Bierma Story
ArchPundit
For those who went to Nathan Bierma’s story, today the Chicago Tribune does report the outcome
2003
Gary Dotson to be pardoned
Gary Dotson was the first wrongfully imprisoned individual to be cleared by DNA evidence. That was in 1989.
4 Pardons–all from the Burge torture era
One of the most horrific stories to come out of Chicago, really in the nation, in the early 1990s was that of Chicago Police Lt. John Burge. Burge worked out of the Austin district in Chicago. Austin has long been one of the most violent and poverty-stricken neighborhoods. It is based on the far west side of the city and borders the suburb of Oak Park. Anyone who has spent some time in Oak Park is familiar with Austin because a line of trees separates that neighborhood from Oak Park, a progressive, but wealthy suburb.
Austin is generally considered the front-line in the drug war and has paid a heavy price for it over the years. In 1993 Lt. Burge and several underlings were fired after the department determined he used excessive force. In this case, excessive force was a euphemism for systematic toture. Suffocation, Russian Roulette, electric shock and traditional beatings were some of the means of getting confessions under Burge. Ten people are on death row that went through Burge’s period, these four are probably the clearest cases.
Burge was acquitted in one specific case back in 1993, however, since a federal judge has appointed a special prosecutor to investigate dozens of claims of torture. In several cases, the evidence disappeared–or more likely never existed given a confession was extracted.
Tomorrow, Ryan will announce what he will do in relation to the larger population of death row inmates.
Be looking here tomorrow
I imagine I will watch a streaming netcast of George Ryan’s dual speeches on death penalty reform. I’ll update this blog in regards to whatever he announces. Of course, Talk Left may beat me to it.
Otherwise, have a good day, I’m signing off until tomorrow or something really interesting.
Loren-Maltese Sentence
Betty Loren-Maltese just got 8 years and 1 month. Couldn’t have happened to a nicer person. And unfortunately for her there are no slot machines in federal prison.
Cornfield Commentary is back
David Hogberg of Cornfield Commentary is back. I hope he got some writing done. When I next do a site update he’ll be back up in the daily reads. We have different views, but David is almost always has something smart to say.
Also, say hello to The Missouri Kid who has made an appearance in comments and is already annoyed at Steve Stoll. He’ll be added soon as well.
Soon is a relative term given my schedule.
John Cole will be in the next batch as well. He is excitable today. Take a look.
Its affirmative action day for conservatives. Whadda you want?
Also, in the interest of promoting writers who get their stories killed take a look at Nathan Bierma’s story on a wife’s plot to murder her husband.
William Burton is back as well and has a lot on Bill Clinton’s penise. Believe or not he is not a Republican. Mention Dutch Sheets to him.
While dog jokes are certainly old to Scoobie Davis he has sunk his teeth into a big bone(head)–Micheal Savage.
I’m sure Micheal Finley has some good stuff up, but it is too small to read.
The Pontificator points to Krugman’s bemused response to some critics
Weblog Central links to St. Louis Bloggers
Gloating
FromRoll Call
Top ranking Republican sources said Georgia Republican Party Chairman Ralph Reed might receive the backing of the White House should he decide to enter the race. Such a move would help to clear the field and prevent GOP infighting. Reed is close to Bush adviser Karl Rove, who is credited with helping define the field of candidates and winning strategies for many open Senate races in the 2002 election cycle.
I called it Kos’s comments. Of course, it wasn’t too hard to figure out.
If I lived in Georgia that would be a tough call–give the Dems a perfect guy to demonize for as long as he was there or vote my conscience.
William Lind Redux
I have a penchant for fruitcakes and William Lind has piqued my interest. So let’s go back to this link from the other day and see who else shared the stage with Lind at the Third International Conference on Authentic History and the First Amendment put on by the Barnes Review.
Several of the speakers have generic sounding titles to their speeches, but I’m certain an enterprising individual with the time could listen in and find all sorts of wingnut nuggets of information in them. Some others telegraph ther intentions pretty well. All of the speeches are available in audio format.
–Russ Granata: Bunker 1" at Auschwitz: Gas Chamber or Farmhouse?
