Disappeared -- The Pre-Legend of Chris Dorner

Here to Help

Have you noticed that despite the intense media coverage of the Dorner Manhunt, and even despite the $1 million reward offered up by the City of Los Angeles yesterday (thanks to a cohort of anonymous wealthy donors)  the object of all this attention hasn't been seen or heard from in something like a week now.

He's disappeared.

Have you noticed, too, that despite the efforts of the LA and other police forces to provide Dorner with the formal three-name sobriquet always utilized for major league -- and some minor league -- criminals (in this case "Christopher Jordan Dorner") most people seem to be sticking to the informal "Chris Dorner," as if he were somebody they knew or had a beer with on occasion, who they liked and trusted, who was their friend.

Have you noticed that even though Dorner is now designated a Domestic Terrorist by the LAPD (by what authority, I wonder?) the public outpouring of understanding and even support for his cause -- which is widely recognized as a cause of "justice" -- has not diminished; if anything, it's increased. His methods may be wrong, but his cause is just, so goes the reasoning.

I've mostly followed the story online and watched with something close to amazement as the comments about it have gone from clearly in favor of the police doing "whatever is necessary to take him out" to "he's doing what he has to, may not be the right way to do it, but he's already done or tried to do all the right things and has been screwed over." The sympathy/empathy for him and contempt for the LAPD is almost all that appears in comments about the story now. It's nearly universal.

This is, I think, unprecedented at least in modern times. I've heard of outlaws in pioneer days and during the Depression receiving a lot of public support despite their status as outlaws, but the Outlaw Character has practically disappeared from American mythology these days, and people who do things which are counter to the prevailing social mores are routinely denounced, demonized and whenever possible destroyed.

This is something else again.

While the police initially panicked to protect themselves, causing a great deal of collateral damage -- thankfully no one died in the hail of bullets let loose against phantom targets of opportunity -- now they're scrambling merely to hold on to any public good will at all. It's a sight to behold. Step by step, as they have lost the public's good will through many unforced errors over the years and the clearly out of control bolloxing of this case going back to its origins in the official mistreatment of Dorner for daring to complain about abuse he witnessed, the police have tried practically all the PR stunts they can think of -- mass armed assemblies and fruitless searches in the snow at Big Bear, conceding the need for further review of Dorner's complaints while designating him a Domestic Terrorist, fundraising and offering a million dollar reward, moderating press conference statements about him, apologizing to the citizens shot up by mistake, so on and so forth -- they are not winning back the public trust. The more they try to smooth over the PR disaster they have on their hands, a disaster of their own making let it be said, the more the public sees their desperation, and the higher their level of contempt.

The more I see of this Charlie Beck person who is allegedly chief and in charge of the operations of the LAPD, the more repellant and snake-like he becomes. He's been floundering so badly, and yet is still put forth as the face of the agency. Something tells me he's not in charge at all; he's the fall-guy and will be sacrificed at the appropriate moment by those who are really in charge.

Who could that be I wonder.

Is this all an elaborate ruse to get rid of him while preserving the malformed institution he ostensibly heads? The "Chinatown" elements of whatever happens in LA are never buried very deep in any case; things are typically not what they are said to be or what they seem to be, there is always an underlying -- and often very different and very corrupt -- "necessity" being protected and promoted.

The LAPD exists to protect certain interests and certain people and to ensure that the control and exploitation of the rest continues without interruption or hindrance. When things go wrong, as they do every now and then, the LAPD pays for it with another round of "reform." But the "reform" never actually reforms the institution, because its whole point is to protect certain people and interests while ensuring control and exploitation of the rest. That's what the LAPD is for. When you understand that, you understand what their motto ("To Serve and Protect") really means. It doesn't mean they "serve and protect" you you see. Never.

There seems to be a widespread understanding that Dorner tried to do the right thing by bringing abuse that he witnessed to the attention of his superiors and he was punished for it. We can be certain that he is not the only one by any means.  He did what he thought was right and what he was supposed to do, and he was slapped down, hard, by a system that cannot accommodate that kind of idealism and honesty.

For the supposed chief now to reopen his case and pledge honesty and transparency (of course, we can assume it's a fraudulent pledge, but that's another issue, not germane to the matter at immediate hand) in reviewing the facts and Dorner's complaints, tells me that Dorner's "manifesto" has struck a strong chord within the department, that many, many LAPD officers have either hesitated to bring their own complaints about racism and abuse to the attention of superiors for fear of retaliation, or that they themselves have faced similar punishment to that of Dorner for trying to do the right thing, and now they're saying, "Look, this shit has got to stop."

Of course, the purpose of the institution requires that the shit continue. Even redouble. So they'll do what they have to to make it look like they're reforming or changing, but they won't actually reform. They'll fuss with process, they'll declare the matter settled. If you have any doubt about how these things go, look at what the Catholic Church has done in the face of withering criticism (oh yes, and lawsuits, many many lawsuits) of its institutionalized child abuse. Almost every "reform" has been eyewash.

So it is and will ever be with the LAPD.

It is the Iron Law of Institutions, and the only way to really change it is to abolish the institution and start over -- which isn't going to happen. Well, not before the Revolution comes.

Dorner's pre-legend is being put together right now, despite the fact that he is nowhere to be found. Is he even still alive? Who knows? He will become a legend whether or not he is ever found, dead or alive (my own suspicion is that he took his own life, perhaps in Big Bear). He might become a legend as powerfully iconic as the Hugo Weaving character in "V is for Vendetta." Let there be comics and movies and songs and stories.

And let there be masks. He's already got the smile...

The Meme Is Spreading -- "The LAPD Brought This On Themselves"

 

Last I remember hearing of the LAPD before this Dorner situation arose was after Anthony Villaraigosa  pranced around with nipples erect praising his shock troops for "masterfully" evicting the Occupy LA folks from the grounds of City Hall. That it was a violent and brutal raid in which dozens were injured and hundreds were arrested seemed to escape hizzoner's notice, but then, those were the days when kicking the shit out of the hippies was considered virile and manly and all. (Well, those days have never left us, have they.) The video above, for example, resulted from LAPD's violence against LA Art Walk participants in July of last year.

LAPD's reputation for excessive force, cruelty, murder, mayhem and violence -- toward selected segments of the public you understand -- has been known for generations; it's inbuilt. Every effort at "reform" -- that is to say, to curb the violence and cruelty and murder -- has had only limited and generally temporary success, if any success at all. What's true of LAPD is true of pretty much all law enforcement in Southern California: they are routinely violent, brutal and cruel -- toward selected segments of the public -- when they aren't outright murderous. There have been so many incidents just since the Rodney King Thing, that the public generally lives in greater fear of the police than they are of vaunted gangs and criminals.

The Doner Thing has opened floodgates of absolute outrage and contempt of the police, particularly LAPD since they are in the center of this mess, but affecting all the Southland law enforcement agencies. The ripple affect is traveling throughout the country.

The Dorner Thing has catalyzed the widespread recognition that enough is enough, and it was the panicked actions of the LA and Torrance PDs in shooting up two pickup trucks being driven near the home of one of LAPD's "high value protectees" -- ie: cops -- that wounded two women delivering papers and scared the shit out of a man while destroying two trucks while sending hundreds of bullets flying wildly into houses and cars and landscaping in a sleeping neighborhood that did the trick.

This action, they say, was the perfect demonstration of what Dorner was writing about in his lengthy "manifesto."

It is a culture of corruption, violence, impunity and... incompetence that afflicts the practice of policing in Los Angeles and throughout the land. Someone has to put a stop to it, because police agencies cannot do it themselves. 

While people are not happy about the way Dorner has chosen to try to put a stop to it, they "understand." What else works with these people, ie; the Po-Po, but a dose of their own medicine?

The wan and pathetic defenses of LAPD actions -- whether firing Dorner or shooting up pickup trucks in Torrance -- rub people the wrong way, to put it mildly.

And so a sort of conventional wisdom is congealing that says that the LAPD "brought this on themselves" by their actions specific to this case, by their historic incompetence, their long and disturbing record of violence and brutality (some of which was on nauseating display during their suppression of Occupy LA and other mass police actions in the Los Angeles area -- remember the LA Art Walk, or the Anaheim shootings?)

And look!

As Dorner seems to have disappeared -- whether into the mountain snow at Big Bear or somewhere else -- the police are modifying and mitigating their most outrageous behavior and even promising now to "review" Dorner's specific complaints.

Who'dathunk.

Furthermore on the LAPD Thing

Christopher Dorner with former LAPD Chief William Bratton c. 2006

I'm stunned at the level of animosity toward the police -- not just LAPD -- this series of incidents involving Christopher Dorner has raised. There was a chat with LA Times reporters earlier today which was linked by hotflashcarol over at FDL, and I checked in for a bit to see what people in the Southland wanted to chat about: 1) the LAPD is out of control; 2) why isn't the LA Times covering the outpouring of rage and outrage at the police?

