David Cobb: Creating Democracy and Challenging Corporate Rule

Move to Amend presents:
Creating Democracy and Challenging Corporate Rule with David Cobb




Q&A Session:




The National Campaign to End Corporate Personhood and Demand Democracy
Move to Amend Tucson with David Cobb
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
7:00 - 9:00 PM
Unitarian Universalist Church
4831 East 22nd Street
Tucson, AZ 85711

Fiery speaker and lifelong activist David Cobb is touring the country for Move to Amend, the national coalition of over 204,000 people and organizations whose goal is to amend the United States Constitution to end corporate rule and legalize democracy.

We're coming to your town! Come hear the story of the American creation myth, learn how the Constitution is being used to grant corporations illegitimate but legal rights, and discuss what actions your community can take to reclaim democracy!

For Arizona Election Integrity News www.RiggedNoMore.com , www.audit-az.blogspot.com, and SEEKING JUSTICE: www.seekingjusticeauditaz.blogspot.com,

EDA & AUDIT-AZ's Mission: to restore public ownership and oversight of elections, work to ensure the fundamental right of every American citizen to vote, and to have each vote counted as intended in a secure, transparent, impartial, and independently audited election process.

Law enforcement means serve and protect

The Examiner
William Heuisler

Law Enforcement should always mean serve and protect citizens...always.

Think about it: Jose Guerena would probably be alive today if Sheriff Dupnik’s multi-agency SWAT team had called the Tucson police for advice.

Case in point: Last Saturday a few Tucson police officers had a problem with a man with a gun in a house. There were five or six regular beat cops, no armored vehicles, no sirens, and no smashed-in doors. No bullets sprayed the neighborhood. They wounded the man and rendered aid. Nobody died.
According to KGUN 9 TV News, Tucson Police Officers went to a house and located a suspect, who threw a large rock out a window at officers and was generally uncooperative. Apparently the mother contacted police and warned her son was possibly armed with a rifle. Police say, as they were relaying information via radio, the suspect pointed a rifle at officers from inside the home. http://www.kgun9.com/news/local/133296763.html

SWAT was not needed. Police Officers backed away and waited until back up, in the form of three more officers, arrived. Ten minutes later, about 12:45, the suspect pointed the rifle at officers again. One of the officers shot the suspect. Tucson Police officers quickly administered first aid until paramedics arrived to take the suspect to a hospital. Nobody died.

Compare this with the Jose Guerena killing six months ago. Remember how, in service of a daytime search warrant, Guerena’s door was broken down and a dozen SWAT officers fired 71 shots into the house – all in less than a minute. The dying former United States Marine lay in his hallway for more than an hour before any public servant even attempted to render him aid.

Police are supposed to serve and protect. Most law enforcement officers serve the public unselfishly and with day-to-day heroism. The May 5th lapses and reactions of the Pima County Sheriff’s Department were due to police militarism, incredible mission overkill, and a serious lack of training.
Guerena died during service of a search warrant. He did not point a weapon at anyone. He bled out in his hallway while dozens of Sheriffs Deputies and paramedics watched from a safe distance.

But Sheriff’s and Pima County Attorney investigators say Officers were not at fault in the Guerena killing. One said Guerena pointed a rifle, and all the officers shot 71 times in self-defense. Apparently Deputies and Paramedics were too afraid for their safety to check Guerena’s condition for an hour.
Next search warrant, Pima County SWAT should call a few Tucson patrol officers. 

SWAT killing is, "justified"?

Examiner
William Heuisler

"Justified" is a strange word to use about the mistaken, unnecessary death of a homeowner. “Justified,” sounds almost triumphant – or self-satisfied – about tragic incompetence.
Yesterday afternoon the Pima County Attorney’s Office said Pima County SWAT members who fired 71 shots at Marine veteran, Jose Guerena (and into a surrounding neighborhood) were “reasonable and justified”. Chief Criminal Deputy David Beckman reported, "Under the circumstances, and based upon our review of all the available evidence, we have concluded that the use of deadly force by the SWAT Team members was reasonable and justified under the law. Accordingly the Pima County Attorney's Office finds no basis to prosecute." (KGUN 9 TV) http://www.kgun9.com/story/14900676/tucson-swat-officers-cleared

A County Attorney states the obvious, and Tucsonans are expected to sigh in relief.

