Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » Turmoil in Tucson Schools over Mexican-American Studies Course

Turmoil in Tucson Schools over Mexican-American Studies Course

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

This year, Arizona passed HB 2281, a law which bans ethnic studies that promote the radical agenda of groups like La Raza, known for revising history to suit their anti-American, anti-caucasian ideology.  The radical reconquista crowd isn’t pleased.

On April 26th, the Tucson school board meeting was disrupted by high school students egged on by a leftist University of Arizona professor. Guess who was also in attendance: Ward Churchill, the former University of Colorado professor who revised history, committed plagiarism, and called the World Trade Center victims “little Eichmanns.”

On May 3rd, the raging moonbats converged on the Tucson Unified School District headquarters because the governing board is considering making the district’s ethnic studies courses into electives.  The prospect of elective choices doesn’t sit well with Hispanic radicals who want mandatory propaganda force-fed to students. 

The so-called Mexican-American studies is chock full of “death to the invaders” rhetoric,  supporting illegal aliens, and advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government. They also describe Thanksgiving as a “white supremacist holiday”.  The curriculum reads like a cross between the Communist Manifesto and the rabid regurgitation of 1800’s Mexican revolutionaries.  This leftwing-reconquista agenda has spread throughout our school system, and the American taxpayer has been footing the bill.  Obama’s fingerprints are all over this. The National Council of La Raza (NCLR), the organization pushing this propaganda, is powerful and politically connected, with leaders regularly attending congressional hearings and White House meetings. The group also endorsed and campaigned for Obama in 2008.  B. Hussein violated his own ban on lobbyists when he appointed NCLR hack, Cecilia Munoz, as White House Director of Intergovernmental Affairs, among the number of other political lobbyists he hired.

The truth about history is a bit more complicated than the “whitey is responsible for all the world’s problems” crap that LaRaza spews.  The Central, South, and North American tribes were not a civilized people; holding hands, singing kumbaya, and living in peace. Wholesale slaughter of enemies and innocents didn’t just materialize when the Spaniards showed up.  They killed men, women and children with equal savagery.  The Aztecs ripped the beating hearts out of, on average, 10 to 20 thousand people a year, because their gods demanded large amounts of blood and sacrifice. The Mayans and Incas practiced the same level of bloodshed.  If you sprayed their temples with Luminol, they’d glow in the dark for miles.  The native Americans were just as brutal over territory and dominance. They fought and warred among themselves and each other long before any modern European set foot on the continent.  And as for Blacks, some of their own people sold them into slavery.

Just a reminder of history for those who bitch about moving borders, human rights, and ancestry:  There isn’t one ethnic group on this earth who hasn’t been kicked around or done its own kicking. I’m Irish-Scots-German-Cherokee. I’m not ashamed of any part of my heritage. I will never apologize for my ancestry.

This so-called Mexican-American Studies course is not an educational forum; it’s ideological indoctrination aimed at school children for the purpose of radicalization. There’s absolutely no balance or counter points in the material.  La Raza’s other pet project is aiding and abetting illegal aliens in violation of Federal statutes. Entry into this country is a privilege, not a right. Illegal aliens are not guaranteed rights under the U.S. Constitution.  Obama panders to his Hispanic voting bloc with promises of immigration overhaul and the outrageous DREAM act.

The United States is no longer a melting pot, but a land that is rapidly becoming Balkanized. Illegals have no intention of paying taxes, adopting American traditions, or becoming citizens. They have established their own colonies on this soil; refusing to assimilate. They’ve been suckling off the teat of American welfare so long, they think it’s an entitlement. We have enough American-born able-bodied people who use welfare as an income, we should not add illegals to the public dole.  They want all the benefits, but none of the responsibilities. They want free healthcare, education, and welfare. All we have to do is pay for it. The illegal immigration pimps might derive some sort of smug satisfaction from providing them their freedoms and benefits at our expense, but the rest of us are sick of footing the bill for an entire class of derelicts who come here with nothing more than a list of demands.

The wave of leftwing revisionist history is being met with opposition from parents and concerned citizens who are sick and tired of the La Raza racist bullshit being taught in the classroom.

The best disinfectant is sunlight, much to the dismay of the La Raza cockroaches.

Powered by

About SFC MAC

  • TJ Jackson

    There is not much to add. You have stated the case very well. I live here at ground zero for all of this BS. If they want a revolution, they will get a lot more fight than they could imagine. Power to the people!

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Jose Guerena was murdered by a SWAT team in Tuscson Arizona this month. I’m having a difficult time getting upset about the textbooks at the moment.

  • Clavos

    Sarge, in your article you say, Illegal aliens are not guaranteed rights under the U.S. Constitution.

    This is incorrect. All persons on US soil, even if only visiting, are protected by the Bill of Rights. The framers drafted the Constitution in very general terms. It refers to the rights of persons, not citizens.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Sergeant –

    What an incredibly spiteful and hateful diatribe, chock-full of unsubstantiated accusations and utterly baseless assumptions…and if I read your personality rightly (as readers often try to know the mind of the author), I suspect that you might not be able to tell which statements you made are unsubstantiated and baseless. It’s interesting how I get castigated for being such a sanctimonious liberal, yet when I see your article with language that’s not much less inflammatory than what’s found on stormfront.org and I see no one pointing out your rhetorical log as it compares to my rhetorical mote…that tells me much.

    It would be nice if you would learn to read history without seeing everything through blood-red political glasses. I recommend reading Guns, Germs, and Steel as a start. It’s a completely apolitical work…which is one of the many reasons it won the Pulitzer.

    And for Clavos – well said.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Dear you-ain’t-MY-sergeant. I know there’s a bit of friendly rivalry between the army and the marines, but how does it strike you that a guy who had served–even if it WAS as a Marine–was served THAT way in return by the SWAT team in Tuscon?

    The story of Jose Guerena’s murder is getting so very little attention nationwide. The very next thing I read after reading an article about it (I linked to that article in comment #2) was YOUR article about how you’d had enough of La Raza’s uppity ways and you weren’t going to take it any more.

    So what I’m wondering is, which allegiance is going to determine how you react to the story of Jose Guerena’s murder? Will the army connection compel you to defend ANY action of a group of government-anointed hit men, even THAT action? Or will you recognize the dead Marine as a comrade, and advocate that his memory be honored?

    Or will Jose Gurena’s (possible, and, in your eyes, unfortunate) Aztec ancestry lead you to conclude that he got just what he had coming?

  • Cannonshop

    Guerena was a MARINE-that makes him American enough in every sense of the word, and he was murdered because of the fetish for midnight, no-knock assaults by agents of “Law enforcement” (put in quotes due to the irony of that term-esp. in this case.)

    Who wants to make a bet that not one of the shooters (because, 71 rounds into a man before he can take the safety off is either a minigun, or lots of guys opening fire at once) is going to face the prison time they so rightfully brought upon themselves in this act of cold-blooded, negligent, murder?

    Oh, and Irene, please, don’t slur the Army with that, if you would be so kind, yes?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Don’t worry, C-shop. There is a growing contingent of army men, whom I very much respect, who are banding together to decry this sort of thing. The SLPC doesn’t like them very much, though.

  • Lemmie

    Irene, your link to the Jose Guerena “story” has nothing to do with this blogcritic post.

    Your point is?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Lemmie, I can tell that you are frustrated. If I knew more about what grade level you are reading at, and if I had more of an idea of how you might be connected to the Jose Guerena “story,” I might be able to be of some assistance. As the situation stands, however, I am afraid that I am not in a position to help you.

  • Clavos

    Irene, at the risk of displaying my ignorance, what is the SLPC?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    I transposed two letters accidentally: SPLC Southern Poverty Law Center. Has done some good work in the past, but has recently taken to classifying certain liberty groups as threats to national security. They’ve decided who the haters are.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    One such organization, under fire by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is the Oathkeepers. The Oathkeepers have been very closely following this story of former Marine Jose Guerena’s violent death in his Tucson home by a SWAT team.

    There is much about the story that disturbs the Oathkeepers, and there is much about the Oathkeepers that disturbs the SPLC.

    Why would a group whose existence is dedicated to protecting the rights of minorities have different goals from a group that is calling the nation’s attention to the murder of a minority Marine in his own home?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Yes, there are racists in the United States, and part of the job of protecting the President and his family involves identifying them. Caroline Kennedy, Julie Nixon, Chelsea Clinton–they were all household names, and no harm came to them, but it cannot be that way for Obama’s little girls. This I understand.

    However.

    There are also thugs like the crowd that murdered Jose Guerena. Oathkeepers is a group of current and former US military and law enforcement personnel who refuse to go the way of those thugs.

    SLPC has, as so many do, confused “speaking out against government agency policy” with racism.

  • zingzing

    from the splc thing on them:

    “We will not fear our government; they will fear us,” one man, who appeared to be on active duty in the
    Army, said in an angry video sent to the Oath Keepers blog. In another video at the site, a man who said he was a former Army paratrooper in Afghanistan and Iraq described President Obama as “an enemy of the state,” adding, “I would rather die than be a slave to my government.” The Oath Keepers site soon began hawking T-shirts with slogans like “I’m a Right Wing Extremist and Damn Proud of It!”

    In April, Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes – a Yale Law School graduate and former aide to U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (a Texas Republican and hard-line libertarian) – worried about a coming dictatorship. “We know that if the day should come where a full-blown dictatorship would come, or tyranny … it can only happen if those men, our brothers in arms, go along and comply with unconstitutional, unlawful orders,” Rhodes told conspiracy-minded radio host Alex Jones. “Imagine if we focus on the police and military. Game over for the New World Order.”