Wow. You'd never know that from the complete silence about it everywhere throughout the major mass media and the near silence about it in the so-called progressive media, including most of what passes for the progressive blogosphere. Anytime anyone brings it up, they are shushed.

The police shooting of the LA Times delivery women (oops!) was a catalyst for the outpouring of contempt and outrage at the police. It's resulted in many comments suggesting Dorner was right about the LAPD.

KTTV in Los Angeles has been doing a remarkable job unearthing the legal documents surrounding Dorner's firing and his appeal. They are to be commended (and yes, it is a FOX affiliate these days. When I was a boy, it was an independent station owned by the Times-Mirror Corporation. I think they ran the Demolition Derby programs...)

The Times has been criticized for editing Dorner's manifesto. They've censored some of the names, and apparently cut some of the copy (though I can't say for sure, not having studied the unredacted vs the redacted versions carefully). The Times claims they haven't cut anything.

The police appear to be somewhat less panicked, but people are still saying they are more frightened of the out of control police than they are of the alleged killer ex cop. This can be useful to Authority.

There are -- of course -- conspiracy theories.

Because this is going on in the Greater Los Angeles area, there are bound to be fantabulous elements to the story, and there will be much confusion between the reality of what is taking place (what little we are allowed to know of it) and the crime laden teevee shows that tell everyone how it's done.

It is a nightmare for Authority.

Speaking of Which -- The LAPD Thing

Newspaper delivery truck shot to pieces. Oops.

Yes. Well.

When I saw a brief mention on the news yesterday that a former LAPD officer had shot a bunch of people, had issued a "manifesto", and disappeared and then saw something about Torrance police shooting two women in a blue pick up (Oops! Sorry! Wrong one!) it was all I could do to keep my blood from boiling. This is the kind of impunity by those with guns -- and that includes the police and in this case ex-police -- that gets people into a froth and frenzy. Why are people with guns going around shooting like this seemingly more and more often? Why do they think they have a right to do it with impunity?

During the day, I didn't really follow the events of the manhunt, and I had no idea whether other people had been shot by police or by the fugitive ex LAPD officer, but if any had been, I wouldn't have been surprised. Later in the evening, I found a site that posted the uncensored version of Christopher Dorner's "manifesto," and I read part of it, and...

Oh dear.

I saw why LAPD was in such a total meltdown. It's not just police departments, it's practically the entire government at every level dreading the day when one of their "own" as it were goes on a rampage like this and tells the world exactly -- and truthfully -- why. It's similar to the days when "going postal" became a meme and a metaphor for abused workers taking their anger and frustrations out on their bosses and fellow workers.

The LAPD has been a witches brew of intrigue and corruption, lies and brutality, murder and worse, going back generations. All the efforts at reform dating especially from the Rodney King Thing in 1991 have largely been eyewash, and everybody knows it. The system carries an incurable disease within it. The only real answer is to abolish the Department (and all kinds of ancillary and dependent agencies) and start over. This is true of many urban police departments and not a few non-urban ones. When operated with such impunity, it's hard not to become corrupt.

Dorner's specific complaint, that he was unjustly accused and fired because he broke internal omerta regarding an instance of police brutality rings very, very true. No doubt this has happened to many well-meaning and idealistic officers over the years, and not solely in LA. Witnessing misbehavior and brutality and worse on the part of fellow officers is pretty much a daily occurrence, and what to do about it is a dilemma for officers who want to do what's right but who don't want to lose their jobs for exposing what they witness.

That's a real threat: say something and you're out. Object and you're out. And you will be smeared and denounced, you may be threatened or actually endure great bodily harm, and on occasion you may be murdered.

So what to do? What to do when internal controls and "reform" doesn't work? What to do when you are targeted?

Most people will try not to get into that situation to begin with, which means going along to get along. That's basically how most government and large corporate employees at very level typically endure. They have, they think, little choice if they want to stay with the Company.

Whistleblowers are not welcome, and their supposed protections are a joke.

So now we have a situation in Southern California where one of the LAPD's (former) "own" has had enough of the abuse and is taking matters (and guns) into his own hands to exact revenge.

Police forces in Southern California appear to be in full panic mode because they know or believe Dorner can do it -- get plenty of revenge at the place and time of his choosing. Almost nothing is more terrifying to authority.

In their zeal to capture or kill their enemy, they shoot at anyone and anything they think might pose a threat. Thus two newspaper delivery women are shot in Torrance -- because they I might be someone who threatens them, Dorner or someone, anyone, and they're in a scary blue truck which looks something like the one Dorner is said to be driving. C'est la vie. Oh well. Too bad, so sad. The women, they say, will recover.

In the nearly endless series of mass murders in this country, police and government, the rich and powerful, the High and the Mighty, Authority, are almost never the targets or the victims. There are exceptions to be sure, and when there are -- as in say Tucson, or Oklahoma City -- the response is almost always the same: panic.

Nearly every level of government in this country now operates behind high barricades, protected by phalanxes of armed guards and elaborate protocols for responding to threats. Protest or refusal to comply is equated with terrorism, and terrorism is the excuse for suspending the Bill of Rights (well, except for the Sacred Second, so it isn't "tyranny" yet!) and plenty of other provisions of law and custom which once protected the People from rampant abuse.

No more.

The culture of oppression, corruption, and impunity has become institutionalized among those in power to the point where they barely recognize the fact.

All they know is their right to power and their fear. When someone with a gun goes after them, they panic, as the police in Southern California have panicked. It is their worst nightmare.

I sincerely hope that no more innocents are targeted and victimized -- by anyone -- in this current state of fear and panic, but it's a wan hope.

Documenting the Atrocities

The atrocities seem to be coming thick and fast these days, and as everyone knows, their endless documentation is the primary purpose of Blogtopia (h/t Skippy).

After delivering his smooth and soothing and ever so "progressive" Inaugural Speech, His Serenity Barack Obama commenced his second term of office determined to have his way no matter what, demanding that the Rs concede the points he's long been making that the rich in America have to pay their fair share, and then the rest of Americans have to sacrifice by enduring permanent cuts in benefits called "Entitlement Reform."

He's never wavered from this position from the moment he was installed in the White House. One of the things about Obama is that he is a remarkable politician who gets his way in the face of some of the most hot-headed criticism any president has endured since before the Civil War.

He gets his way. He got an increase in upper income tax rates, but notice what it was linked to: an end to the payroll tax holiday which meant a 2% increase in the payroll tax rate, and 2% less in working people's take home pay. The tax burden on the rich has increased a bit, but I'm told it's not even close to 2%. Beauty.

He gets his way. This fact about reduced worker take home pay is ritualistically ignored by practically the whole universe of commentators, and many in fact defend it as proper. Yes, well. Of course.

It was only a temporary tax holiday, not meant to be permanent, and besides, what do working people need with all that spendable cash anyway? They should be saving for a rainy day, and the expiration of the payroll tax holiday will force savings by putting the money into Social Security. So it's all good.

Then there is the whole issue of "targeted assassination" of American citizens -- via drone or SEAL or whatever -- not to mention the continuing debate over whether "we" should torture.

The White Paper is supposed to explain the legal rationale for "targeted assassination" -- aka: summary execution, murder, etc. Torture of course is not done. Any more than the Church tortured heretics. It simply didn't happen. So stop saying that.

Killing and torture and extracting wealth from the masses is how Empires are established, sustained and run. It's simple. The People can do nothing about it once those in power become convinced that their security can only be ensured by means of Empire. First, the People have no say in the matter, but even if they did have a say, they'd probably go along with whatever evil that Power proposes in the hopes that they would one day benefit.

That's how it goes.

It's fascinating to see people state and debate these issues on the internet and confidently assert that voting choices will somehow bring matters under the control of the People. Third parties are very popular -- if somewhat abstract -- remedies to the cruelties and depredations of the Duopoly that rules us, even though in the last election third parties didn't even break into double digits.

Elections and voting, I've said many times, is not the answer, for in our system you never actually have a choice when it comes to policy (not at the federal level), for policy is never put to a vote of the People.

You vote for personalities.

Slogans.

Not policies.

Third parties are meaningless in a winner take all electoral system. Two parties that shade into one another are the only feasible "choices." Change the system and maybe third (fourth, fifth, sixth) parties will have a chance, but because they might have a chance, the system will not change from the inside.

Pressure from the outside can sometimes afflict the dominant parties sufficiently that they might mitigate some of their worst policies, but the pressure must be sustained over long periods -- generations or centuries sometimes -- and it must be relentlessly single-minded.

Documenting the atrocities isn't going to do it.