The County Attorney has confirmed there was no intentional criminal act committed by SWAT on May 5th. More important, the County Attorney specified there was not enough evidence to charge the SWAT team with a crime.

For criminal prosecution, intent must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in court. Not a chance.
But there never was a question of criminal liability. The question was of incompetence and reckless disregard for the safety of innocent civilians. The question was about the briefing, timing, method and training of an assault team on a disastrous search warrant.

The team did not commit a crime. No one with real knowledge of our justice system and our laws ever accused the ill-chosen SWAT team of committing a crime. Their actions, statements and video showed a badly prepared and poorly led group of men placed in a deadly situation by incompetent superiors. Community condemnation is not for those who shot Jose Guerena in his home, but for those who implemented those policies of clumsy overreaction and needless overkill in pursuit of an erratic drug investigation.

A Marine veteran with no criminal record was shot in his home; a young widow and two small sons are without a husband and father; a residential neighborhood was sprayed with bullets. And Tucsonans are told the SWAT raid and responses were "reasonable and justified”?

Where is the remorse, admission, and abject apology from our County Sheriff?

Veterans Beware

Examiner
William Heuisler

Why is our Sheriff serving search warrants with armored cars, sirens and SWAT teams? Could it be because the Feds say veterans, and citizens with gun training, are dangerous?

On May 5th, SWAT supervisor, Bob Krygier was obviously expecting serious trouble as he got out of an armored Bearcat (18,000 pounds, worth $240,000) at a Tucson home. Sirens blared and an assault team clustered at the door of an alleged “murder” suspect.

Twenty seconds later the assault team broke in and shot Jose Guerena 22 times.

Oddly, the SWAT team had been briefed for a search warrant that Jose Guerena was “associated with a homicide where a husband and wife got killed,” and, “If something were going to happen, it was probably going to happen at Red Water” (Guerena’s house).

But Jose Guerena was an honorably discharged Marine veteran with no criminal record at all.

He was evidently a victim of Federal Government warnings about veterans. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in agreement with the Southern Poverty Law Center, wrote a policy two years ago that anyone with the skills of a combat veteran, or any American who owns a gun - criminal or not - is a danger to society and should be dealt with as a known criminal because of their potential danger to police. (Steinback, 2011)

In fact, DHS issued a report titled “Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment,” about veterans as likely recruits for, “attacks against the government.” (Harwood, 2009)

The Guerena killing illustrates this anti-veteran-overkill policy in action.

1)      What purpose has an armored car on a residential search warrant?
2)      Why were sirens allowed to drown out commands during search warrant service?
3)      Why did supervisors brief young officers they would face a homicide suspect?
4)      Why did Sheriff Dupnik tell Jennifer Waddell on KGUN9 News, “He (Guerena) thought we were there to arrest him     for murder”? (Waddell, 2011)

A very expensive 9-ton armored car will stop most bullets fired at officers who are inside it's half-inch steel plate. Emergency vehicles normally use deafening sirens while maneuvering in traffic. So, why use SWAT, a huge armored car and blaring sirens to knock on a front door and serve a search warrant?
Sheriff Dupnik admitted to KGUN9 that, in his mind, this veteran was a criminal.

Federally prompted SWAT, armored cars and military tactics are now everywhere. Capricious policies, untrained officers and unclear enforcement missions are dangerous to all citizens – and particularly dangerous when some citizens are treated differently than others.

So, veterans beware. Sheriff Dupnik is reading our minds, and our government has begun to treat us like the enemy.

Harwood, M. (2009). Security Management. Security’s Web Connection. Domestic Extremist Dictionary leaked from DHS, then retracted. http://www.securitymanagement.com/news/domestic-extremist-dictionary-leaked-dhs-then-retracted-005619

Steinback, R. (2011). Hatewatch. Southern Poverty Law Center. Keeping an eye on the Radical Right. http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2011/04/26/nullification-advocates-take-show-on-the-road/#more-6287
Waddell, J. (2011). KGUN9 ABC. Raw Video: Sheriff Dupnik opens up about fatal SWAT raid.
http://www.kgun9.com/story/14831062/raw-video-sheriff-dupnik-opens-up-about-fatal-swat-raid

Help Us Transmit This Story

  Add to Your Blogger Account
  Put it On Facebook
  Tweet this post
  Print it from your printer
  Email and a collection of other outlets
  Try even more services

SPECIAL REPORT: Symptoms of Tyranny, Oathkeepers in Arizona to Honor Marine Jose Manuel Guerena

We are "news blind" - Tucson media ignore news

William Heuisler
Tucson Crime Prevention Examiner

1) Neither the Arizona Daily Star nor local TV news has demanded to know who is responsible for the hundred million dollars missing from “Rio Nuevo” projects.