    One Oath Keeper is longtime militia hero Richard Mack, a former sheriff of a rural Arizona county who collaborated with white supremacist Randy Weaver on a book…

    -snip-

    i dunno. they seem like run of the mill right wing militia types. except they’re well trained and they probably have guns. might be a good idea to keep an eye on them. if they do anything, it won’t be to lead a large group of millions to freedom–they’re to far out there for that–it’ll be something they think is a profoundly good idea, something that will stop the ever-more-powerful gov’t from taking over their lives, something that will kill people who don’t give two fucks about them.

    they’re nut jobs, irene. let them have their jollies, but you don’t need to join the cult.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Here is the Oath that the oathkeepers take. Orders We Will Not Obey

    We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.
    We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people.
    We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.
    We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state.
    We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.
    We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.
    We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.
    We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control.”
    We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.
    We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.

  • zingzing

    all well and good. shrug.

    still, best to keep your eye on the armed man in the room, isn’t it?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Well ZingZing, you have told me that the individuals in Oathkeepers are “nut jobs,” and that I should take your advice, and find that comfy ZingZing spot on the political scale where sane and wholesome people dwell.

    It’s like this, ZingZing. If I had to pick a set of nut jobs with whom to cast in my lot, it would be with the people from Oathkeepers who are opposing the murder of Jose Guerena, rather than those in smug, safe, politically correct, SPLC territory with those who haven’t quite figured out what to say about it yet. Eggshelly tiptoeing people.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Delusionally paranoid, one might even call them.

  • zingzing

    yeah well. fair enough. i can agree with them on opposing a murder by a swat team. but i’m not going to dedicate my life to their cause. too many other things to do. at this point it’s a social club with a political edge and a gun fetish, but those things can sometimes go awry.

    they certainly agree with you (and me) on this one point, but don’t go all evangelical with them. i can find guerena’s murder horrendous without pulling out my phallic gun and saying “fear me, government.” (or associating with white supremacists… at least he seems to hate the gov’t more than he hates them brown folk.)

    and the splc has always looked out for hate groups. i don’t know if i’d consider the oath keepers a hate group (unless gov’t as a target of hate qualifies), but they are quite a good example of a militia group, which is what the article i quoted was about.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    ZingZing, if you’ve never been in the military or in law enforcement, you wouldn’t be welcome to join anyway. I think you’re kind of missing the point of how serious this is. When a man or a woman takes an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States, that man or woman takes it seriously.

    There are some men and women in Tuscon who have taken that oath, who are facing some pretty heavy moral dilemmas right now.

    Don’t trivialize the efforts of their comrades who are trying to help them make the right decision.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    And yes, I’ll recite a poem and playfully stick a flower in the barrel of their guns, because it does take all kinds to keep this world spinning harmoniously, but I will not join with you in mocking the seriousness of their oath.

  • zingzing

    “When a man or a woman takes an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States, that man or woman takes it seriously.”

    oh, balderdash. it’s a fucking bit of paper. defend something real, like your life or someone you love, not the hotly debated words of someone you never knew. they “defend” their own interpretation of the constitution, which is their political beliefs. they pretend to believe that their political beliefs are worth killing or dying over. that’s fine and all, but when they’re free to go on a radio program and broadcast it to the world, they aren’t under duress. if they aren’t a bunch of blowhards, they’re a bunch of cowards, and if they aren’t a bunch of cowards, they’re a bunch of terrorists, and if they aren’t a bunch of terrorists, then just maybe they were right, but that’ll be the day too late.

    “ZingZing, if you’ve never been in the military or in law enforcement, you wouldn’t be welcome to join anyway.”

    ah, exclusivity. what a great way to keep the riffraff out.

    if you join them, i’ll restart baader-meinhof and we can have an explosion competition. gotta believe something.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    I said I wasn’t going to be joining you, ZingZing, in mocking them. I meant it.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    There are a GOOD many of those in Oathkeepers who’ve worked hard to oppose unjust wars, and who are in a position of influence to do this.

  • Lemmie

    Hi Irene! First off I’d like to thank you for the ad hom comments in response to my #8 post.

    Second, in the “story” you posted a link to, Griggs claims that gang members, heavily armed and dressed as SWAT, were raiding homes in Texas during 2005-08. This “might” explain why Mrs. Guerena described the dynamic entry team as “some guys”, rather than a SWAT unit. The thing is, I can find no information about said gang from any credible source. I found a few articles about gang members posing as police officers or plain clothes detectives in a number of states, but nothing about them posing as SWAT teams. Griggs posted no links to back up this claim. Do you have them?

    Third, even if Mrs. Guerena suspected that these “guys” were actually gangsters in disguise, why didn’t she at least inform her husband that they were dressed as such. Of course, she may have already modified her initial statement to reflect this, but I have yet to read anything about it.

    So, we have a man sleeping in bed when his wife screams: “Guys with guns are trying to get into the house!”

    The man jumps out of bed, grabs a semi-automatic military-style rifle, secures his wife and child in a closet for their protection, then rushes to confront the “guys with guns”. He draws a bead on the front door as it bursts open.

    One wonders if his final thought wasn’t something along the lines of: “Oh, crap, she didn’t tell me they were SWAT (or at least dressed as SWAT)!”

    Perhaps if he had that little tidbit of information his reaction might have been different?

  • zingzing

    oh lord, irene. what are you going to do about it? what are THEY doing about it?

    jack. dick.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    For the life of me, Lemmie (in the previous 25 comments), I can’t imagine why it SHOULD have been different. A man’s home is invaded by ANYONE, he has the right to defend himself and his family in it.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    That’s the hypothetical answer. You do agree with that, do you, Lemmie, that a man has a right to defend himself against home invasions?

    The other line of discussion would go along the lines of sussing out the truth of “what resistance did Jose Guerena actually provide?” I have posted two sources already, Will Grigg’s account, and Oathkeepers’, where an attempt to do this is made.

  • Lemmie

    Irene, I do agree that a person has the right to defend their home against invasion; however, this was not an invasion–it was the execution of a search warrant by law enforcement officials. There IS a difference.

    I reviewed the Oath Keepers site and, while I do agree with the basic premise of such an organization, I do not find it to be a credible source of information. Same thing with Will Griggs. It is all subjective opinion with a few factoids thrown in for good measure. Heck, if I want that I can just as easily listen to Glenn Beck or Mark “Speed Racer” Koernke, yes?

    Anyway, back to my point. Why did Mrs. Guerena tell her husband that “guys with guns” were coming, rather than a SWAT team? The commentary on the Oath Keepers site alludes to the “fact” that neither of them knew the identity of the “invaders”, but this does not make sense to me. Certainly, HE might not have known having just been awakened to all hell breaking loose, but she claims that she SAW the “guys” through the window. Seriously, a group of “guys” clad identically in paramilitary uniforms are hard to mistake for anything but what they are. Thus, it appears that she is either as dumb as a box of rocks, or she is lying.

    Maybe a little of both?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    I have a problem with search warrants being delivered by SWAT teams. I take it you don’t?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    I’ll post the Oathkeeper’s analysis again.

    And, I will post Will Grigg’s report again as well, so they will be on this side of the “Previous 25 comments” page break.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/dr-dreadful/ Dr Dreadful

    Seriously, a group of “guys” clad identically in paramilitary uniforms are hard to mistake for anything but what they are. Thus, it appears that she is either as dumb as a box of rocks, or she is lying.

    Or option 3: she was terrified.

    I don’t know about you, but if I happened to glance out of my window and saw a group of heavily-armed, black-clad gentlemen advancing on the house, I doubt very much whether, in the one or two seconds available before said gentlemen smashed the door in, the first thought to cross my mind would be, “Ah, clearly this is a squad of police officers executing a legal warrant, and not members of a drug gang, terrorist organization or foreign intelligence service approaching the premises with the intent to kidnap and/or torture and/or massacre everyone within”.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    You’re saying only (they) yelled SWAT after the shootout?” asked KGUN9 reporter Joel Waldman.

    “Oh, yes! Yes,” said Guerena.

    So here’s where Lemmie comes in, calling the new widow a liar and/or dumber than a box of rocks. Nice.

    Any commentary, Lady Lemming, on how many times Deputy Ogan’s story changed?
    First, it’s: Jose Guerena fired at the officers with a long-gun.
    Next: bulletS from a long-gun were deflected by the SWAT team’s shields,

    Hold on, wait a minute. “Further investigation reveals Guerena did not shoot at the deputies before they returned fire.”
    DANG. That doesn’t even make sense.

    …Next, it comes to light that the SAFETY is still on the rifle.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    You from the Tuscson area, Lemmie? I tell you what you ought to do now. You just get off that ass of yours, and bring that grieving lady and her babies a coverd dish, rice and beans or something like that. And don’t have any dang SWAT team help you deliver it either.

  • Cannonshop

    #25 Limmie, had the officers been obedient to the common law, and announced their presence with words, instead of a hail of bullets, likely Guerena would still be alive, because he likely would have not reacted to activity that is commonly (and yes, it is common down there) the fore-stages of a gang-sponsored home-invasion pillage and rape.

    AS is clearly shown in the 911 call, the SWAT team did not identify themselves before opening fire.

    This is what makes it Murder. Officers, with a properly sworn and signed warrant, whom identify themselves before entering, generally don’t draw fire unless the house or person in question is, in fact, committing a crime or in fact a criminal. This is a Veteran who worked the night shift at a mine, and the team was at the wrong house, but they violated so many elements that even HAD the home been a nest of crims, the Pima County Sherriff’s office would be the likely loser of a series of lawsuits, and any evidence found within would just as likely be inadmissible in court, or overturned as inadmissable evidence in a higher court.