But I guess it's worthwhile in its own right.

Isn't it?

Unglamorous

New Mexico landscapes have served as settings for innumerable movies and television shows for many years and they continue to do so today. Often when we go into town, we encounter some crew setting up for some movie or show, and even out in some parts of the country we've seen movie location crews hard at work. There's a very active native film and television community -- local people who work in the business and who make their own movies and videos as well.

Up in Santa Fe and Taos, of course, there have long been film-people colonies. Greer Garson was one of the first movie stars I associated with New Mexico, but there are many, many more. Some have ranches, some carry on in their urban/suburban compounds, some even make movies in New Mexico. It lends a superficial glamour to the place quite apart from the artist community which has its own sense of glamour.

Our place is in the unglamorous central region of New Mexico. This is such an unglamorous area that is typically ignored altogether when mention is made of New Mexico in the travel and tourist press, in the Tamalewood listings (Abq is known as "Tamalewood" by some of the film folk), and often enough, it's ignored even by locals. You could think of it as New Mexico's Empty Quarter. Not many people live in the area, something like 15,000 or so in the entire county. It's not the smallest population county in NM, but close to it.

Nevertheless, we live in a pioneer ranch house, one of the first, if not the first, Anglo houses built in these parts, the original wing dating to about 1900. Ironically, we were told that Toney Anaya grew up in this house -- I don't believe it, and I've never had the chance to ask him directly -- which somehow doesn't seem to fit his Hispanic heritage at all. This house is a very Anglo adobe. The Anaya Ranch is not far away, to be sure, and there are plenty of Anayas in the area (Toney himself lives in Santa Fe these days), but I've been unable to make a connection between this house and the former New Mexico governor. (To be clear, I don't know Toney Anaya, though I have met him. His family is an institution in New Mexico.)

Neighbors know nothing about it. Typical.

Given how early non-Indian settlement started in New Mexico -- Coronado's exploits in the 1540s, Onate's in the 1590's, Santa Fe itself founded adjacent to an Indian pueblo in 1610, Albuquerque in 1706, etc. -- and given the fact that there are pueblo ruins all around this area, from Galisteo in the north, Pecos in the east, Abo and Grand Quivira to the south, and numerous pueblos in the mountains to the west, the literal absence of people in this area during the 19th century when New Mexico became part of the United States is striking.

I shouldn't say complete absence, because there were a few people in these parts through most of the 19th century, though they were very widely scattered and were seemingly quite isolated from the Rio Grande communities. Communications weren't impossible. There are rather easily managed passes over or through or around the central mountain chain to the Rio Grande Valley, and the route to Santa Fe from here is no great challenge.

The isolation was mostly, I think, due to the fact that this is very different country, geologically, environmentally, and in nearly every other way than either the foothills of the Sangres where Santa Fe is situated, or the broad expanse of the Rio Grande Rift where the silvery river flows and cities, farms and ranches spread out against the dramatic backdrop of the Sandia and Manzano Mountains.

I'm just getting to know about the Rio Grande Rift, one of the true geological wonders of the United States (and part of Mexico) -- or it would be if anyone were paying attention. When you first encounter it, it is breathtaking. But you don't necessarily know what you have encountered. It seems strange to think that that tiny silver river, shallow, lazy and sometimes nearly gone, carved a 40 mile wide valley extending from the western mesas to the Sandias and Manzanos on the east. Well, it didn't.

The Rio Grande Valley is a rift zone, where the land is being pulled apart by forces from below, well below, and its spread of forty or more miles is the consequence of the uplift and extension caused by rising magma from the interior. There are volcanoes on the western margin of this rift, some active fairly recently, and one, the Valles Caldera, an explosive monster that rivals the Yellowstone Caldera.

In the far west, residents of Albuquerque can see Mt. Taylor, a sacred mountain to the Navajo and other Native peoples, which is a huge stratovolcano, its top blown off long ago. Not far from Mt Taylor is El Malpais, a flood volcanic region that goes on for miles.

Once you realize that the Rio Grande Valley is actually a rent in the fabric of the land and not (for the most part) a feature carved by flowing water, the implications of what we see today are quite profound.

The Rio Grande Rift is comparable to the East Africa Rift, one of the most striking geological features on the globe. Dramatic as it is, particularly around Albuquerque, the Rio Grande Rift is not quite as obvious as the East Africa Rift, however, in part because so much of it is filled in with miles deep layers of debris washed off the mountains. There is a layer of light-colored limestone at the top of the Sandias, for example, now at an elevation of some 11,000 feet. That same layer of limestone is found some 8,000 feet below the current level of the Rio Grande River. The mountains rose, while the valley fell, leaving a vertical span of nearly five miles between sections of what was once a flat layer of limestone laid down at the bottom of a broad shallow sea that once covered the interior of the continent. Fascinating.

The Rio Grande Rift borders the Colorado Plateau on the west; eastward of the mountains, the central portion of the Continental Plate gradually descends and flattens into the Central Plains, once known as the Great American Desert. Traveling east on the Interstate, the change in altitude and the flattening of the horizons becomes very apparent as does the change from mountain and forest to grasslands and plains.

Our place is in an area that is something of an introduction to the plains landscapes further east. It looks very much like the plains of Texas or Oklahoma or Kansas or Nebraska or what have you, but the elevation is still quite high (6,200 feet), about 1,000 feet higher and Albuquerque and 1,000 feet lower than Santa Fe.

We have pretty spectacular mountains on the north and west, somewhat less spectacular peaks on the east and south. It is very clear we live in a valley. What's not so clear is that this valley was once a huge mountain lake that dried up not that long ago; in fact, remnants of it are still apparent to the south and east as Las Salinas, the small salt lakes that have been mined for centuries.

When people first came to this area, perhaps 20,000 years ago or more, the lake was apparently at its full extent. The lake level rose and fell many times over the next several thousand years as water drained from beneath it to the south while fresh water flowed into it mostly from the slopes of the mountains to the west.

Exactly when the lake almost completely disappeared -- and why -- is not fully understood, though consensus seems to gravitate to the notion of climate change at the end of the last ice age significantly reduced rainfall, leading to much reduced runoff from the mountains, leading to much more rapid evaporation from the surface of the lake, while tectonic forces from below opened channels beneath the lake for water to drain to the south as if from a bathtub. By the time the native pueblos were first being established, perhaps 1,300 years ago, the lake was gone or nearly so, with only the salt pan remnants in the east of the valley pretty much as they are found today.

But I wonder. All of the main pueblos were established on the west margin of what was once the lake. Some were established well above the highest lake level, others were close to the shoreline of the supposedly absent lake, while much later, it is thought, one small or perhaps a few tiny pueblos were established near lakebed springs after the lake disappeared.

The "near shoreline" pueblos were the only ones that lasted after the arrival of the Spanish. They are now all abandoned and in ruins, but they were occupied until the 1670's -- just a few years before the Pueblo
Revolt -- and some pueblos to the north were reoccupied for a time after the Pueblo Revolt, finally being abandoned in the 1740's or even later.

The abandonment of the pueblos in the 1670's was due to drought and starvation. The abandonment after the reoccupation of some of the northern pueblos was due to raiding by Plains Indians and population decline due to disease.

By the time this area became part of the United States (at one time, it was claimed by Texas), there were only Plains Indians who had no fixed settlements in the area (though they used some of the abandoned pueblos for shelter from time to time), and a very few Spanish cattle and sheep ranches.

There were a number of competing Spanish land claims in this area to be sorted out by the Anglo land commissioners charged with certifying Spanish land grants -- or stealing the land from the Spanish claimants if that seemed feasible, which it so conveniently often was.

This area, however, was mostly closed to Anglo settlement due to the competing land claims by both Spanish grantees and some Anglos who purchased grants from them. There were a few Anglo squatters, but not many.

The claims were eventually settled by denying all of them and opening the whole area to homesteading and settlement in 1900. The railroad came through promptly thereafter, opening stations all along the new line from the Santa Fe tracks in the south to Lamy in the north starting in 1903.

I've counted about 8 original adobe houses relatively near our place. Ours may not be the oldest, though some neighbors say it is. I suspect one about half a mile away is older, but not by much, though I haven't asked the people who live there, and even if I did, they might not know.

The railroad ceased operations and the tracks were torn up many years ago -- I believe it was in the 1940s 1970's -- but it's still easy to trace the line of the tracks when time was. The town site that once existed here is pretty much gone, though. The depot has been restored, and one of the warehouses is still standing and there are maybe two or three of the original town buildings still existing -- though they are abandoned. Most of what once formed the town, however, has long since been demolished or burned down. There is almost no sign there ever was a town as such there. There are a number of other townsites along the former railroad line that are just as nearly-not-there -- if not more so.

