your facebook back 15 years to before you worked there and found that you has said something derogatory about the company that your boss didn't appreciate. 
• What if the police showed up at your house to arrest you or question you because they had computer software which automatically monitors activities and it red flagged you for whatever reason as a suspicious individual.  What if further laws were made which gave probable cause for law enforcement to further investigate you or search your property?  

I could go on and write an entire book on this subject, I could sit and write 1,000 what ifs and still not have tackled but a fraction of all the injustices and invasions to your life and privacy which could be perpetrated and to an extent are being perpetrated today, but I think you get the idea.  We need to make laws now that strictly governs how our personal information is gathered and when it is used because we're only going to lose more privacy as time goes on. 

 

Why are drug manufacturers supporting bills against online piracy?

I learned something new the other day in an article I read on the washington post.
Read Here: Washington Post Article on sopa and pipa anti-piracy bills.
Specifically,

Q. Why is legislation needed?

A. There’s no argument that more needs to be done to protect artists, innovators and industries from copyright thieves and shield consumers from products sold on the Internet that are fake, faulty and unsafe. Creative America, a coalition of Hollywood studios, networks and unions, says content theft costs U.S. workers $5.5 billion a year. The pharmaceutical industry loses billions to Internet sellers of drugs that are falsely advertised and may be harmful.

By Associated Press, Updated: Thursday, January 19, 1:07 AM

The Washington Post

Hmmm.  Thats something that most people don't immediately think about when they read an article about SOPA and PIPA, or you see an ad or article on the stop online piracy propaganda.  I think it can be somewhat misleading they let you think it's all about music and movies yet right out in front they have huge drug companies backing the same bill because in the fine print it includes them as well.

Isn't it irresponsible to create a law which gives the government such broad and sweeping powers of control and censorship on the internet over such a vast array of industries that it'd be nearly impossible to properly set limits for enforcement and would leave virtually no one person held accountable if someone goes too far?

While Sopa and Pipa are supposedly intended to help stop music and movie pirating, it could definitely be used for a whole lot more.  I don't care which way you slice it, or what you're favor of, if you have half a brain and are a sane and logical human being you cannot justify support for a bill that regulates movies and buying prescription meds overseas all in one bill.

Common sense has to kick in here somewhere people.  If you're a parent and you catch little Johnny downloading free music or ordering Viagra from Singapore, while in concept it falls under the same category of piracy in practice its two different degrees of piracy and definitely two different kinds of "talks" you'll have when you sit little Johnny down to discuss it!

Lets destroy America together! I'm Ann Coulter! Call me!

Wow I cannot believe her new book is actually called Demonic!  So truthful!  Ann Coulter is what happens when your a rich media executive and you mistake something your crazy coke whore blond girlfriend said for something rational, logical and intelligent.  Thats why you shouldn't make decisions when you're all strung out from weekend of boozing, narcotics and sex.

Please, please, please!  Keep your spoiled rotten, blond haired coke whore locked up in your penthouse where they belong.  Buy 'em a poodle, a maid and a pool boy to keep them company while you're away and don't ever let them out lest they become another Ann Coulter!  

Pigs Vs. Cattle, We think of cops as pigs, they think of us as cattle.

A worst case scenario can happen more often that you think.  
..for every video we see on youtube, how many times does it happen where there's no one recording it.
http://www.ohiobikelawyer.com/uncategorized/2010/01/court-says-cops-cant-use-tasers-like-cattle-prods/
Kelly Thomas in Fullerton, CA
In this video, you can hear Kelly Thomas screaming for his father.  "Dad, Dad, Dad!" are his last conherent words before he slips into a coma and dies several days later.  All while roughly half a dozen highly trained and armed law enforcement officers surround him and shock him with a taser and insist that he stop resisting.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2019225/Kelly-Thomas-Police-beat-taser-gentle-mentally-ill-homeless-man-death.html

After you watch this video, I'd like for you to imagine yourself lying on cold pavement, lights strobing and flashing in your eyes, surround by six angry armed men.  They are screaming at you and hitting you and finally they shock you with a taser.  You're laying on the ground bloody, bruised, possible broken ribs and nose from being kicked and beaten, you can't see, you're throbbing with so much pain and then suddenly 50,000 volts goes through your body.  Would you be resisting anything or would you just be too overwhelmed and scared shitless and screaming for your daddy like Kelly Thomas was?

Was he REALLY resisting the whole time?  At what point was he only technically resisting by not complying with the officers orders  I think it'd be fair to say, if you're only continuing to resist arrest by not complying with the officer's orders because said officers have terrorized and traumatized you beyond the point of complete submission, then you're really just being legally tortured.

What to do about it? 

• I support rules and laws enforcing the use of a taser as a last resort to lethal force, not as a compliance tool. 
• I support better training, rules and laws for officers.  Especially training that involves teaching officers when they've completely subdued a suspect and especially rules and laws which punishes those who continue on past the point where they should've just slapped some cuffs on the poor bastard and called it a day. Common sense and probably any trained torture expert would tell you that anyone overwhelmed with enough force will at some point just lie there and take it.  They are in a state of shock and can no longer respond.  In case you'd like to argue with that, I thought I'd put a Guantanamo Bay photo up, here you can see someone who's really being tortured.   I can't help but see several startling similarities between what happened to Kelly Thomas and whoever this guy is in that photo from Guantanamo.  