    With attendant civil lawsuits.

    Seventy-one bullets entered our dead Marine. That requires either a very fast firing weapon such as a vulcan gun, or several men firing on him simultaneously.

    Excessive Force doesn’t BEGIN to describe it-the percentage of bullets fired under those conditions means that there are probably several tens to hundereds of rounds in the walls, floor, ceiling, etc. that missed him.

    It only takes one bullet to put down a man with a rifle in his underwear, these guys up and emptied entire MAGAZINES of bullets into him.

    I somewhat doubt that the Pima County Sherriffs take any oath to support, uphold or defend the Constitution in any way shape or form seriously.

    these guys are a gang with badges, I just have to wonder what he did to piss them off.

  • Lemmie

    Irene and Doc,

    I do not preclude the possibility that Mr. Guerena was involved, either directly or indirectly, with drug trafficking and that this was the serving of a legitimate search warrant. Eventually this detail will come to light.

    I’d also like to apologize for my “dumb or lying” remark. That was simply rude considering that the facts of the case have yet to be determined. Yes, Doc, she was probably terrified and not thinking logically.

    Irene, I was already aware that Mr. Guerena did not shoot and that the rifle’s safety was on. This leads me to believe that he realized, too late, that this was not a home invasion and was intending to submit to the search. When the door was forced open, he was already in position to fire the weapon, but never had a chance to explain himself. The officers saw him pointing the gun in their direction and opened fire.

    Looking at it this way, I cannot blame Mr. Guerena for his actions. IF he was involved with drug trafficking, and based on the information he received from his wife, he may have assumed that the “guys with guns” were members of a rival organization. IF he was not involved in drug trafficking, he was simply moving to defend himself and his family from “guys with guns”.

    Either way it appears to me that it was faulty intelligence at the point of conflict that got him killed.

    Oh yeah, Irene, I do not like the fact that our law enforcement personnel are forced, by necessity, to serve warrants in such a manner, but I understand why they do it. These days drug traffickers have the tendency to open fire at the drop of the proverbial hat. I do not believe it prudent to send lightly armed officers in to “poke around” when they could be facing a dangerous thug, or thugs, armed with AK-47 knockoffs, or whatever.

    Do you?

    Oh, one other thing. Keep my “ass” out of this please. Pretty please? ;)

  • Lemmie

    Cannon, is this the 911 call?

    If so, it was recorded after the fact and cannot prove or disprove whether or not the SWAT team properly identified themselves. Thus far we only have Mrs. Guerena’s word on that–unless you have a different, or more complete transcript. If so, please link to it.

    Additionally, I do not believe that anyone has stated that Mr. Guerena was shot 71 times, only that 71 shots had been fired. I agree, that is a bit of overkill on the part of the officers, but I was not there. Stress-fire might have played a role.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    ZingZing (#22), hope you are listening in. You announced that “the Constitution is just a f******* scrap of paper.”

    Here’s a perfect opportunity for you to get to know some of the more ACTIVE promoters of that point of view.

  • zingzing

    hrm? where?

    you’ll note that i also said “they “defend” their own interpretation of the constitution, which is their political beliefs.” given the history of our courts and our political battles, the constitution’s meaning is open to debate in a lot of areas. that’s what i meant by “a fucking scrap of paper.” when they “defend the constitution,” they’re “defending” their own slanted view of it. it’s fine that they have their own view, but just what offends them and what offends me (and what offends you) might be very different. don’t think they’re automatically doing you a favor, because they don’t care about you. and really, they’re just loud (at this point).

    just out of curiosity, what more do you expect them to do?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    In response to:”When a man or a woman takes an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States, that man or woman takes it seriously.”

    Your response, in #22 was: “oh, balderdash. it’s a fucking bit of paper. ” — your words, ZingZing

    Your remark was made in the context of a discussion of an encounter between “peace officers” and a citizen in his own home.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Lemmie, so how have we come to the point where standard operating procedure for delivering search warrants in certain neighborhoods is to employ teams with military training (trained to kill) to citizens who have not yet been through even the preliminary stages of the criminal justice system.

    I would say, that in terms of making neighborhoods safer, the War on Drugs (admittedly, quite lucrative for some) is a colossal failure.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    That’s a general answer, Lemmie, to your question “These days drug traffickers have the tendency to open fire at the drop of a proverbial hat…Do you [I]… consider it prudent to send lightly armed officers to poke around when they could be facing a dangerous thug…?

    There WASN’T a war going on in those neighborhoods before “the Government*” STARTED one. Now, there’s a war zone.

    Instead of peace officers, being trained, as they formerly were, to make friends with the schoolkids while walking the beat, to smooth out domestic disputes, to pull people over and chastise them for driving carelessly, maybe giving them just a warning a time or two instead of a citation, “the Government*” is bringing in these outfits with military training to keep the peace.

    Any citizen, ANY citizen, could be the enemy now.

    *”the Government” — anyone know of a euphemism I could use instead? Some see this phrase in the context of any criticism of said government, and charges of “crazy, paranoid, racist” start flying out.

  • zingzing

    “your words, ZingZing”

    yeah, but not all of them, and removed from the context i provided, not just the one you decided to read them under. that’s the nature of a paragraph. it completes a thought. if you want to start playing a game wherein you can assign whatever meaning and context you want to whatever little snippet you please, i’ll play. but it won’t be any fun, and you know it. in fact, it’s dumb.

    i’ll say it again, so this time it might stick, the constitution is a piece of paper to which people assign their own meanings. the constitution itself matters very little. the meaning a person gets out of it, which is what they “defend,” is what’s important. i don’t see them surrounding a glass-encased handwritten copy of the constitution. i see them clutching their guns and crotches.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    I know, I know ZingZing, it’s easier to defend YOURSELF against me than it is to try to defend Vanessa Guerena against Lemmie, but I’m surprised that you show no interest AT ALL in joining in THAT latter kind of fun.

    Or are you waiting for the Southern Poverty Law Center to provide direction before you comment?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    coor, that’s liable to make him mad. Have a swell day, ZingZing.

  • http://www.RoseDigitalMarketing.com Christopher Rose

    Bad as this particular case is, does it not pale into comparative insignificance next to the recent Indiana Supreme Court ruling that Hoosiers don’t have the right to resist illegal entry into their homes by the police?

    This could easily spread to the rest of the once land of the free and drive another nail into the coffin of freedom, a process that has grown wildly ever since 9/11.

  • zingzing

    “I’m surprised that you show no interest AT ALL in joining in THAT latter kind of fun.”

    if i had something to add, i’d do so, but i’ve only read about it in the article you linked. so i have nothing to add. if i get curious, i might add something. the truth of the matter probably doesn’t lie in the unambiguous views that you (or whatshisface) or lemmie seem to be claiming.

    “Or are you waiting for the Southern Poverty Law Center to provide direction before you comment?”

    har har. may you never quote anything ever again. in addition to the “context-free” game, we now have the “let’s assign random source worship” game. great. what dismal fun.

  • Cannonshop

    #46 The Indiana court ruling, and this incident, are two parts of the same whole, Chris. They’re both indicators of agencies and government run amok, no longer serving the public so much as trying to assert a de-facto caste system where those formerly entrusted to secure our rights, instead have ‘superior’ rights to mere citizens, including the right to deliver death and mayhem upon citizens at random and in violation of the same law of the land these systems (courts and police) are supposed to uphold.

  • Lemmie

    “Instead of peace officers, being trained, as they formerly were, to make friends with the schoolkids while walking the beat, to smooth out domestic disputes, to pull people over and chastise them for driving carelessly, maybe giving them just a warning a time or two instead of a citation, “the Government*” is bringing in these outfits with military training to keep the peace.”

    Are you absolutely positive that the officers involved in this incident were not trained to keep the peace in the manner you described? As far as I know they were Pina County deputies acting in a secondary role as SWAT. This seems to indicate that when they are not serving as SWAT officers, their role is to drive around in cruisers and hand out speeding tickets, respond to reports of criminal activity or domestic disputes, chat with folks in the neighborhood, etc. Irene, these are regular patrol officers with specialized training that allows them to be utilized in situations requiring such training.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Lemmie, layer upon layer of lies delivered by the Pima County Sheriff’s Office have made discovering details like that in this specific case rather a challenge. Again, from Will Grigg’s blog:

    In the immediate aftermath of the murder, Jose’s killers — in keeping with established custom — began to traduce the victim’s reputation, claiming that the slain husband and father was a violent suspect who had fired the first shot, and that a ballistic shield had probably saved the life of one of the assailants. This version of events was dutifully regurgitated by an initially uncritical local media.

    Jose’s reputation was allowed to steep in that falsehood for several days before the PCSO grudgingly admitted the truth.

    In my comment to which you refer, by the way, I was referring to the national trend, which of officers of local law enforcement being transitioned from a “peace-keeping” mindset to a “war-zone” mindset, whether the military-style training is practiced on innocent citizens by local law enforcement personnel or by federal agencies like the BATF. Cannonshop mentions the trend in the comment before yours.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    By the way, Lemmie, those turquoise words in Will Grigg’s article are called “links.” When you put your computer’s mouse over them, and left-click, you will be brought to something called “a source.”

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    ZingZing, though wrong about so many things, was right in his evaluation of ONE element of the police/paramilitary force–the element that committed this crime, the element that groups like Oathkeepers are opposing. They are bullies with a gun and power fetish. I’d add phallic, but their number includes females, unfortunately.