Our place was originally not in town, but it was not far out of town, either. It was an easy walk or buggy-ride to the depot and the shops in town, less than a mile. I've found some artifacts on the property from that era, though surprisingly few. Some time in the 1950's or early 60's, the ranch that this house had been the center of was broken up and subdivided into residential lots, streets were laid out, graded and paved and suburban houses were built. Our house is now in pretty much the center of a familiar seeming suburban residential district. Well, except it's out in the country, surrounded by range land. There is a "new town" a couple of miles away that was first established when Route 66 was realigned in the 1930's, but there really isn't much from that era still standing (again, much of what once was there burned down or was demolished.) A "new-new town" was then built to service the Interstate which was run parallel to Route 66. There are two truck stops on the Interstate, soon to be three.

It's not remotely glamorous; it's the opposite. It's dusty, gritty, and real.

But there are stories here, oh my are there stories!

The King and the Anaya families are legendary in the area and in New Mexico for that matter, but there are other area ranching families that have a growing reputation and who may become legends in the near future. Cowboying and ranching is a way of life out here, and like everything else, there is nothing glamourous about it. It's hard and sometimes crippling work. Some of the ranches are being turned into... civilian, school kid or tourist destinations of one sort or another. There is one ranch up the road to Santa
Fe that was intended as a movie ranch, or at least that is what I was told, but for years now it's been idle because its owner is in jail, or so they say. That story is murky at best.

Much to learn, very much.

The Shooter Is Shot Down At the Gun Range

Yeek.

Or is it some perverse justice?

This man, Chris Kyle, is the author of "American Sniper", part of which I have read, recoiled from, put down, pondered. Chris Kyle is now dead, killed at a Texas gun range, allegedly while trying to help a Viet Marine Vet (accounts differ) suffering from PTSD -- which seems to be something of a theme these days.

Snipering in our Glorious BattleZones during the heady days of the BushWars was considered Manly and Heroic by many observers, unless, that is, you were on the receiving end of the snipering, in which case it was considered cowardly and criminal, and that was the charitable interpretation.

In many cities in Iraq, for example, American snipers killed anyone who appeared on the street -- women out to buy food, children, dogs, goats, you name it, all were targeted and shot by snipers. People were shot in their homes if they were seen in windows or doorways or at their gates. Anyone and everyone, and their animals, were targets for American snipers. This wasn't assassination of the "bad guys," it was straight-out murder, and most of the snipers loved it, got off on it, reveled in it, as did their President and Vice President, in their White House bunker, awaiting reports from the field. Preferably with pictures.

Chris Kyle was one of these joyous snipers, considered one of the most prolific, and therefore effective, individual killers in the practice of modern warfare. That practice includes random murder of civilians as a terrorizing tactic in order to more easily control restive civilian populations.

Let's not fool ourselves. That's what modern snipers do. They routinely deny it, claiming they only take shots at verified armed insurgents, never at civilians, let alone random individuals or their animals.

Those on the ground receiving sniper fire would vigorously dispute the sniper's claims to honorable kills. Those on the receiving end would call them liars and murderers.

The supposed "bad guy" is anyone and everyone -- including their pets and domestic animals. The objective is control of civil populations through fear and terror. Oddly enough, despite the thousands murdered by American snipers in Iraq, the tactic failed, and the strategy of terror was an unmitigated disaster.

People like Chris Kyle were held up as heroes. At least for a time. For some people, of course, they still are heroes and always will be. But what were they really doing besides imposing a reign of terror on civilian populations that were chafing under foreign occupation?

People like Chris Kyle were eager to impose a similar reign of gunner terror on the American civil population.




Many still are.

Reflect on the DC Sniper episode for a sense of just how much terror was being imposed on the civilian populations of Our Glorious War Zones during the hey-day of snipering.

Reflect, too, on the fact that the role of the individual sniper like Chris Kyle has been largely superceded by the Drone Pilots celebrated in the recent NOVA episode...



Progress!

It's time for this shit to stop.

Down At The Clinic

[Note: Been working on this post all week. Taken me much longer than I thought it would. This is a fictionalized account of a recent morning spent at the health care clinic...]

When Americans lose their health care insurance -- or never had it -- as something like 60 million Americans who have no health insurance understand well, we make do with the system of emergency rooms and community clinics (assuming there are any) that passes for universal health care in this country. Or we go without.

The clinics have been a godsend in our experience, but I can't say the same of ERs, where, even if you have insurance, you're likely to be neglected, misdiagnosed and/or mistreated. I think it's time for Americans to understand that medical care is not considered a right, it's not a privilege, it's an opportunity for the practice of medicine. Emphasis on practice. Or not.

At any rate, I shouldn't complain.  My life may have been jeopardized from time to time by medical mistakes and/or neglect, but so far, every time it has been jeopardized, my life has been saved in the end by heroic interventions, so what's the beef?

On the other hand, clinic care has been remarkable, especially given that my expectations were so low.

Since moving to New Mexico, we've had to set up a whole new set of clinic relationships as our former health care provider in California -- Kaiser Permanente -- doesn't exist here, and the clinics we were using before we moved don't have reciprocity agreements with the clinics here.

As in California, it took a while to get a new patient appointment (though they say they will take walk ins without appointments), but once the appointment was arranged with the community clinic in town (Albuquerque), things seemed to go well. The place was clean, efficient, seemingly very well operated. I did some research and found out we would be dealing with one of the pioneer urban clinics in the country.

It's hard to imagine what things were like before these clinics sprang up in the 1960's and '70's, but I'm old enough to remember, and it wasn't pretty. If you could not pay for care, they might or might not take you at "County"* depending on factors which you were never made aware of. But generally speaking, you didn't want to go to "County" anyway, because even if they took you, they wouldn't necessarily take care of you. You went to "County" to die, in other words. (*"County" was the county hospital, often out in the country somewhere difficult to reach, or maybe attached to the jail, or by the sewer plant, where indigent patients were sent and treated, either at no charge or very low charge.)

There was very little in the way of public health care, and what there was was focused on specific ailments and infectious diseases -- STDs, TB, polio, that sort of thing -- in need of control/containment/eradication.

For the most part, doctors and hospitals would only see patients who could pay, and ERs were not required to accept patients who could not (ie: they'd be sent to "County" to take their chances.) The fear of "Socialized Medicine" was rampant for some reason. Better you should die a Free Man than be treated for illness or accident a Socialist Slave! America Forever!

The first community clinics I remember were the Free Clinics established in the 1960's by and for the hippies clogging the Bay Area of California and eventually everywhere else. It was recognized that the health care system in place at the time -- private fee-for-service doctors and hospitals that required payment or no care for you, or "County" where you took your chances -- was not working very well for anyone, and not at all for the free spirits of the era who were on the road, traveling, exploring, experimenting with substances and different lifestyles, often living on very little or no money at all, and relying extensively on one another for survival.

There may have been earlier free community clinics, but if there were, I wasn't aware of them. The hippie clinics were staffed by mostly volunteer professionals, med school students and skilled lay people, and they were often supplied by barter, strategy or donations of surplus medical materiel, some of it acquired from the then-bloated military off killing gooks in the rice paddies.

The free clinics would see anyone for anything that ailed them, without restriction, and most would offer their services either free of any charge, or on a sliding scale depending on ability to pay. There was no elaborate bureaucracy, no reams of papers to fill out, or insurance claims to make. It was simple, straightforward, and quite effective.

However, most clinics were not set up to handle serious or chronic illness or injury that required in-patient care. The hospital was the only place that could handle it, and if you couldn't pay, that still meant "County."

But county care was improving as more and more benefits of the free clinics were recognized. Basically, the clinics were taking much of the routine heath care burden off of the "system" -- both the for-profit and the public health system -- which allowed the "system" to focus more on chronic and serious diseases and injuries, and ultimately to do a better job.

Over time, the clinics consolidated, became institutionalized and plugged into the system. There were fewer of them, and for the most part their care was no longer "free," nor were they staffed with volunteers relying on donations of money and materiel. They professionalized. Though most maintained an open door policy, some restricted their acceptance of patients to certain service groups. Their funding sources were primarily from government programs -- Medicare, Medicaid, IHS, and so on -- which meant they had to conform to the operational standards set by their funders. They bureaucratized as they institutionalized. They became essentially indistinguishable from hospital or doctor-provided outpatient care.

Except, of course, that they still tended to serve a poor population rather than one better off.

The urban Indian clinics came a little late to the community clinic field, but they were advanced from the outset compared to some of the others. In most cases, they were immediately funded by government sources, so they could operate at a fairly high level from the get-go. We first encountered the urban Indian clinic in the early 1980's and we stuck with it for quite some time. We found the care to be more than adequate on the one hand, and the spirit of the personnel to be outstanding on the other.