2) Neither the Arizona Daily Star nor local TV news has mentioned Superior Court case # C 20085016 where Pima County admitted under oath to wrongdoing and security lapses in the two billion dollar Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) election.

3) No media outlet has bothered to mention how Brian Crane, chief computer tech for Pima County Elections, admitted buying “election flipping” software, called Crop Scanner, prior to the largest, most expensive bond election in Pima County History.

4) No one reported when Pima County affirmed in testimony that the RTA election was a, "discrete incident of past wrongdoing” (Ford v. Dem. etc, 2010).

5) No one questioned Attorney General Goddard who first had “sufficient cause to investigate” but changed his mind a week later. Not one reporter wants to know why Attorney General Horne, “…declines to initiate another (?) investigation”.

Our Constitution protects press freedom. Shield laws in 30 states protect journalists from compelled production of confidential/unpublished information. The press is protected. What about the press’s duty to protect the public with information?

And newspapers knew about the corruption back in 2007. Garry Duffy, reported for the Tucson Citizen: “No one seems to know what happened to a computer tape record of the May 16, 2006 (RTA) election… The county elections director made the revelation in his testimony Wednesday in a Pima County Superior Court trial... The case goes to the heart of the democratic process – the security of voting and vote counting…” (Duffy, 2007)

Do you like this Article?

1) Neither the Arizona Daily Star nor local TV news has demanded to know who is responsible for the hundred million dollars missing from “Rio Nuevo” projects.

2) Neither the Arizona Daily Star nor local TV news has mentioned Superior Court case # C 20085016 where Pima County admitted under oath to wrongdoing and security lapses in the two billion dollar Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) election.

3) No media outlet has bothered to mention how Brian Crane, chief computer tech for Pima County Elections, admitted buying “election flipping” software, called Crop Scanner, prior to the largest, most expensive bond election in Pima County History.

4) No one reported when Pima County affirmed in testimony that the RTA election was a, "discrete incident of past wrongdoing” (Ford v. Dem. etc, 2010).

5) No one questioned Attorney General Goddard who first had “sufficient cause to investigate” but changed his mind a week later. Not one reporter wants to know why Attorney General Horne, “…declines to initiate another (?) investigation”.

Our Constitution protects press freedom. Shield laws in 30 states protect journalists from compelled production of confidential/unpublished information. The press is protected. What about the press’s duty to protect the public with information?

Garry Duffy, the Citizen reporter who
actually did report about the missing data
tape at Pima Elections.

And newspapers knew about the corruption back in 2007. Garry Duffy, reported for the Tucson Citizen: “No one seems to know what happened to a computer tape record of the May 16, 2006 (RTA) election… The county elections director made the revelation in his testimony Wednesday in a Pima County Superior Court trial... The case goes to the heart of the democratic process – the security of voting and vote counting…” (Duffy, 2007)
Advertisement

The Citizen is gone. The “heart of democratic process” story is forgotten. Not a printed peep now about an ongoing civil suit and Pima County’s admissions of “wrongdoing”. Nothing is reported about a two billion dollar fraud on the taxpayers of Pima County.

Two billion is how much from each county taxpayer?

Do local TV and newspapers have a duty to inform their public when millions and billions of tax dollars are lost, or when official corruption occurs? Are the news media in Tucson malingerers? Are they willfully blind, or have they just taken sides against taxpayers?

Duffy, G. (2007. Tucson Citizen. Record of votes in ’06 RTA election missing.

http://tucsoncitizen.com/morgue/2007/12/06/70793-record-of-votes-in-06-rta-election-missing/

Ford v. Democrat Party of Pima County (2010). Justia.com US Law. Arizona Court of Appeals, Division two, unpublished decisions. Case # C 20085016

http://law.justia.com/cases/arizona/court-of-appeals-division-two-unpublished/2010/cv20100001memo.html