    They certainly deserve their day in court, though, as all criminals do. May justice be served, and after they lose the case, may the defense attorneys spend a little time investigating precedent in American law for the right of Americans to defend their homes against ALL invaders–including law enforcement.

    The news about the Hoosiers is indeed disheartening. The bitter irony is that even their NICKNAME means “Who IS yer? My home is my castle. Don’t even think about entering unless you’ve been summoned. By ME.”

  • Cannonshop

    #49 Seventy one bullets into a man who hadn’t even had time to cock his weapon and take the safety off, Lemmie, a man with no criminal record, a steady job, a wife, and kids in the building.

    These “cops” (god, how in hell did they pass the evaluations?) were at the address not to serve a warrant or make an arrest, they were primed to kill. Every indicator including the 911 call indicates that they did not follow even LOOSE procedures, did not announce who they were, they were at the house and looking to kill somebody.

    It might be interesting to find out who it was they were really after.

  • Lemmie

    # 53 Cannon, 71 shots fired, 60 hits. I already stated that I believe this was overkill on the part of the officers. It does explain, however, why the medics were held back.

    A man with no criminal record, etc. but you left out ex-Marine. Irrelevant, if you think about it.

    “These “cops”…were at the address not to serve a warrant or make an arrest, they were primed to kill…they were at the house and looking to kill somebody.”

    So, they threw a dart at a map of Tucson and then trucked on over to blow the hell out of some random schmuck?

    “Every indicator including the 911 call indicates that they did not follow even LOOSE procedures, did not announce who they were,”

    The ONLY indicator, at this point, is a statement by Mrs. Guerena that they did not identify themselves. The 911 call was placed after the incident and proves only that she was distraught and confused.

    “It might be interesting to find out who it was they were really after.”

    Interesting, indeed. I wonder what Mr. Guerena was up to–if anything–to justify a search warrant being issued against him.

    I will say this, if it turns out that he was involved in drug trafficking and, based on his actions that day, he has only himself to blame.

    If, on the other hand, it turns out that the Pina County deputies were involved in a SNAFU, then heads should roll. But, not the heads of the entry team’s point men. They simply responded to an individual pointing a semi-automatic military-style rifle at them.

    52# Irene, do you understand the intent of those precedents in that link–the blue “clickey” text–that you posted? They are to protect citizens from unlawful behavior by law enforcement officials. Serving a search warrant is NOT unlawful behavior.

    “Who IS yer? My home is my castle. Don’t even think about entering unless you’ve been summoned. By ME.”

    What you’re saying here is, that if someone is engaged in unlawful activity in their home, the police aren’t allowed to go there and arrest them?

    I’m going to assume, Irene, that you are not a criminal, but you do understand that some people are.

    Don’t you?

    At any rate, it is all moot at this point. Until the investigation is complete, and an official statement is released, anything and everything else on our parts is pure speculation.

    Perhaps we can now cease our hijacking of this particular blog and discuss the topic that SFC MAC presented? You may be interested in it, Irene, I believe it has something to do with State’s rights.

  • Cannonshop

    Lemmie, they opened fire without identifying themselves in an area which is known to have gangs like MS-13 operating, this doesn’t sound like a “Situation Normal all fucked up” condition, it reads and sounds from the EVIDENCE available like an assassination, or “hit” that went wrong. It may be that the only reason Mrs Guerena is still alive, is that the 911 operator was on the other end of the phone line.

    Wrong address, wrong guy died, but the intent wasn’t warrant service or arrest, it was to kill somebody. They had eyes-on-him, if nothing else, that means they opened fire on someone whom was clearly NOT the person they were there to see.

    as for the whole “He pointed a gun at them” defense? Bullshit, my friend, they were on his property, un-announced, in the wee hours of the morning. the overkill alone indicates the real intent of the operation, the blundering, bumbling attempts to try and re-cast this fiasco in the public, including claiming that he opened fire first, that they announced themselves, etc. all point to a SWAT team that KNEW it was where it wasn’t supposed to be, doing what they weren’t supposed to be doing, with no expectation of getting caught doing what they weren’t supposed to be doing, where they weren’t supposed to be doing it.

    A department dirty enough for this to happen, no “heads are going to roll”, minus perhaps someone coming down on them from the State level with intent to prosecute with criminal charges.

    The “new numbers” (sixty hits, 71 shots) indicates as much as anything else, that the shooters KNEW what they were shooting into, and were firing with coordination. Sixty rounds is two magazines for an M-16, Lemmie, so one shooter is doing three magazine changes, two shooters are doing one, and one, and three are firing off full or nearly-full magazines into a man-sized target in the wee hours of the morning. shall we go over the mechanics of what a high-stress environment with bad lighting does to marksmanship in a threat situation?

    The SWAT team has body-armor, the target didn’t. risking one shot to make sure you have the right address isn’t unreasonable in a state where the law asserts the right of a homeowner to home and self defense.

    Especially in a situation where you have a SWAT team executing the mission.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Deputy Ogan (after first lying to the press) already admitted that Guerena neither opened nor return fire, Lemmie.

    And even if he had:

    “An arrest made with a defective warrant, or one issued without affidavit, or one that fails to allege a crime is within jurisdiction, and one who is being arrested, may resist arrest and break away. lf the arresting officer is killed by one who is so resisting, the killing will be no more than an involuntary manslaughter.” Housh v. People, 75 111. 491; reaffirmed and quoted in State v. Leach, 7 Conn. 452; State v. Gleason, 32 Kan. 245; Ballard v. State, 43 Ohio 349; State v Rousseau, 241 P. 2d 447; State v. Spaulding, 34 Minn. 3621.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    “When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense, his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80; Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.

    “These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State, 26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State, 43 Tex. 93, 903.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Oh, dear. “the blue ‘clickey'” (it’s called a hyperlink, Lemmie) directions couldn’t have been any more clear.

  • Clavos

    Interesting, indeed. I wonder what Mr. Guerena was up to–if anything–to justify a search warrant being issued against him.

    So cops have never lied to a judge to secure a warrant? I wonder if by design, they waited until shortly before their invasion (it was way more than a simple raid) to solicit the warrant, waking the judge in the middle of the night?

  • Glenn Contrarian

    I have to agree with C-shop and Clavos – sixty hits out of seventy-one shots…that’s an execution.

    First, were the cops carrying automatics? If so, then either the one(s) who were firing at the victim had fingers that got stuck in the ‘fire’ position after the victim was already down…

    …or, if they weren’t automatics, well…you get the picture.

    That, people, was an execution. Whether the guy deserved it or not, I don’t know. But an execution it certainly was.

  • zingzing

    why did they target guerena? when you “execute” someone, you generally have a reason for doing so. even if that reason was false, why did the police think they had a reason?

  • Glenn Contrarian

    I don’t know – but just because we don’t know of a reason offhand doesn’t mean there wasn’t one. And I have to stand by what I said about it being an execution.

  • zingzing

    well, i would think the reasoning behind the killing would be important to those seeking to come to a true understanding of it. without the “why,” even if you disagree that “why,” it’s all just outrage over something you don’t understand. i’m curious as to the why, and until we know why they did what they did, even, or maybe especially if that why is unsatisfactory, none of us truly knows what they are talking about.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    zing –

    Well said.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Glenn I accepted your apology on the other thread. What do you think of Christopher Rose’s comment in #46?

    I think it’s important to be outraged by stories like this. If you’ve got the time…

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Sheriff chides media. KGUN responds. Two hours ago.

    KGUN hangs tough, starting at para 5. Good.

  • Lemmie

    63# “well, i would think the reasoning behind the killing would be important to those seeking to come to a true understanding of it. without the “why,” even if you disagree that “why,” it’s all just outrage over something you don’t understand. i’m curious as to the why, and until we know why they did what they did, even, or maybe especially if that why is unsatisfactory, none of us truly knows what they are talking about.”

    Exactly. Until the investigation is completed, and the facts released, anything and everything else is pure speculation.

    66# Thank you for the blue “clicky-click”, Irene, it sure beats the hyperbole contained in the Griggs “report”.

    Additional info

    59# “So cops have never lied to a judge to secure a warrant?”

    Clavos, of course cops have lied to obtain a warrant. There is no sense in arguing that. The potential exists; however, evidence to this effect is lacking in this particular case (or, at least, it has yet to be released).

    Anyway, I dug up a few more “clickies”. Some of the officers pictured/mentioned may have been involved in the Guerena incident.

    Pima County SWAT

    Other incidents in which this organization has played a role

  • Cannonshop

    #67 so, they failed to stop a lone murderer on a killing spree, but very (ahem) competently cut a man in his underwear in half in front of that man’s wife and child…

    Sixty Bullets, Lemmie. I broke it down for you before. Sixty into the man out of seventy-one. A man who didn’t have the strength left to thumb a 3 oz switch from “Safe” to “Fire” on one of hte most ergonomically correct platforms for that operation currently in production. They jumped him, they shot him, they didn’t expect there to be live witnesses, and after being caught in multiple lies, they’re reaching for any and every possible way to smear the victim of their little death-squad mission in order to save themselves.

    This kind of activity is not new to the Southwest (or the Southeast, or Chicago), the fact that at this point, the word has spread beyond the locality is all that is really new about it.

  • Lemmie

    Whoops. Misread the comment policy concerning URLs. Will post as http in the future. Sorry.

  • Lemmie

    #68 so, they failed to stop a lone murderer on a killing spree, but very (ahem) competently cut a man in his underwear in half in front of that man’s wife and child…”

    Mr. Guerena was cut in half? Where did you get this information, Cannon. Link, please.