Of course, they were still unable to take on serious injury or disease which required hospitalization. What they could do was make referrals, and usually, because of those referrals, the hospital care provided and any specialist services and follow up were top notch. In other words, you didn't just have to go ER and hope. Wait. Pray. Later on, that would change.

The Indian clinic in Albuquerque is one of the pioneers in the field, and it is very well maintained and operated. It takes a while to get a new patient appointment, but once that's done, it's fairly easy obtain health care service. Indians with "blue card" and CIB receive treatment at no charge, others use Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance, or pay out of pocket on a sliding scale -- which can mean free. No one is turned away because they can't pay. Though busy, it's surprisingly uncrowded. Much less so than some of the ER waiting rooms I've been in. The clientele runs heavily to Indians (shock!) but is by no means exclusively so. Not all are poor,  though many clearly are. From what I've seen, the clinic serves a broad cross-section of the population of Albuquerque and the area round about. We come in from the country, after all, a pretty decent drive over the Tijeras Pass. Not something you want to do in a blizzard, though we've done it more than once.

The other day we were at the clinic, and it was clear it was Homeless Outreach Day, for the waiting room was populated by numbers of homeless people trying to navigate the intake paperwork before being seen. Some were understandably having a difficult time of it.  One couple in particular was practically in panic over how to fill out the forms.

Every now and then, the Homeless Outreach Coordinator would appear -- a charismatic young Indian of indeterminate tribal affiliation,  his lustrous black hair done up in a pert chignon at the nape of his neck, his dark eyes flashing, his smile wide and welcoming. He'd briefly scan the room, talking to some of the clients who said they'd never been there before and didn't know the process. He'd explain that once they turned in their intake paperwork, they'd be seen by one of the doctors to assess their physical condition and then would be put on his list for counseling and referral to the various homeless services available in Albuquerque, and then he would point out that he was really racing from one site to another and he didn't have time to chat.

Off he'd go, sometimes with one of the homeless clients in tow -- "I'll take you right now," he'd say, "so you won't have to wait to get on my list. Did have your vitals taken already? Good!"

It's been a couple of decades since I've dealt with numbers of homeless on a continuing basis, and I can't say that I did it very well.  I wasn't particularly prepared for what I would encounter. People are homeless for a variety of reasons, most of them having to do with a chronic inability to function "normally" in the everyday world.  Drug use and alcoholism are frequent factors, but in my experience with the homeless, these factors are symptoms rather than primary causes of homelessness. In many cases, addictions and alcoholism preceded homelessness, but in many other cases, they were consequences. On the other hand, those who became homeless were often self-medicating with drugs or alcohol in order -- they thought -- to cope better with normal living. In my often ham-handed way, I would sometimes offer homeless individuals who came to me for help a place to stay, food, or occasionally money (though I rarely had much myself.)  But I couldn't deal with underlying causes of homelessness, and so I'm not sure that what little I was able to do was of much help.

Of course, mental illness is a significant contributing factor to homelessness in America. The fact is, there were few mentally ill homeless in the United States prior to the destruction of the residential system for mentally ill individuals beginning in the 1970's. The widespread failure to provide adequate and accessible mental health services, let alone access to residential care, was one of the leading causes of homelessness prior to the onset of the apparently permanent recession. Since the beginning of the recession, homelessness among the economically deprived has increased substantially.

Most of those in the clinic waiting room were able to handle the intake paperwork, though some had a good deal of difficulty and needed help of one sort or another which they typically got from one of the other homeless clients in the waiting room rather than from clinic staff.

The couple (who I'll call Richard and Ann, not their real names) who were having trouble with the forms that I mentioned earlier, however, had a lot of other problems as well, and they attracted the attention of the armed (female) guard who was monitoring the clinic waiting room and was charged with keeping order.

Richard was an Anglo in his early 40's I would guess. He was probably formerly nice looking but now was ravaged and jaundiced, his creeping infirmities taking their toll. His eyes were wide-staring, his body tension-filled. He was acting paranoid. Every now and then, he would get up from his chair and pace, sometimes in the waiting room, sometimes outside.

The younger Anglo woman with him, Ann as I call her, had even more problems. She was constantly trying to help Richard with the intake forms, but every time she would offer a suggestion, he would get upset and tell her to leave him alone. She would then get offended and go sit in another part of the waiting room. She was unsteady on her feet, though, and sometimes seemed to have severe vision problems, as if she couldn't see where she was going.

The guard, who I'll call Julie, took an interest in this couple, especially when Ann would get up and her pants would start to fall down. Ann was not wearing underwear.

At one point, Julie approached Ann and asked if she was all right. Ann replied she was fine, but her speech was slurred and her head was reeling. Julie asked if she'd been drinking, and Ann replied "absolutely not!" but she could barely get the words out and at that point, she couldn't even stand up without a struggle. She said, "I'm not drunk. I'm sick." Richard said, "She's fine." But it was clear Ann was not "fine." Nor, for that matter, was Richard.

Ann was acting drunk, but I wasn't so sure that was her problem. She appeared to me to be having physical as well as mental issues that may have had nothing to do with alcohol. Her problem was that she was trying to be "normal" and failing. Every time she set Richard off, by saying something or doing something that troubled him, she would become morose. My own sense of what was going on was that probably neither of them had eaten for perhaps days, possibly they hadn't slept either. Both lack of food and lack of sleep can have profound psychological effects that can mirror drunkenness and can exacerbate any underlying mental illnesses. That's what I thought was going on based on my observations of their behavior.

At one point, Ann got up from her chair and her pants nearly fell off altogether. Julie, the guard, approached her again and said she would have to leave if she couldn't keep her pants up, that she was in violation of the rules, and she was guilty of indecent exposure. Richard said, "She can wear my belt," which he rummaged around in his backpack to find. It was a very fancy studded belt, something I wouldn't have imagined he'd carry, but you never know. He helped Ann with putting it on, and once it was done, she was quite proud of her new accessory.

Julie, meanwhile, had disappeared into the counseling section of the clinic. She emerged from wherever it was she'd been soon after Ann had been belted up and said to her, "Look, we're going to take you across the street where we'll get you a pair of pants that will fit." Ann's eyes grew huge, "Really!?" she asked. "You'll get some pants, and if you need anything else, we can take care of that, too. Come with me."

Ann was delighted, and eagerly followed Julie out the door. Richard looked worried, but he stayed put. The homeless outreach coordinator (who I'll call Standing Bear) came out and spoke to him briefly, asking if he'd turned in his intake paperwork, and Richard said "Yes," but he had it rolled up in his hand. He'd turned in nothing. "Good," said Standing Bear, "we'll call you in for counseling as soon as your vitals are taken and that shouldn't be long." "What about Ann?" asked Richard. "We'll take care of her, too. Just wait for your names to be called. It shouldn't take long."

Standing Bear disappeared back into his area, while Richard waited for Ann to return -- which she did not too long afterwards, wearing a smart pair of running pants with an elastic waist and carrying her oversized black jeans with Richard's fancy studded belt. She had a huge smile. Julie was with her.

After Ann sat down next to Richard, Julie said, "Look, you're having a real problem here. You're severely dehydrated, your breath smells of alcohol, and you aren't able to function. We're very worried about you, and so we're going to call an ambulance to take you to the hospital for evaluation. You sit here while I go call the ambulance."

Julie walked off, headed to the back of the clinic, while Richard and Ann sat for a moment stunned.

"They're calling an ambulance!" said Ann, as if she was facing the worst fate possible. "What are we going to do?"

Richard said, "We'll have to leave."

He started assembling his things into his backpack, and stuffed Ann's defunct jeans in on top. "We have to go," he said to her. Ann was near tears. "They're going to take me to the hospital? Why?!"

"They think you're sick," said Richard.

"I AM!" she said. "I'm very sick!" But she was terrified of going to the hospital. She was panicking. Richard got his things together, slung his backpack over his shoulder, and said: "Come on, let's go."

Just as they were headed out the door, Standing Bear emerged with a bottle of water saying: "Ann, take this. Drink it. You need to drink it."

She stopped and looked at him, desperation in her eyes, and said, "Thank you! You are a wonderful person." And she and Richard left the building before Julie could come back to announce the immanent arrival of the ambulance -- which so far as I know never came.

So ended a very sad episode at the clinic. It was clear that neither Ann nor Richard could cope with expectations they couldn't meet. There was no real help or hope for them. The only thing the clinic personnel could think to do was get Ann to a hospital for evaluation -- after leveling accusations about her sobriety and inability to function normally. But for Ann, going to the hospital was a terrifying thing. The most terrifying thing she had up to then encountered at the clinic.