Found this photo at:  Whitechic Press

The main problem is officers using a technicality of law instead of their own sense of compassion, they don't care, they want an excuse to torture someone.  
Look at the case of Darrin Ring,
daily mail / Darrin Ring Article

Youtube version of Darrin Ring beating, he wasn't acting dangerous and for some reason they didn't immediately assertain whether or not he was armed, this is a perfect example of what officers shouldn't be allowed to do, once you've overwhelmed someone with so much force, you can't expect them to comply with your orders.  

Here you can watch Darrin Ring, he was a little drunk and out of it and he didn't obey the officers instructions to keep his hands out of his pockets on a cold, snowy night.

If you take nothing else away from watching the video, I want you to notice the most important point of this video is that they had him subdued, he wasn't a threat to any of the officers standing over him, he simply wasn't complying with their instructions.  They continued to try to force him to comply rather than what they should be doing, which is cuffing him and putting him in the squad car.  Once officers get someone down, and its obvious they are no longer resisting or able to resist, a police officer should face real jail time if they continue to apply force because often the individual is too shellshocked, hurt, barely conscious enough to respond to their demands.

I hate it when cops try to justify footage like this saying it's their job, he was dangerous, blah blah.  Always apply common sense, the bottom line here is if you're truly afraid of someone, if you think they're dangerous, if you think they might use a weapon against you.  You're going to subdue that person and get them cuffed as quickly as possible so they are no longer a threat to you.  Put yourself in that situation, if you're truly afraid of someone, are you going to beat them, shock them, play monkey compliance games with them?  No you wouldn't care about any of that, you'd just wanna cuff them so they can't hurt you.  And right there is the easiest and most common sense litmus test when you judge situations like this, were the officers afraid or not.  

At the rodeo they judge you on how fast you can hogtie an animal.  Any officers should be naturally good at this, we should be watching videos on youtube showing how few seconds it took to take down a resisting suspect, not videos of six fat cops standing around shocking some poor bastard with a taser trying to get him to turn over on his stomach when they've already brutalized him mentally and physically to the point where he can't do anything.  

Why I created this site

• The patriot act
• Any proposed law that reduces one's freedoms while claiming to be for the greater good.  (Sopa, Pipa) 
• Police legally allowed to use tasers as cattle prods.  
• That old lady that got $2 million bucks from McDonald's cause she spilled hot coffee on her dried out old coochie.  
• Anthony Wiener, forced to resign from Congress for sexting.  He didn't actually have any kind of sexual relations or affair, he just sent and dirty picture to a girl of his weener...and his name is wiener. 
• Sarah Palin ...enough said.
• You work here, but you can't smoke your $10 overtaxed pack of cigarettes on your breaktime anymore on our property, not even in your car if its parked on our property.  We're trying to discriminate against all smokers because it costs us more money for health insurance and that makes it right.  Next we'll discriminate in any other way we can that the law hasn't provided protection for.  We only do what's legally right anymore and not what's morally right.  Respecting your personal life and freedom means nothing to us, especially if it might cost more.  
• The entire education system in america. 
• The cycles of legally right and morally right....and money.  If you do something wrong anymore, it's only wrong if it's illegal and you're punished based on your ability to buy your way out of trouble.  You can kill someone as long as you have enough money for a good defense lawyer.  And the people who teach moral and ethical behavior can be so biased, anal and lacking in common sense, its not wonder people don't abide.  
• American capitalist industry standards that stifle creativity and innovation to maximize profits.  (And no its NOT better to change to a socialist system, you don't kill the patient, you just fix what's wrong.)  Particularly, in education and autos.  

Bravo to wikipedia! Down with Sopa and Pipa!

Bravo to wikipedia and others who on wednesday will blackout their site to protect the proposed Sopa and Pipa bills.  I am so happy someone woke up on this one and stood up for what is right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SOPA_initiative

ZDnet Article


Bravo wikipedia!   Thank you for being american and standing up for what is right!
The free and open exchange of all information and ideas over the internet is our next and greatest frontier.  It should only be limited by our imaginations.  As one raised to believe the United States became the greatest country in the world because of it's free and democratic society, we need to set an example for the rest of the world.

The internet, like America when it was young and new, is so much more important than any single interest, belief or monetary concern.  We need to take this as a first step
to creating a bill of rights for the internet.  To protect our freedom of expression and ideas and free exchange of information.  To prevent the government from creating laws which interfere with the global dynamic of the internet.

I'm so tired of the government using the tragedy of 911 as an excuse for the patriot act, and now using online piracy as an excuse to control what internet sites we can see and visit.

Protecting our freedom and privacy on the internet is much more important than any single issue like whether or not hollywood claims they only made $300 million on their last movie rather than $400 million because someone uploaded a free copy of it online, that the people who would watch it free weren't going to buy the movie or couldn't afford it anyways.

Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.
Martin Luther King, Jr.