    “Sixty Bullets, Lemmie. I broke it down for you before. Sixty into the man out of seventy-one.”

    Three shooters, close range, utilizing weapons with high ROF (HK maybe?) can dump 60 rounds into ANYTHING in a matter of seconds. In a stress-fire situation the trigger is likely to remained depressed until A) the magazine is empty B) the target is neutralized. If the shooting took place in a matter of seconds, these may have overlapped.

    “…after being caught in multiple lies…”

    Mr. Guerena’s weapon was set to “safe”. Who informed us of this? The liars?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Paramedics were prevented from administering help to the dying man, Lemmie, for over an HOUR. A Lifeline helicopter arrived at the scene shortly after Vanessa put in the 911 call as well. People on the scene to help were told to “stay put.”

    The shooters were trying so HARD to eliminate the possibility of there being more than one story, Lemmie. Who knows what went wrong.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Your SWAT public relations link assures us: “The Tactical Emergency Medical Support element provides emergency medical support to the entire SWAT team and suspects or victims requiring emergency medical services.”

    Your critique not withstanding, I prefer the blog that gives voice to the impressive number of victims of criminal police activity across the USA in the last few years.

  • Lemmie

    71/72# “Paramedics were prevented from administering help to the dying man, Lemmie, for over an HOUR. A Lifeline helicopter arrived at the scene shortly after Vanessa put in the 911 call as well. People on the scene to help were told to “stay put.”

    The man was shot sixty times. Paramedics can do little to assist a corpse.

    “The shooters were trying so HARD to eliminate the possibility of there being more than one story,”

    Then why didn’t the “assassins” flip the safety of Mr. Guerena’s rifle to the OFF position? Why didn’t they put Mrs. Guerena down while they were at it? Surely they could have claimed that she came at them with a butcher knife or something to that effect.

    Griggs, again. Hyperbole, scare tactics, outrage, etc. etc. etc. Great writer, but too much rhetoric. No, thank you.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Vanessa’s 911 call summoned witnesses, even though those medical personnel were prevented by Law Enforcement from saving Jose Guerena’s life. That info is not from Will’s blog. It is from the local news outlet, KGUN.

  • zingzing

    why were they trying to serve a warrant on him?

  • Lemmie

    74# “Vanessa’s 911 call summoned witnesses, even though those medical personnel were prevented by Law Enforcement from saving Jose Guerena’s life.”

    Irene, the man was shot SIXTY times. Unless all but a few of these were superficial wounds (grazes, etc.), he was more than likely deceased BEFORE the medics arrived on the scene. They can’t breathe life into the dead. IF this the case, there was NO reason to bring them (the paramedics) into the house. What would they have “witnessed” anyway? A dead man on the floor.

    75# “why were they trying to serve a warrant on him?”

    zing, suspicion of drug trafficking. They raided three additional houses in the area and claim to have confiscated drugs and cash. Though they found no drugs, or money, in the Guerena home, they claim to have removed some type of evidence (home PC, etc.) that might link him to the suspected trafficking ring.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    The attorney representing the SWAT team made that statement. It is the top news story related to the found with a Google search, posted an hour before the time of my posting this. Yesterday, and as of last night, the Sheriff’s office wasn’t talking, after a period of releasing several conflicting stories to the press. There will be a statement from Vanessa’s lawyer later.
    Vanessa displayed her husband’s Marine uniform in an interview with KGUN9, in which she claimed
    agents removed the badges from his Marine uniform and took her wedding band
    , before leaving the scene.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Providing medical help to injured suspects is SWAT policy, according to the SWAT public relations link Lemmie posted on the previous page.

    It is unconscionable that medical help who arrived on the scene after Vanessa’s 911 call were prevented from going near Jose. Why weren’t MEDICAL personnel allowed to determine if there was anything they could do to help?

  • Lemmie

    Okay, new details. I correct my statement to zing as follows: According to attorney Michael Storie, who represents the officers involved in the raid, they were searching for evidence which links Mr. Guerena to a home invasion/ drug-rip off crew. According to Storie, they found what they were looking for–“…assault rifles, hand guns, body armor and a portion of a law enforcement uniform…” This information, however, has not been confirmed by Pima County officials.

    78# “Why weren’t MEDICAL personnel allowed to determine if there was anything they could do to help?”

    Perhaps because the SWAT team medic made the determination that there wasn’t much ANYONE could do to save a man shot 60 times? Just a guess on my part, Irene, I do not know the facts and will not until the investigation is complete.

    I will say this, that if this “home invasion/ drug rip-off crew” allegation turns out to be factual, the residents of Pima County owe these officers a debt of gratitude (and Will Griggs owes them an apology).

  • zingzing

    “According to attorney Michael Storie…”

    so… they wanted to connect him to the type of crime that everyone is saying his wife may have suspected was being perpetrated against her family? that’s a bit strange. this case is eating itself. (although that would be a good reason for her to think that that was what was happening. that sentence just ate itself.)

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Had Tactical Emergency Medical Support accompanied the SWAT team (#79) , Mrs. Guerena would not have requested medical help in the 911 call she made. A dispatcher told the Arizona Daily Star that no calls requesting medical help had come from the deputies at the scene of the shooting.

    Paramedics sent in response to Vanessa’s call were forbidden to get near her husband, the Sheriff’s Department saying that they might be dealing with a “barricaded subject.” Since they fired 71 bullets at Gurena, whom they claimed to see aiming a weapon, and Mrs. Guerena says in the tape of the 911 call that the door had been opened by police, I am wondering what barrier separated the SWAT team from the “barricaded subject.”

    You are acting as the SWAT team’s advocate, Lemmie. I am taking up for the widow. Her husband’s Marine uniform is displayed near the end of the video of an interview with her (see #77), and she reports that the agents removed medals (not badges) from it and took her wedding ring before leaving the home. Federal “acquisitions agents” often take booty unrelated to the crime.

    You are also acting as Will Grigg’s detractor, Lemmie. Victims of police crimes (which very frequently go very lightly punished, or not punished at all) deserve an advocate, too,and I’m glad they have one in him. The donut jokes and other comic relief–as well as his obvious eloquence and sense of irony– make slogging through all that bad news bearable.

  • zingzing

    so the reason for the warrant, if it’s true, doesn’t phase you whatsoever, not even to the point of mentioning it, irene?

    i realize you’ve taken up a cause at this point, but have some critical doubt. i don’t know what happened, neither does lemmie, and neither do you.

    don’t go jumping whole hog based on faith in a blogger. your “hero” only has an opinion. nothing is clear.

  • Lemmie

    Hold up, Irene. I am NOT advocating Pima County SWAT except in the sense that I advocate law enforcement in general.

    A dispatcher told the Arizona Daily Star that “…no calls requesting medical help, had come from the deputies…”

    Again I ask: Why would they seek medical help for a corpse?

    Am I going out on a limb to suggest that– considering the number of bullets he had been hit with–this man was probably deceased before the paramedics even left the fire station?

    As for the video interview with Mrs. Guerena? Interesting, indeed. I wish I had watched it first.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    He wasn’t a corpse, neither when he was next to Vanessa near the open door of the house when she 911’d, nor when the deputies used the excuse that he might be a “barricaded subject” to deny access to paramedics who’d arrived in response to that call soon afterwards. Why keep the paramedics away, Lemmie, excecpt to ensure that he was “really most sincerely dead?” Clavos, Cannonshop and Glenn agree(!) that it was an execution, on page 1 of the comments. I don’t know if you’re inclined to counter that evaluation. They all claim to have experience in the military.( I’d advise against challenging that claim…um… ‘Nuff said.) The video interview with Vanessa I linked to is in #77–others may find it as interesting as you did.

    No warrant warrants an execution without trial, especially by heavily armored men who could have incapacitated Guerena without killing him, ZingZing. There’s nothing for me to add, as I’ve already established that I take the bill of rights seriously, again, on page 1. I’d feel the same way even if we were fairly certain of the culpability of this two tour Iraq veteran Marine, with nothing but two traffic violations on his record. We’re not. Military service does not necessarily equate to impeccable character, but I associate the criminal element with crimes in service of the USA (e.g.Abu Garib),not drug trafficking.

    Perhaps you’ll find another blog about crimes by LEO (law enforcement officers) more to your taste. Here’s a google search listing. (Lemmie, go ahead and advocate–I’d love to see them all have their day in court.)

    About heroes, I hope you find some if you don’t have some already ZingZing. Goodnight.

  • Lemmie

    81# “Had Tactical Emergency Medical Support accompanied the SWAT team (#79) , Mrs. Guerena would not have requested medical help in the 911 call she made.”

    According to Mrs. Guerena, the call was made immediately following the shooting. Had the SWAT team entered the home yet? I do not know. Do you?

  • zingzing

    i realize that a warrant doesn’t mean you can kill someone, irene. that’s not the question whatsoever. but you know that. the question is what happened here, and you don’t know more than anyone else.

    don’t condemn before you know the facts. if they (the swat/police) were guilty of murder, then they were guilty of murder. but with only one voice saying so, you don’t know that. i hope, if what she’s saying is true, that there was a witness to that. and if she’s saying was true, i’d hope that our justice system could find that truth, no matter if there was another witness or not.

    you, on the other hand, seem to have attached yourself to a particular point of view. what proof of this point of view do you have? faith won’t do.

  • Lemmie

    84# “He wasn’t a corpse…when he was next to Vanessa near the open door of the house when she 911’d…”

    Irene, I never claimed that he was a corpse while she was making the 911 call. How do you know he was lying next to the front door? According to what I’ve read, he was at the end of a long hall and partially obscured from the officer’s sight (after going down, presumably) by a wall or doorway.