I have no doubt that proper protocols were being followed and that Richard and Ann were not being driven out of the clinic deliberately. People having that much difficulty can be liability headaches, however, and without knowing what their underlying problems were, it was hard to serve them appropriately. Getting Ann a full-scale medical evaluation at a hospital was a logical decision, but her panic at the announcement thwarted even the best of intentions. I don't know that the clinic personnel could have handled the situation much better than they did, though it seemed to me that the guard was unnecessarily officious and harsh -- before she realized that Ann was really in bad shape and needed expert help.

Homeless Outreach Day at the clinic I later learned was scheduled the day before the annual Homeless Census. This is a full scale effort to find and count all the homeless throughout the country, and a wide variety of strategies are employed to make sure the count is as thorough and accurate as possible (though I understand some communities actually seek to undercount homeless people so as to make it seem like the problem isn't as bad as it really is.)  Asking the homeless to come into a clinic for evaluation and services is one of the strategies employed to ensure a full count. Given the sharp increase in the poverty rate over the last five years, I have no doubt that the homeless number is greater than ever.

For the most part, service at this clinic is remarkable for its warmth and humanity. Patients and clients are not just statistics or symptoms. They are people who are treated with dignity, openness and consideration, much as might be the case in a large, welcoming extended family.

I was sad to see what happened to Richard and Ann, but somehow I have the feeling things will work out for them.

Let's hope.

Disarming

The other day, the gunners descended on the New Mexico Capitol, the Roundhouse, and demanded that the legislature enact no more gun restrictions, no matter what. They pretty much got their way, too, as the committee considering a bill that would require background checks for all gun sales and transfers, including private ones between individuals, tabled the measure as it could not pass out of committee. The committee vote was tied, and at least for now, the measure is dead.

Meanwhile, the measure by secessionist Republican Nora Espinoza to make a felony of enforcement of Federal gun law in New Mexico doesn't seem to be going anywhere, although it is widely supported by gunners and it mirrors similar legislation introduced in Wyoming, Tennessee, Texas and so on.

The hot button notion of civil disarmament is hardly considered at all in New Mexico as the gunners really have the upper hand, and no one wants to cross them for fear of triggering something unpleasant. The implicit threat of mayhem from the gunners is, I believe, what has long prevented any sort of civil disarmament movement or legislation, and not just in New Mexico. It's nationwide.

When a member of Congress is shot down, as Gabby Giffords was in Arizona two years ago, and Congress fails to act at all on the matter of excessive gun violence in this country, you pretty much know they are in fear for their lives should they do anything to cross the gun fanatic community. The fact that a few are only now raising their voices and proposing legislative responses to the violence is hardly a badge of courage.

The idea that the excess of gun violence in this country is somehow protection from tyranny is one of the most absurd arguments there is, especially given the nearly complete abrogation of the other provisions of the Bill of Rights since the advent of the so-called Glorious Global War on (or of) Terror.

Tyranny in America -- though it may be "soft" at this point (well, depending) -- is a fact, and the gunners, for the most part eagerly support it now as they have from the outset. They aren't worried about preventing tyranny at all, they just want to be sure they are the ones to impose it.

And they're getting their way.

The excess of gun violence, in the United States which I have characterized as equivalent to that of a nation experiencing a civil war, is part of the process of tyrannizing the population: it's the tyranny of fear, fear of mayhem, chaos, random massacre and slaughter, fear of your neighbor, fear of strangers, fear of authority, fear piled upon fear. It is quite deliberate in my view.

More guns and more gunners simply leads to more fear and more violence. Guns pervade poor neighborhoods where often gun violence seems to be out of control -- and fear is rampant. Is it unintentional? I think not. The more fearful the downtrodden are, the easier they are to control. Yes?

The fact is, the High and the Mighty among us live in fear of gun violence just as everyone else does, but they believe they have the means to protect themselves from the random mayhem that afflicts everyone else. Barricades and armed guards and gate keepers and law usually keeps the gunners away from the rich and the powerful, but there have been exceptions. Oh, the assassination record shows there have been many enough exceptions, but the exceptions have typically been due to... strategic and ideological issues shall we say. Stray from the path of Righteousness and watch out...

Civil disarmament is another kettle of fish, to be sure, and it can't realistically take place until the civil war is ended. That may not happen in our lifetimes.

To end the civil war, either the combatants have to tire of the conflict or a faction has to declare or believe its victory.

The United States is the victim of an ongoing class war with many, many aspects, including the drug war. All of these aspects of the class war/civil war are meant to ensure that the People stay divided and thus more easily exploited and controlled. Random acts of murder, mayhem, and massacre certainly haven't hindered division and control of the masses, have they?

Consequently, though there will be continual hearings and debate over "gun rights" and "gun issues," I don't expect anything significant to be done. We are likely to stay on this path for another generation or two, simply because doing anything about gun violence can be destabilizing to those who benefit and profit from it...

The Senate Judiciary Committee hearing is about to begin... Gabby Giffords vs Wayne LaPierre. Fireworks are guaranteed, eh?

Nest of Rebel PhDs

I was in a nest of PhDs yesterday, and noted something interesting: the comment was repeatedly made that one or another of them was "probably doing something illegal" by making their papers freely available to anyone who asked -- after they had been published in one of the scholarly journals.

"It's probably a violation of copyright, but I don't care," quoth one. They expressed nothing but dismay and contempt for the scholarly journals because the journals were preventing public access to published papers by charging outrageous fees to read them online ($35 is typical for one paper). But that wasn't all; they charged libraries outrageous subscription fees (a figure of $1,000,000 a year in aggregate paid by the university library was mentioned) for providing limited access to students and faculty. The library counters by opening to anyone. The public at large is always welcome.

They pointed out that practically all their research is funded by the public through the university or various agencies of the government, and it is completely unacceptable that the journals continue to maintain strict policies that prevent public access to the results of their research. A movement is afoot to bypass the journals (and therefore JSTOR which maintains a digital library of journals and published papers and also serves to prevent public access to it despite claims to the contrary). They are seeking to publish and make their papers freely available independent of the journals but say they are stymied for the time being by university expectations/requirements that they publish in "respected journals" -- which puts them right back where they started.

How far their rebellion will get is anyone's guess at this point, but I was glad to see there is an ongoing rebellion regarding public access to academic research and papers.

They never mentioned Aaron Swartz, but it was clear that their fury at the journals and JSTOR was no less than that of Swartz, and in their own way, they are doing what they can to subvert a system that actively prevents public access to their work.

Pondering the Local Mass Murder and What It's Done to the Gunners

Mug Shot of Nehemiah Griego, alleged local mass murderer

Let's be clear, New Mexico's culture is still very much linked to Times Gone By, including the romance of the Wild West period. People have guns, they shoot guns, and there are far too many shoot outs and shoot-em-ups in New Mexico for a sense of relaxation and ease. There is an edginess pretty much all the time. To put it mildly.

But the Griego Thing was and is something else again. It's partly because Greg Griego was so well known in town. This was not some random gang-banger nor was this an isolated incident of gun mayhem brought on by drugs or alcohol, longstanding feud -- or so far as anyone knows, abuse.

No, this was a very well-known and well-respected high profile Christian -- Born Again Christian -- household, the father a pastor, the mother a stay-at-home-homeschool-mom, the children (there were ten of them, I didn't realize, but most did not live at home) little angels. Angels, I tell you. Including Young Nehemiah, the confessed murderer.

Angels, the lot of them.

People have glommed on to violent video games as the possible culprit, the trigger shall we say, and apparently the uncle has been going around to the teevee shows blaming Young Nehemiah's 12 year old girlfriend for egging him on. Of course, the obvious issue was that there were accessible guns in the house.

Hello?

Sure, if he was intent on murder, he might have taken a hammer or an axe -- or tied everybody up and burned the compound down around them for that matter. Those who insist that guns are not the issue will perform any acrobatic exercise necessary to divert attention from the proximate source or tool for the bloodshed.

There are plenty of curiosities and issues that may have been contributing factors, for example, Greg Griego's resignation/leave of absence from his position at the Calvary Church last year (for personal reasons...? What might they have been? Was it a resignation or a leave or something else?) His inability to find another job until he landed the overnight caretaker position at the homeless shelter... eh? "Find another job" when he was on leave? Financial problems ensued that left the family on edge and barely getting by so they say.

Wait. From appearances, this was not a poor family by any stretch of the imagination, and the whole issue of his leaving the Calvary pastor-ship might be worth exploring in a bit more depth. Nobody's talking. And appearances can be deceiving.

Why would the boy go to the church (with his girlfriend) after murdering his entire household and spend the day there while a workshop was underway about the topic of mass murder (oh my) and then attend services that evening as if nothing were wrong at all... and then rather casually mention to the security guard (or someone, accounts differ) at the church that his whole family was dead... well, that part of the family that lived at the Griego compound in the South Valley was dead at any rate.

