November 30th, 2014
I hate it when this happens. KAAL in Austin and Rochester, Minnesota, has presented a distorted half-truth using only a half-video clip of the car that rammed its way through the Minneapolis protesters last week, and it’s this distorted half-truth that has 5,236 comments and 17, 591 shares:
This is their entire report linked to that partial video that was edited and doesn’t show the driver at the stoplight, other cars going safely around, and the driver going around the car in front of him waiting at the intersection and he drives INTO the crowd (emphasis added):
(ABC 6 News) — We’re following breaking news out of a Minneapolis where a car drove through a group of protestors.
One person was hit before the group of protestors jumps on the car and begins vandalizing it. Police confirm one person was transported to the hospital with very minor injuries.
This protest was in response to last night’s grand jury ruling in Ferguson, MO.
Stay with ABC 6 News for the latest on this developing story tonight at 10
Very naughty — that is NOT reporting. That’s a grossly misleading spin. KAAL had access to the entire video just like the rest of us did, and maybe even before the rest of us did.
Meanwhile, there were over 5,200 comments to that misleading facebook post, and over 17,000 shares — sharing and commenting on an incomplete and misleading version of the video. Read those comments, filled with hate and rage.
From Alan Muller on today’s Mpls. yak-yak list, to consider when looking at some of the 5,235 comments on that KAAL post, comments like:
- “He needed a plow with knives”
- “I would have done the same…they were out to kill the driver for sure.”
- “Should get a snow plow and gas on it!!”
- “I would’ve drove straight over those idiots. White black pink don’t care, I’m not stopping for psychos in the street to get out from under me. Made their decision being out there.”
- “Good for him maybe more people should do this so these idiots will go get a job instead of standing in the street protesting free rights for hoodlums to act like gangbangers.”
What??? So back to Alan’s comment:
Every once in a while, on a list like this, a thread happens that seems that seems to speak about larger social or community problems. This one does to me. Is it OK to ram a car into a crowd of people? One could use answers to this as part of a test to diagnose sociopathic tendencies. Do you have a moral compass? Yeah, I mean "If you think the answer to this question is 'YES,' I would hope you don't ever get hired as a teacher or police officer, or reporter, or animal control person, or manager of people, or...."
For me, it’s the sort of thing where I long to see a societal intervention and treatment, this is embedded self-centered ignorance and hate with no regard for rights of others, or laws or basic human decency. How ugly can we humans get? That’s a question I do not want answered…
KAAL – though you have posted the full KSTP video, this other shorter one is so distorted that I think you should remove that post so that people won’t continue to be misinformed, and continue to pass on that misinformation.
November 4th, 2014
Released yesterday by National Institute for Science, Law, and Public Policy (NISLAPP) (never heard of it before, need to do some checking):
Why is this a question? We know it’s a problem. But this report focuses on things like “Smart Meters” and doesn’t dig into the the even worse toadying for coal gasification and other harebrained promotional schemes of these orgs.
Here in Minnesota, the money goes to Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, Fresh Energy f/k/a ME3, Izaak Walton League and its former program now independent 501(c)(3) Wind on the Wires (conveniently separate since just after election, when Bill Grant was appointed Deputy Commissioner of Commerce in charge of all things energy)(oh, and Nancy Lange appointed to Public Utilities Commission). And then there’s RE-AMP. There’s so much money flying around for promotion of transmission and coal gasification.
AAAAAAAAAAAAARGH… back to work…
September 17th, 2014
It’s final… that is, the FINAL meeting notice was just issued, one more go round on these draft rules for Certificate of Need (Minn. R. Ch. 7849) and Power Plant Siting Act (siting and routing of utility infrastructure) (Minn. R. Ch. 7850).
We’ve been at this for about a year and a half, maybe more, and to some extent we’re going round and round and round.
Here are the September 2014 drafts, hot off the press:
Send your comments, meaning SPECIFIC comments, not “THIS SUCKS” but comments on the order of “because of _______, proposed language for 7950.xxxx should be amended to say_______.” It’s a bit of work, but it’s important, for instance, the Advisory Task Force parts are important because we were just before the PUC on this last week, trying to reinforce that Task Force’s are necessary, despite Commerce efforts to eliminate and/or neuter them. That despite ALJ orders otherwise, the Final EIS should be in the record BEFORE the Public Hearings and Evidentiary Hearings (just lost a Motion to require this last month).
How can you comment? The best way is to fire off an email to the Commission’s staff person leading this group:
If you’re up to it, sign up on the PUC’s eDockets, and file your Comment in Docket 12-1246. If you’d like your comment filed there, and can’t figure it out, please send it to me and I’ll file it for you. It’s important that these comments be made in a way that the Commission will SEE, in a way that they cannot ignore, when this comes up before them.
September 16th, 2014
I’m about to undergo a “Security Threat Assessment” and pay $129.75 for the privilege. Give me a break…
Doesn’t it mean anything that I’ve got my Attorney License, #254617, sworn on oath to uphold the Constitution? Apparently not. And then again, upholding the Constitution would probably be regarded as a security threat! Such a heightened level of absurdity! Personally, it’s so intrusive, and with a $129.75 price tag for the privilege. GRRRRRR… You’d think that they’d know by now that if I was going to blow up buildings or run through the courthouse with an Uzi, I’d have done it already. But nooooooo… and I recall the implied challenges, and claims of my violating CEII regs, when I’d tried to introduce the MAPP map of transmission lines in the CapX 2020 case. How can a decision on need for a large complex build-out of transmission be made without a map of the system? How can entering a transmission map as an exhibit in a transmission Certificate of Need proceeding be a threat to security? It’s not as if the transmission lines and substations weren’t there out in the open for all the world to see!
Here’s the supposed basis for TWIC — the rules:
Worse are the social implications, the general acceptance of these regulations, when this, like the TSA airport searches, in the name of “stopping terrorism,” have zero to do with it. There’s both a false sense of security and sheep-like acceptance as necessity of these infringements on our privacy and speech. Constitutional rights going down the crapper.
Alan tells me this was a big issue in Delaware where longshoremen at the Wilmington port were required to go through this background check, and I imagine it alsonhas to do with the truck driver shortage.
From my experience in trucking, I think many truck drivers had criminal histories that have nothing to do with “terrorism,” but which would prohibit issuance of this ID, and effectively take away that person’s ability to earn a living.
A reality check on TWIC:
Balance the number of avoided terrorists attacks (zero?) with the loss of livelihood for those disqualified workers, and employee shortage, I’d guess this has a destabilizing effect overall.
Then I learn that it’s not just that they’re checking up on us when deciding to issue the card or not, but they’re also collecting information on an ongoing basis!
And the GAO report also cited TSA officials as saying challenges like readers being incapable of recording needed data prevented TSA from collecting complete and consistent pilot data, leading to TSA not being able to collect complete or consistent pilot data and subsequently not be able to determine if operational problems at the pilot sites were due to TWIC cards, readers, or users.
How intrusive can this get? I don’t want to find out…