    How do you know that the “barricaded subject” statement is an excuse to “deny paramedics access”?

    “Clavos, Cannonshop and Glenn agree(!) that it was an execution, on page 1 of the comments.”

    Irene, when you “…urge someone to accept a claim…simply on the grounds all or most or some substantial number of people (other than authorities or experts, of course) believe it, [you] commit the fallacy known as the “argument” from popularity.”–Critical Thinking, p.154., Moore & Parker, 2007, 8th ed.

    You’ve made the argument that this was an “execution”. Do you have credible evidence to support this claim?

    You’ve made the argument that there was no search warrant. Do you have credible evidence to support this claim?

  • Jordan Richardson

    Irene,

    Your passion for the plight of those experiencing injustice is admirable, but the laundry list of fallacies couched in your reasoning here is embarrassing.

    Appealing to those who call it an “execution” is irrelevant. Who cares what Cannonshop, Clavos and Glenn agree to or don’t agree to? It’s not proof.

    It was a tragedy, without question. Like the case of Robert Dzieka?ski in Vancouver, it was, without question, a case of disproportionate force. Without question, there needs to be an investigation that is conducted in a thorough manner by an independent party. It is entirely probable that SWAT botched protocol on a number of levels. That should be brought out in the trial.

    But it’s not an “execution” unless you’re using the term in the most casual sense possible. And please, don’t imagine yourself as “taking up for the widow.” This isn’t as clear-cut a case as you think it is, Irene.

    You continually discard the reason for the raid in the first place. You discard the briefing that the SWAT team was given before the operation (“That there is an organization that’s involved in drugs, home invasions, drug rip offs. Violent crimes.”).

    You discard the completely illogical stance on behalf of Guerena that “we thought it was a home invasion.” A home invasion? Involving five heavily-armed members of the SWAT team in uniform, complete with lights and sirens?

    The bottom line here is that we shouldn’t confuse outrage with facts. We can, and should, be outraged at how this operation was handled. But the victim raised a weapon at SWAT team members. What happened was a horrible, horrible thing, no doubt about it, but nothing outside of the passion and the outrage makes this case sound like a murder.

  • Jordan Richardson

    Why keep the paramedics away, Lemmie, excecpt to ensure that he was “really most sincerely dead?”

    Because it’s crime scene protocol. The argument against this is that SWAT coulda/shoulda cleared the scene quicker, but there’s really no question that protocol dictates that you don’t send in paramedics after such a violent showdown unless and until officials are sure that the scene is clear and safe.

  • Jordan Richardson

    In #88 that should read Robert Dziekanski. Formatting screwed up the accent mark. Meh.

  • Cannonshop

    #88 No, he raised a weapon at unidentified, armed strangers on his property. Given the number of times the Sherriff’s dept. has had to go back on statements surrounding this “Incident”(murder), the odds are better than good that the widow’s story (which ain’t changed much) is probably the correct version of events. I have some doubts that a Marine with combat time is going to be pointing a weapon that is still set to “safe” at ANYONE, so it is far more likely he was killed when they saw he had “a weapon” on him-and that’s assuming no criminal intent on the part of the officers.

    Now, NOT being overly generous, I would suggest rather that as soon as they had a clear sight-line on him, they opened fire. Sixty hits on a body out of seventy one shots fired indicates more of an Ambush style deployment with multiple shooters already set to carry out the killing.

    Which means it was a premeditated killing, which makes it a murder. The theft of “Trophies” (uniform items, wedding ring) indicates this was deliberate and intentional, and probably at minimum extralegal if not outright criminal.

  • Lemmie

    91# “Given the number of times the Sherriff’s dept. has had to go back on statements surrounding this “Incident”(murder)”

    They’ve retracted one statement–that Mr. Guerena fired first. Explanation for the error follows:

    “The day the search warrant was served, we reported to the media that Mr. Guarena fired at SWAT officers. This is what was understood at that time. After a more detailed investigation, we learned that he pointed his assault rifle at SWAT officers, however, the safety was on and he could not fire. This is a clear example of erroneous information being provided without careful investigation. Rather than risking the release of further information, it is imperative that we complete all aspects of this investigation.” Deputy Jason S. Ogan–Public Information Officer–Pima County Sheriff’s Office. (See #67, “Additional info” link for full story).

    Are there additional retractions that I am not aware of?

  • Jordan Richardson

    No, he raised a weapon at unidentified, armed strangers on his property

    That is debatable at best, Cannonshop. One side says that the SWAT team identified itself, used sirens and lights and knocked on the door for 45 seconds before entering the home. The other side says different.

    Suggesting that the widow’s side is the right side because of how much a complicated account has changed with new information is just irresponsible. It doesn’t prove anything.

    I would suggest rather that as soon as they had a clear sight-line on him, they opened fire.

    You would suggest that based on what?

    Sixty hits on a body out of seventy one shots fired indicates more of an Ambush style deployment with multiple shooters already set to carry out the killing.

    The suggestion that the SWAT team set out to murder Guerena and that the operation program was to kill him regardless requires a lot more than just a “suggestion” to assert. And you know it.

    The theft of “Trophies” (uniform items, wedding ring) indicates this was deliberate and intentional, and probably at minimum extralegal if not outright criminal.

    No, it doesn’t indicate that at all. It indicates that members of the SWAT team were jackasses, but it doesn’t indicate premeditation.

    Conveniently, you’re skirting the reason for the warrant and the evidence found at the scene. Was this planted to facilitate such a murder?

  • Jordan Richardson

    And here’s the thing: I’m willing to let the evidence go where it leads. If SWAT is guilty of murder, let ‘em fry. If this operation was a premeditated event to murder Guerena, so it is.

    But at this point and time, there’s no evidence to suggest this is the case. There is evidence to suggest overkill, incompetence and a host of other operational blunders. The situation was tragic, horrific and unnecessary. It was, in all probability, a result of overzealous law enforcement and those responsible for the operation should be tried accordingly.

    But it’s not murder.

  • Cannonshop

    #93 They killed a man in the presence of his family, then collected trophies. Ask yourself this question: if they were not law-enforcement officers, what would it indicate as to their psychology, and would you really want someone who thinks that way wearing a badge in your name?

  • Jordan Richardson

    They killed a man in the presence of his family

    An unfortunate, horrific, terrifying reality, absolutely. But he was allegedly crouched in the hallway with a weapon. I’ve said repeatedly now that the response of SWAT could easily be judged as overkill, harsh, incompetent, etc. The entire situation, to me, sounds like an absolute fiasco with unspeakably tragic consequences. But it doesn’t sound like murder until there’s evidence to indicate that it was. Simple as that.

    then collected trophies

    I believe I’ve already commented on this, Cannonshop.

    if they were not law-enforcement officers, what would it indicate as to their psychology, and would you really want someone who thinks that way wearing a badge in your name?

    Cannonshop, I’m not particularly noted for my sympathy or my “good feelings” with regards to law enforcement or the military. I’ve written scores of articles and essays about why I don’t support the troops, for instance, and have come up with similar views pertaining to law enforcement. I have very little by way of “advocacy” with respect to the SWAT team.

    I am convinced that the psychology of someone in such a position is deeply damaged. I would absolutely not want someone who thinks that way wearing a “badge in my name,” either.

    The problem I’m having with your argument and with Irene’s is that you’re drawing unreasonable conclusions from passion and from rightful outrage. What’s interesting in this thread is that I’m seeing calm, reasonable questions asked by the likes of zingzing and Lemmie and, in response, I’m seeing condescending remarks and emotional appeals from you and Irene. That’s not particularly convincing – or flattering.

  • Cindy

    There isn’t one ethnic group on this earth who hasn’t been kicked around or done its own kicking.

    Correction: It is misleading to state violence in terms of ethnicity rather than sex. There isn’t one culture of men which hasn’t been subjected to the inclusion of violence as part of social indoctrination.

    That is the real problem with the world. That is what destroying the world. White men have merely been the most successful bullies.

    Your view of history is distorted. I am not you. Stop attributing your blind, narrow-minded, hostile, and racist views to “Americans”.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Jordan, I could point out the ways you are factually wrong (eg, it is in fact SWAT policy to provide medical help to wounded suspects, and Lemmie unwittingly provided documentation for this fact when he linked to the SWAT public relations site) but it looks like the conversation is going in a different direction from a focus on the facts of the case, and I’d prefer not to participate any longer.

    Lemmie acknowledged that he was an advocate for law enforcement and has consistently maintained that position throughout the thread. I (and Cannonshop whom you also are scolding, Jordan Richardson) have maintained the point of view that Vanessa is not lying and that her husband was an honorable man.

    ALL my comments to Lemmie have been made in response to HIS questioning Vanessa’s veracity. The fact that you have no words of censure for him demonstrates that you, too, Jordan are taking sides.

    As for condescension, it is difficult to avoid returning same when I am in conversations with ZingZing and you, but you’ve both given me plenty of opportunities to practice this skill, and I think I’m getting better at it.

  • Jordan Richardson

    it is in fact SWAT policy to provide medical help to wounded suspects

    It is my understanding that they don’t do this if the crime scene is believed to still be compromised or if it’s not clear. I’m no expert, but I’m taking this explanation from the official explanation as to why paramedics were not permitted inside until it was much, much too late. It’s not a decision I agree with or endorse, but I’m not sure that I’m “factually wrong” when I cite the reasons that the operational team cites for not allowing medical assistance.

    I (and Cannonshop whom you also are scolding, Jordan Richardson) have maintained the point of view that Vanessa is not lying and that her husband was an honorable man.