The notion that the boy is not a Monster -- while he's behaving like an archetypical Teenaged Monster -- is peculiar. The girlfriend is being posited as if she were some sort of demon, in fact. She made him do it, don't you know. And she-the-demon would have led him to many more murders at the WalMart down the road (oh really?) if something hadn't intervened... the Hand of Divine Mercy, perhaps? Charge the Girl, for she is in league with the Devil. 12 years old. Demon spawn.

How is it that none of the rest of the family in or out of town was contacted by the boy?

On and on. This is a very strange story, but then what mass murder in recent times hasn't been?

According to sheriff's investigators, Young Nehemiah loved to play "Modern Warfare" and "Grand Theft Auto," both of which are considered to be desensitizing and conditioning games, ones that have been implicated in numerous killings, including some in New Mexico.

In fact, there is an eerie parallel between the Griego Murders and the Cody Posey Murders that took place at Sam Donaldson's ranch out of Roswell some years ago. In some ways they're practically identical. Cody Posey was 14 when he slaughtered his entire household with a gun back in 2004. Cody was released a couple of years ago, so I'm led to understand, after spending a relatively brief time in juvenile custody. He was said to be obsessed with playing "Grand Theft Auto." Police indicate that Young Nehemiah likewise enjoyed the bloody game which is said to give players higher points for head shots. All the Griego family members were said to have been shot in the head.

Of course, they differ, too, in that the Griego family did not experience divorce and remarriage, nor had Young Nehemiah's mother been killed in an auto accident (though supposedly, that's what Nehemiah said happened to her when he texted a picture of her dead body to his girl friend...) Though they lived in a semi-rural compound in Albuquerque's South Valley, they were not way out in the country, as there was a WalMart within easy driving distance -- a WalMart where the authorities say Young Nehemiah intended to kill many more before going out in a blaze of police gunfire... Cody didn't really have that opportunity if he had contemplated such a thing. So far as has been reported, neither Nehemiah nor any of the other children were abused by their parents, unlike Cody's situation -- which according to some reports was really kinky and violent.

Some of those who knew the Griego family said that video games were not allowed in the household, and even television viewing was severely restricted.

Yet apparently he had access according to the police. Was it through the Demon-Girl, perhaps?

(The internet defense of violent video games has reached epic proportions, but that's another issue for another day...)

Of course there have been many calls to curb the easy access to firearms that is so commonplace in the United States. At first, I thought the Griego household, like so many survivalist and apocalyptic households (and there is no indication at this point that the Griegos were survivalists/apocalyptics), had an arsenal that the boy had used for his murderous task, but apparently there were only two guns, a .22 rifle and one of those dandy AR-15's that seem to show up in mass murders so frequently. And of course, there was plenty of ammunition. Neither the weapons nor the ammunition were apparently kept under lock and key.

There has been much push back, however, from the gunner community and their reps in the state-house and congress, including one bill designed to prevent enforcement of any federal gun regulation within the state of New Mexico. Nice. The gunners' fear of losing their guns or easy access to more weaponry and ammunition runs high. In some sense, it's an irrational fear, but very little of the gun debate in this country is rational.

Authorities have been criticized for releasing too much information about the murders and the accused young man who is said to have confessed to the crimes. But what has happened has profoundly affected many thousands of 'Burquenos who knew the Griegos, as well as many thousands of others. These killings went right to the heart of the extended caring community in Albuquerque.

Unfortunately, the caring community is too often caught in the crossfire of the peculiar American obsession with personal firepower.

I've said before that the level of gun violence, murder and mayhem in the United States is equivalent to that of a nation experiencing a civil war, and in a way, that is what has been happening in this country for many years, a low-grade, constant civil war with many factions.

My answer has long been "civil disarmament" -- ie: strictly limiting the personal possession of firearms and ammunition among the civilian population for the duration. As desirable as that might be, however, it's not likely to happen so long as government in practice and in the abstract is so distrusted by such large segments of the population. It's not that many people have firearms to protect themselves from government tyranny, it's that they can't trust the government or the police to protect and defend them, or to act on their behalf in any manner.

There would have to be a real change in the level of trust in authority, and until there is, few of those who have weapons and arsenals would be willing to give them up.

Many people have guns because they feel they have to have them; often gun regulations or bans are seen as forms of punishment for "law abiding citizens." Households with guns are far more likely to experience gun violence, and from time to time, some of them will be victims of mass murder by one of their own members -- guaranteed.

But until it happens, they will be "law abiding..." won't they?

There are ways to change the situation, but it requires changing some of the power relationships that have become institutionalized. Doing that is not easy, especially not when certain powerful interests benefit so much from keeping things the way things are.

So long as they feel protected, murder and mayhem among the rest of us is just fine...

What We Forget About Martin Luther King -- Stumbling Against the Future

I watched parts of the Inauguration yesterday, and because it was also MLK Day, there were plenty of references to the legacy of Martin Luther King and the long and difficult struggle for civil rights for all in this country -- a struggle that continues, of course. Many inspirational words were offered in tribute.

Well. I've pondered -- and participated in -- the civil rights struggle for many a long year, and I cannot for the life of me understand why, after all these years of struggle, civil rights are still in jeopardy, perhaps more now than at any time since the institution of Jim Crow. The success of the movement has led to what?

For many Americans, it means taking for granted the civil rights and liberties at the foundation of the nation as belonging to all of us, not simply a favored few (as they did at the foundation of the nation.) But we find that taking these rights and liberties for granted has meant that they are once more jeopardized as voting rights, especially, are more and more restricted, and rights to privacy, fair trials and due process and so forth evaporate before our very eyes.

During the controversies over "non-violence" within the Occupy movement, I pointed out that rigidly following King and Gandhi in today's environment is bound to fail and for a very simple reason: Our Rulers have learned many lessons since the days of Indian Independence and the American Civil Rights Movement. They will not ever allow that kind of movement and resistance to succeed again. What they will do instead is infiltrate, co-opt and destroy if they can't use the means and methods of the King/Gandhi non-violence principles against the movement directly.

When I pointed out that many of those who were advocating strict adherence to King/Gandhi "non-violence" were actually advocating for the interests of Our Rulers against the interests of the People (I like to use the example of the use of Non-violent Communications by Our Rulers as one of their ways to employ "nonviolence" against the People -- as I was trained in Non-Violent Communications when I was a government employee, and I know all too well how it works...)  all hell would sometimes break loose.

The problem is not that the principles of non-violent resistance are necessarily wrong, it is that they no longer work in the context of modern, supposedly democratic, states, and when they are employed in People's Uprisings and Revolutions these days (and for quite a long time past when you think how long its been since the Soviet Union fell) they almost inevitably lead to a Neo-Con/Neo-Liberal victory.

And that is not what the People rose up to accomplish. Is it?

Both Gandhi and King understood that their use of nonviolent resistance was part of a larger strategy to undermine the power of and eventually force the capitulation of oppressive and intrinsically violent political systems. That overall strategy was not limited to nonviolent resistance campaigns by any means. In both India and the United States, sabotage and armed resistance were taking place simultaneously with non-violent campaigns. The eventual success of the non-violent campaigns was in part due to the presence of -- or the threat of -- violent revolutionary alternatives.

So often in the modern conception of 'non-violent resistance,' however, there is no alternative path; there is only The One, as codified not by Gandhi and King but by Gene Sharp, whose influence on the Color Revolutions of the '80's and '90's was significant. Their success, however, led -- in every case that I'm aware of -- to the establishment of a Neo-Con/Neo-Liberal regime which calls itself "Liberty."

"Liberty" for whom? To do what? This is something that Sharpian 'non-violence' advocates dast not answer, for many of them must know the truth: it leads to "liberty" for the predators to exploit and impoverish the masses.

Both Gandhi and King well understood that economic "liberty" as it was understood by the Ruling Class led directly to the impoverishment of the masses and enormous social destruction. They sought ways and means to counter that sort of "liberty" as they were pressing for independence in the case of India and civil rights and racial integration in the case of the United States.

Just being able to fly your own flag or to vote or to sit at a lunch counter was not enough. And they knew it.

Of course today there is little or no mention of the economic justice programs of Gandhi and King; after all, both were assassinated well before their campaigns for economic justice could even begin to overturn the corrupt and destructive systems they witnessed in their own time.

Gandhi's assassination may have had more to do with the political situation in newly independent India, but it seems clear enough that King's assassination was driven at least in part by his shift from a primary focus on civil and political rights to anti-war and economic justice campaigns that threatened the Powers That Be in ways they could not, at the time, accommodate.

King seemed to understand, too, that his shift of focus would further jeopardize his life.

The tragedy is that the legacies that might have been were violently cut short, and memories of what might have been have been suppressed, replaced with idealized images of what never really was.