–Juergen Graf: Was Treblinka a "Death Camp?"
–George P. Morse: Nuremberg: The Inside Story
–D Fields: The Genocide of the Afrikaner People
–Michael McLaughlin: Postwar Allied Atrocities
Now, let’s assume that an operative with ties to one of the big liberal foundations gave a speech to a bunch of Nazis who deny the holocaust and
treat the Allies as morally equivalent to Nazis. What would be the outcry? Paul Weyrich is no small fry and Lind is very close to him. Given the recent outcry about Lind why isn’t Weyrich forced to distance himself or sent out to pasture?
The Other question about pull-out
is whether we need 37,000 troops on the DMZ. The alternative is that we could station troops in the area who could be rapidly deployed. In a strict sense this is simply a military question. I don’t know if this would be effective, but kind of doubt it. The troops there now are designed to keep a foothold on the country so the North Koreans don’t push the South Korean army into the sea and take away our chance to land troops in a non-occupied zone-much like Inchon in the first war.
If the South Koreans can handle their own defense this might be reasonable. I am skeptical, but on purely strategic grounds it could be true.
I’m struck though at what a colossally stupid idea this is to anyone who wants to be tough with the North Koreans. Oh, yeah, we’ll show you how tough we are–we’ll pull out!
Now that seems like a solution Chamberlain would have been proud of in his day. The confusion of those on the right about the difference between a legitimate democratic ally and some random banana republic we use is quite clear to me. An ally is an ally out of common interests. Often that ally can be there because we need a strategic ally such as the Saudis. Other times allies exist because of shared values and some strategic interest on the side. South Korea doesn’t have to be a lackey of the US to be our strong ally. They are allowed to have their own opinions. Many Americans died ensuring they would have that right. A democratic and free South Korea is good for the US economically, militarily and morally. If Americans want to throw a temper tantrum about being respected they can, but it will be counterproductive. Our interest is in containing North Korea. That job gets a lot harder if South Korea isn’t cooperating.
Last I checked South Korea was an ally and a democracy
Reynolds hits the woe is the US key again.
The bizarre quote is:
I suspect that the reason why some South Korean politicians want to prop it up is that when it comes out just how bad things have been there, which looks to be Pol-Pot-bad — and that they’ve known a lot more than they’ve let on while cozying up to and propping up the North — they’ll be seen as collaborators in horror. (And some, quite possibly, may turn out to be real collaborators, on the take from the North, and might be worried that that will come out).
What? Where did this claptrap come from? So now the South Korean politicians are collaborating? Based on what? If you are going to accuse South Korean politicians of collaborating, put up or shut up.
The post is set-up using a Cosby episode and Reynolds draws them together here:
We live in a world where most of our allies are Theo Huxtables: self-centered, unrealistic, and overconfident in their assorted schemes because they know Heathcliff will always bail them out in the end. But this isn’t a situation comedy.
Correct, often life isn’t like a sitcom. Often life for South Koreans in Seoul is living 37 miles from the DMZ and within range of North Korean artillery. Wait, strike that. Life is always like that in Seoul. Bush screwed the pooch on this one and the South Koreans have to live with the most direct consequences. Funny, but that would piss me off too. Expecting your allies to simply be happy about your screwups is a bit unrealistic.
Let’s look down the decision tree here for some of our other allies if we pull out of South Korea. What does Japan do with a North Korean nuclear capability and an unsure American comittment to the region? Rearm? Bingo. What does China do if Japan rearms? Is a Cold War in Asia really what we want? Or a hot one if China decides Taiwan is more important with a Japanese military power?
What happens with the rest of the region? I don’t want to find out. The little Theo Huxtable bit is cute, but simplistic and stupid. A funny thing about democracy is that sometimes the ideas you fight for don’t win. That is okay, because the ends is the means in democracy. Respecting that diversity in long-time allies–an ally where the people are free, goes with the territory.
Reynolds’ view of America as the benevolent and benign parent in this situation completely ignores what is in the interest of the United States as well as the unbelievable complexity of Asian security policy. We gain by having a presence in South Korea. Throwing a temper tantrum because South Koreans aren’t respecting us properly is silly and counterproductive.