    Yes, I know Irene. I’m well aware of your position. As a funny aside, why is it that you sometimes use the full names of conversation participants and other times do not?

    The fact that you have no words of censure for him demonstrates that you, too, Jordan are taking sides.

    That’s nonsensical and completely irrelevant.

    I’m talking strictly facts, not “sides.” You’re arguing from an emotional and passionate point of view, which, as I said, I respect.

    Lemmie may well “advocate” for law enforcement, but he’s not suggesting that the officers acted properly or that they’re in the right. He’s arguing that it’s too early to tell that they “murdered” Guerena. If I saw a flaw in that reasoning or if I believed that he was asking unfair questions, I would “censure” him too. But I’m certainly not going to oppose reasonable questions just to make it seem like I’m not taking sides in an Internet debate.

  • Jordan Richardson

    As to your suggestion that the conversation headed in a different direction from the “facts” of the case, I’d say that such a turn occurred shortly around the time you and Cannonshop started calling for the verdict before the trial and presentation of evidence was complete.

    No matter how right or justifiable the anger is in this awful case, and believe me it is, the facts exist on a completely different level.

  • Cannonshop

    #100 First, there has to BE a trial, Jordan. Not a Lawsuit, but a a TRIAL. You know, that thing that the Pima County SWAT team didn’t allow their suspect before they executed him.

    As for the facts of the case…

    The suspect:
    Two Tour in Iraq, multiply decorated Marine Corps Veteran, Works at a copper mine on one of the shittier (but better paying) shifts a man with a family can work. Full Time. ASARCO is a major national company and they run on heavy machinery, regular, random drug testing tends to be pretty much assumed at such places, as it lowers the cost of industrial insurance premiums, and most corporate types like to save money.

    our dead ‘suspect’ works a full time job, in other words. One of the better paying ones in the state of Arizona.

    Fact: Sixty bullets out of seventy one fired hit the now-dead-guy. that’s three magazine changes for an M-16 assuming the 30 round magazine. Panic-fire or gunfight-fire tends to have an accuracy considerably lower-FBI statistics have noted for years that the typical gunfight occurs at less thn thirty feet, with a less than fifty percent hit rate in TRAINED hands when a human being is the target, and return fire is occurring or expected-this is supported by Military studies as well-very few infantrymen engaged in combat actually fire their weapons, and fewer than fifty percent of the ones that do, actually hit anyone on the other end. six-sevenths of the rounds fired (rounded for ease) hit Guerena, not the wall beside him, or the wall behind him, or the wall or other objects that may have been blocking on his flanks.

    Our suspect’s criminal past prior to this “Warrant Service”: Two traffic tickets, neither one for a major infraction.

    Now, I’m not saying that it’s impossible that a guy who works in the bottom of a hole eight to twelve hours a day for good pay could NOT be the kind of criminal mastermind that needs a SWAT team to serve a warrant, I’m not even saying that a Decorated, Honourably Discharged U.S. Marine with two combat tours in a hell-hole couldn’t be. I’m not saying that a man with a wife and kid couldn’t be, either.

    But I find myself wondering at the odds against someone with all three conditions, plus no prior, felony, criminal history, could be sufficiently a threat to the community to, int he first place, WARRANT a SWAT-Team of their very own for warrant service, and second, I have to wonder what charges, exactly, are serious enough for hte team to go in without their medical support, engage and kill this man, and collect his medals and wife’s wedding ring as trophies.

    I also have to wonder at the veracity of a department that starts off with “He shot first”, then has to retract it to “He shot back”, and THEN has to retract AGAIN to admit “He didn’t shoot at all.”

    This sort of thing raises red flags all over the place, Jordan. The department also launched into criticism of local news outlets covering the case, and has refused to answer basic, ordinary questions regarding the event-questions that, under legitimate circumstances, departments tend to answer directly in order to avoid bad publicity in complex situations.

    Now, here is the other thing-the TEAM claims that they went in with full lights and announced their presence and intent. The wife states they did not, the team has lied twice outright as to the actual shooting, it is not outside the realm of likelihood that this makes three times, given the department’s behaviour in this case’s aftermath.

    I also have to wonder: what is the evidence value of Guerena’s medals and his wife’s wedding ring? What sort of case requires the taking of THOSE specific objects?

    The amount of ass-covering, and the effort to smear the widow in this situation does not lend toward giving the SWAT officers the benefit of the doubt. The DEPARTMENT’S actions indicate, more to it, that they were doing something that cops aren’t supposed to do, and killed someone for reasons other than the safety and protection of the public.

  • zingzing

    irene: “I (and Cannonshop […]) have maintained the point of view that Vanessa is not lying and that her husband was an honorable man.”

    why, exactly?

  • Lemmie

    “I also have to wonder: what is the evidence value of Guerena’s medals and his wife’s wedding ring? What sort of case requires the taking of THOSE specific objects?”

    According to Michael Storie, those items were collected by evidence technicians. You will have to pose this question to them.

    Furthermore, according to Storie, the “death squad” never entered the home (which makes sense now that additional information is being presented) and, thus, could not have collected any “trophies”.

    If you want a preview of how this case will probably pan out, see Michael Storie’s Raw Video on the KGUN website.

  • Jordan Richardson

    First, there has to BE a trial, Jordan. Not a Lawsuit, but a a TRIAL. You know, that thing that the Pima County SWAT team didn’t allow their suspect before they executed him.

    More emotional appeals based on nothing, Cannonshop. It’s getting tiresome.

    The suspect…

    More of the same. The background of the suspect has no bearing as to whether or not he was murdered by the SWAT team. It doesn’t even have bearing as to whether or not it was overkill or incompetence.

    You don’t seem to understand that it doesn’t matter if Guerena was a “good guy” or not. It only helps paint the picture as a tragedy, which, as I’ve agreed countless times now, it is.

    Sixty bullets out of seventy one fired hit the now-dead-guy. that’s three magazine changes for an M-16 assuming the 30 round magazine.

    There were five shooters. That averages out to 14.2 bullets fired per gun. When you reference “an M-16,” you need to multiply that by five.

    six-sevenths of the rounds fired (rounded for ease) hit Guerena, not the wall beside him, or the wall behind him, or the wall or other objects that may have been blocking on his flanks.

    He was in the middle of a hallway, crouching. I can’t see how trained shooters, even delivering so-called panic fire, would have missed by much. I also am not sure that there were “objects” covering him if he’s in the middle of a hallway.

    More on the suspect…

    Again, irrelevant to support what you’re claiming. How good a guy he might have been or how unjustified the warrant was does not support what you’re suggesting. It does suggest that perhaps this terrible tragedy was a case of mistaken identity. Maybe they were looking for someone else at the same house. There are countless other possibilities that the victim’s character could point to, Cannonshop, and only one of them is “murder.” The trouble with that is that there’s no other supporting evidence to justify those charges. There may well be as an investigation proceeds. Who knows.

    Bear in mind, too, that I’ve never once said that I support the warrant or the operation. I don’t know if I do because I’m not sure what the supporting evidence for or against it actually is. I’m reserving judgment on that currently.

    I also have to wonder at the veracity of a department that starts off with “He shot first”, then has to retract it to “He shot back”, and THEN has to retract AGAIN to admit “He didn’t shoot at all.”

    Yep, I agree. I’ve never said otherwise.

    But once more for the kids in the back: it’s not evidence that this was murder. Police incompetence, an inability to get stories straight or aligned properly…that sort of thing happens all the time. It doesn’t point to murder; it points to varying accounts, both official and otherwise, of a very chaotic and unnecessary operation.

    Leo Verdugo, Guerena’s master sergeant in Iraq, seems to think that it could have been a case of mistaken identity. He might be right. Again, who knows.

    As to the behaviour of the police department, the same thing happened here in Vancouver after the cops tasered Robert Dziekanski at the airport. They covered things up, changed their stories repeatedly and were eventually convicted of perjury. Good. The same thing could very well happen here as SWAT members and other officials try to cover their asses on what could well be a very botched job.

    But…it doesn’t prove that it’s murder.

    As to the team’s claims that they went in with lights and sirens, it’s their word versus the wife’s word currently. It was 9:30 am in a relatively populated neighbourhood, though, so it seems pretty weird that SWAT would elect to murder someone at such a brazen hour when there could conceivably be many, many witnesses. If the goal in this premeditated attack was to kill Guerena, why do it in such a noisy way?

    The amount of ass-covering, and the effort to smear the widow in this situation does not lend toward giving the SWAT officers the benefit of the doubt.

    I’m not. Never do. Read #96 again.

    The DEPARTMENT’S actions indicate, more to it, that they were doing something that cops aren’t supposed to do, and killed someone for reasons other than the safety and protection of the public.

    Well, what “cops are supposed to do” is really open to vast interpretation. “To serve and protect” is the motto to make us feel better about their “service,” but the lines there are getting pretty fuzzy. Cops in NY are allowed to bust into a home if they even suspect that drug evidence is being trashed, for instance.

    I know that this situation didn’t need to happen. I do not support the operation at all. I don’t support any so-called “War on Drugs.” I don’t think Guerena was a bad guy. He didn’t deserve to die, he didn’t have it coming, etc. as far as I know. But I don’t think the express intention of the operation was to murder him. There’s just no evidence to support that.

  • Crust&Peace

    Just when the hostility of racial accusation was simmering down… we need this like we all need a hole in the head. How is it that these guys can get tenured as professors, so that can spend all of their time bashing the nation, the freedoms and the system that grants each of them their education?

    What a waste of money. We need to run these cats out of the Higher Ed system. Colorado isn’t through with their Wacko Professors.