King's final book was titled: "Where Do We Go From Here? Chaos or Community?" published in 1967. In it, he acknowledged the progress that had been made in securing political rights for Negroes (the term used in those days) but he clearly focused his attention on the fact that political rights by themselves did not lead to paradise, not by a long shot, and that promise of America would only be secured through the establishment of economic justice. 

Now more than ever, that clarion call from so long ago needs to be heard again, for every year, millions more Americans are forced into poverty, their hopes and dreams destroyed, their homes confiscated, their livelihoods vanished, their future gone. This is the cruel truth of the economic situation since the advent of the Perpetual Recession. The American poverty rate, once on the decline, has been skyrocketing, right along with homelessness and hunger, and for all intents and purposes, nothing is being done about it by the Government except to reinforce policies which ensure ever greater levels of poverty and suffering.

It doesn't have to be that way. It never had to be that way. The increasingly desperate situation so many Americans find themselves in could be reversed in a twinkling, too.

But we have a government that resists any policy solution to the increasing problem of poverty in America, that denies any positive ability to change things for the better, that no longer bothers even to talk a good line regarding the now seemingly permanent and scandalous unemployment problem, let alone providing any sort of household debt relief.

All of these issues could be addressed, should be addressed, and won't be addressed willingly by the Ruling Class -- which obviously is quite unbothered by the economic difficulties of the People, in fact, it seems to enjoy increasing the cruelties the People are made to suffer.

So long as that Ruling Class is lavished with the kinds of considerations, benefits, and literal welfare they receive (and believe is their right), and so long as their own debts are covered, why should they care about the sufferings of the masses? They don't and they won't.

Americans have not lived with this level of routine indifference to their plight by their representatives for generations, and it is not easy to grasp just how destructive current policies are.

King ultimately realized that social acceptance and political rights mean a great deal, but they can be eclipsed by failures to establish economic justice and by a perpetual war making machine. So it was near the end of his life, and so it is once again today.

It's a moral issue. It's the fundamental moral issue of our time.

As we stumble against the Future, we are called on to end the perpetual war making machine and establish economic justice for all. 

The Local Mass Murder

We were in town (Abq) yesterday to take care of an errand for a friend and to check out an exhibit at the Indian Pueblo Cultural Center (Zuni Map Art Project). We watched the films on Maria Martinez and Pablita Velarde after touring the rest of the exhibits, and when they finished we tried to follow the same path back to our starting point -- only to discover that the place was locked up tight and the lights were out. Oh, oh. We're locked in the museum. What shall we do? We took the elevator back downstairs where we thought we might find an available exit only to be confronted by a very nervous young guard.

"The museum is closed," he said grimly.

"Yes, apparently so. We're locked in."

He seemed confused. "The museum closes at 5:00p,"  he said gruffly.

"That's fine," I said. "We're trying to find a way out and we're not getting very far. Maybe you could help. What time is it now?"

"5:25. The museum closed at 5:00pm."

(Sigh.) "We were watching the videos. I thought I saw something that said the place was open till 5:30. Anyway, we still haven't found a way out."

He shook himself out of his befuddlement for a moment. "Oh. See this brown line on the floor?"

"Yes, of course."

"Just follow that till you reach the end of the room beyond which there is a set of stairs and an elevator. Go up to the first floor, then turn left, go through Governor's Hall and the Rotunda, and you'll see the exit doors."

We smiled.

"Here, I'll go with you to the stairs," he said. And he did. At this point, he actually became rather pleasant, though I thought he was still in a kind of daze at encountering us. No doubt he would have to fill out reams of paperwork...

The strangest thing, though. Or it seemed strange at the time. We had passed through this exhibit room originally, following the brown path on the floor, and there was no set of stairs or elevator or exit that we recalled... one went around in a sort of spiral instead, and came out at the point where one entered. There was no "back way." Except then I recalled the encounter we had with the docent before we began this historical exhibit. After explaining what the exhibit was about, he said, "When you get to the end, you'll come to a wall, and you'll think you can't go any farther, but... you'll see. Have a pleasant journey!"

And sure enough. There must have been a wall, but there wasn't one any more... and we climbed the stairs and emerged from the Underworld in a kind of replay of the Sipapu stories we've heard and were told, and we found our way back to the Upper World, and in some ways I'm kind of stunned at the whole experience. Something unusual happened.

We had dinner at Hazel's (El Bruno's) and then headed out of town, back to our place in the country. It was dark and there seemed to be a heightened amount of police action. Some of it seemed quite strange, but then, what do we know. Cruisers patrolling slowly with their flashing lights on -- sometimes sirens too -- drivers stopped (at random?) and so on. Were they looking for someone in particular?

At the time, we hadn't heard the news, so we didn't know about the murder spree in the South Valley the day or night before (I'm still not sure of the timing.) A pastor (who I believe we have met; his name is familiar, and his picture looks familiar, but I couldn't say we knew him), his wife and three of their children were murdered in their home -- by their surviving son, it would appear, using one of those assault rifles that gun nuts insist are benign and anyway they're not "assault rifles" so stop saying that.


Oh. Right here. Well, in the South Valley, which is part of Albuquerque and is considered a rougher part, [said to be] riven by gangs of young toughs and what have you, drugs and so forth, "the mean streets." [Having Goggled up the Griegos compound, however, I would definitely not characterize the area where they lived as anything but deluxe. It's semi-rural, and quite beautiful.] "Barrio" but not exactly "ghetto," but not the North Valley or Los Ranchos or -- damn -- Corrales, either, the areas of and near Abq where we tend to do the majority of our hanging out it would seem.

A mass murder, here, in Abq during the fury of the National Conversation we're having over Gun Violence, on Gun Appreciation Day, no less. People are seemingly getting shot all the time in Albuquerque, and the Po Po are under Justice Department investigation due to all the Police Involved Shootings that have been happening (a lot). But this was something else again.

The story that is emerging of what happened is very troubling, even in the context of American Mass Murder Culture.

It seems that a fifteen year old pastor's son, Nehemiah Griego, had been involved with some sort of paramilitary make believe -- whether derived from video games, who knows, for there are other sources of the paramilitary lifestyle and belief system, some of them closely related to apocalyptic endtimers. His household had collected an arsenal of weapons (here we go again), and something happened which caused young Nehemiah to go on a shooting rampage Saturday night, slaughtering his parents, his brother and his two young sisters, then calling Emergency Services. (One story says he told a friend what he had done, and his friend called Emergency Services, but whatever.)

It appears that the story wasn't known beyond the crime scene until well into Sunday, and it wasn't reported widely until Sunday afternoon when we were in the Underworld at the Pueblo Cultural Center... so we missed it.

The murdered pastor, Greg Griego, was the brother of Eric Griego, who ran against Michelle Lujan Grisham in the Democratic primary for the Congressional seat being vacated by Martin Heinrich who was running for Senate. Griego was actually my choice, but I couldn't vote in New Mexico at that time. Lujan Grisham won, sadly, and is now the Congressmember from my district. Heinrich won the Senate seat easily.

At this point, it becomes a very small-town kind of story because of all the interrelationships -- everybody knows everybody else, or knows of them, and there is hardly anyone in the region (including our own selves) who isn't touched in some way by this murder spree. It gets worse. Three of the Griego victims were children. One was two years old. Add that to the fact that one of the children killed at Sandy Hook, Emilie Parker,  was a recent Albuquerque resident... the sense of wrenching dislocation is profound.

How much longer can this sort of thing go on?

Too many Americans still see disarming the civilian population as a form of punishment, in part because of the way the right to keep and bear arms has historically been used to arm one segment of the population while disarming another. No matter the firearms bloodshed in this country -- the equivalent of casualties you'd see in a civil war -- we can't even mention civil disarmament because of its punishment factor.

Of course, there's more to it than that, especially since we can't really trust the police or the justice system to operate on behalf of the People.  Relations between the People and the Po Po are not as bad in Albuquerque as they are in Oakland, but I wouldn't say they're good, especially not among communities of color.

The toughs and the gangs and their guns are arrayed against one another for the most part, but then there are the survivalist and apocalyptic believers who've amassed their arsenals to ward off... exactly what? I don't know. If they're raptured, after all, none of it will matter. And if they're not, they're in the same boat with everyone else. They might want to consider cooperation and mutual aid before they turn their weapons on the others who are left behind.

The Griegos may or may not have fit into the "apocalyptic" gun cult, but there are apparently very may more of them than most of us realize. What triggered this mass murder, who can say? We never seem to know enough about them.

And "knowing about them" doesn't seem to stop the bloodshed in any case.

For some reason, all the hundreds of millions of firearms in this country don't seem to be preventing the imposition  of tyranny either. In fact, it sometimes seems as if the guns are the source of tyrannical rule ... how drole.