    Just when they got past Ward Churchill, now they have Tom I. Romero II, who thinks that every private property owner is a racist. DU hired the guy about a year ago, and all he can talk and write about is how bad Colorado is, that everything is run by some sinister bunch of racists. This La Raza cr@p has got to stop.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    A neighbor who heard the shooting corroborates the wife’s account, “The only sirens I heard out here were like maybe 20-30 minutes into the entire ordeal,” said David Watson.

    Watson is very familiar with gunfire and stressful situations; he’s a Vietnam combat veteran, “I want to make this as clear as possible: you only heard the announcements after you heard the gunfire?” asked KGUN9 reporter Joel Waldman. Watson quickly answered, “Yes!”

    It only got noisy after the deed was done.

  • Jordan Richardson

    Yep. There’s a buttload of conflicting information pertaining to this case. There’s no question that SWAT’s actions need to be scrutinized to the fullest extent. I don’t think anyone’s disputing that.

    I think it’s probable that SWAT didn’t properly announce themselves. I think it’s probable that Guerena may have thought he was victim of a home invasion. I think the tactics used by SWAT were absurd and tragic. I don’t think it was murder. I think it was gross incompetence, perhaps from the leadership on down, and that needs to be properly investigated to hold the right people accountable for this disaster.

    Once again, though, it’s the notion that this was “murder” that I’m disputing. I think such an accusation not only undermines the reality of the case but merely transmits it to easily-digestible chunks to support the opportunistic agendas of various political ideologues.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    104 – Jordan Richardson
    May 20, 2011 at 3:26 pm

    As to the team’s claims that they went in with lights and sirens, it’s their word versus the wife’s word currently.

    The KGUN story, quoting a neighbor who’s account matches Vanessa’s account, was last updated: May 13, 2011 6:34 PM MDT

    You’ve told us multiple times that you don’t think this was a premeditated execution, once with the helpful preface “for the kids in the back.” I get it!

    I was just fact-checking.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    whose-YER.

  • Lemmie

    911 tapes back up SWAT account.

    Speaking of 911. What is missing from the following statement that Mrs. Guerena is reported to have made early on in this story?

    “”When I came out the officers dragged me through the kitchen and took me outside, and that’s when I saw him laying there gasping for air,” Vanessa Guerena said. “I kept begging the officers to call an ambulance that maybe he could make it and that my baby was still inside.”” Arizona Daily Star, May 11, 2011.

    This conflicts with the statements she made during her video interview.

    Fact: We KNOW that she made the 911 call and was on the phone for at least a few minutes BEFORE the officers removed her from the house.

    “911: “Is law enforcement at your house, ma’am? Is law enforcement at your house? (Are they) inside or outside your residence?”

    Guerena: “They are outside, but they came inside! They were inside. They were (inaudible) going to shoot me. And, I put my kid in front of me. They were going to hit me!”–KGUN, May 16, 2011.

  • Cindy

    110 – Lemmie,

    I don’t see a conflict.

  • Cindy

    “Police incompetence” resulting in a person’s death is murder, in my view. It may be reckless murder rather than being premeditated. It may come from having too much testosterone combined with watching too many Bruce Willis movies. Dangerous not to have an outlet for conditioned brutal desire.

  • Cindy

    Once again, though, it’s the notion that this was “murder” that I’m disputing. I think such an accusation not only undermines the reality of the case but merely transmits it to easily-digestible chunks to support the opportunistic agendas of various political ideologues.

    In the favored system–that of police and state authority–if you are a participant in a crime where your victim dies during the commission of the crime, you are guilty of murder whether you acted directly or were merely a lookout half a block away.

    The state arms paramilitary forces which can then invade your home under authority, the ‘reality’ is that they may be enthusiastic and eager to exercise the force and power which is one of the appeals of the job in the first place. Such a job is known to and bound to attract individuals for whom the enforcement of their authority is titillating and the exercise of their power and dominance is desirable and justification for same is sought out.

    Giving credence to that system is also a political agenda. It is taken for granted because it is the norm. So much so that it seems be reality rather than be a challengeable political stance. Here I see it being given automatic credence. Those ‘dismissed’ as political ideologues are really nothing more than proponents of povs that question that system and its authority.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    A scenario consistent with the tapes of Vanessa’s 911 call, her video interview, and the snip from the KGUN interview with a neighbor in #106:

    SWAT arrives. Vanessa sees them point a gun at her through the window. She wakes her husband, then hides in closet with the toddler. Police break into home, shoot Jose, go out the door and reassemble outside, now with “a barricaded subject situation” to justify preventing medical help from going in. Around this time, the decision is made to commence the SWAT-is-here-light-and-siren show. Vanessa emerges from the closet (telling her child to remain there), sees her husband and calls 911 for help. She tells them the door is open. SWAT reenters house, and drags Vanessa outside while the 911 call is in progress. (The toddler is left inside; he comes out on his own later.)

    Lemmie states that her stories conflict. I am challenging that assertion.

  • Clavos

    GUERENA (wife — from 911 tapes): They were (inaudible) going to shoot me. And, I put my kid in front of me. (emphasis added).

    What kind of mother does that???

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    That quote matches the print transcript of the call during the FOX11 news story about the audio tape, which includes segments of the tape of the 911 call Vanessa made. This is at minus 30 in the video at the top of Fox news website. The words printed in yellow over this point of the video say: “They were pointing at me with a gun. I put my kid in front of me. I thought they were going to hit me.” The first and last sentences of that statement are fairly clear when I listened to them–even though Vanessa is crying hysterically at this part–but I had to listen about seven times to hear something that sounded like “kid in front of me,” but I could not aver that she didn’t say that.

    Vanessa’s statement about putting her child in front of her is not made in, but does not conflict withthe part of the raw video of Vanessa’s interview with KGUN9 in the top right-hand corner of the page, about 40 seconds in. It’s raw and sound quality is poor at the beginning of the video, but it gets clearer:

    “So uh he told me mommy can you turn on the TV so I did. So probably the volume it was like a four or five. So he was like hugging me like to say good morning, and when I saw this guy like pointing me [makes gun gesture] at the window. So I got scared, and I got like, ‘Um please don’t shoot um [waves hands back and forth in front of her] I’ve got a baby.” So I got my baby and I put my bag into the window, and I yelled Jose, Jose, uh, wake up…”

    While she certainly would have time to enhance her story between the 911 call and the interview, you may be jumping to conclusions to infer from the 911 tape that she was using her own baby as a human shield– if that is what you are implying, Clavos, by asking, “What kind of mother would do that?”(I may be the one jumping to conclusions about what you were implying.) The younger of their two children is four years old, not a babe in arms, and the elder was in school. So her saying “I put my kid in front of me” could very likely have meant she moved the child closer to the area between her and the part of the wall underneath the window, to keep him out of the line of fire.
    The video interview reference to putting a bag in the window (covering the part of the window directly above the child’s head) makes more sense as a protective measure for her child than it does as a protective measure for her, as her torso and head would have still been unprotected. That’s an alternative scenario that is also consistent with the 911 tapes by themselves, and further supported by her words and gestures in the video.

  • Lemmie

    116# “SWAT arrives. Vanessa sees them point a gun at her through the window. She wakes her husband, then hides in closet with the toddler.”

    If she is in the closet hiding, how does she know they came inside? Is this an assumption on her part?

    116# “Police break into home, shoot Jose, go out the door and reassemble outside…Vanessa emerges from the closet…sees her husband and calls 911 for help…”

    The only problem, Irene, is that is not what she said. What she said is: “When I came out the officers dragged me through the kitchen and took me outside, and that’s when I saw him laying there gasping for air,

    116# “SWAT reenters house, and drags Vanessa outside while the 911 call is in progress…”

    A 911 call that, I believe, lasted for 5 minutes, according to reports. Apparently she was on the phone for at least 5 minutes BEFORE the officers “dragged her outside”. “The wife of a Tucson man killed in a Pima County SWAT raid May 5 pleaded for five minutes with 911 dispatchers to send an ambulance for her mortally wounded husband, audio records show.–Arizona Daily Star, May 14, 2011.

    116# “While she certainly would have time to enhance her story…”

    She did not just “enhance” her story, she changed it.

    Version #1: She first saw her husband while SWAT was dragging her through the kitchen. (According to the Arizona Daily Star article, May 11, 2011)

    Version #2: She first saw her husband when she came out of the closet [and entered kitchen?-Lemmie]. (According to the KGUN Raw Video interview, 2:20-2:50)

  • Lemmie

    Oh, yeah, just be be fair. Concerning what Mrs. Guerena did with the baby. The article(s) state that she put a “bag” in the window when she saw the man with the gun. What I believe she actually said (at least as I heard it in the video interview) was that she put her “back” to the window. This indicates to me that she placed herself between the man with the gun and her baby.

  • Clavos

    Irene,

    You got my gist. Going just by the words attributed to her, I did think she used her child as a human shield for herself, and was appalled. Thanks for the explication.

  • Lemmie

    Clavos, thank you for fixing the KGUN link for me. It has been at least a decade since I’ve written in html (or any code for that matter).

    thanks again!

  • Clavos

    Lemmie, It wasn’t I, I don’t have editorial access to the comments, it was either Chris Rose or Dr. Dreadful, who are the comments editors, but it was nice of you say thanks.

  • Lemmie

    Then my thanks go out to either Chris Rose or the Doc.

    Thank you!

    Oh, and Clavos, thank you for pointing this out!

  • Jordan Richardson

    I was just fact-checking.

    I get it!

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/dr-dreadful/ Dr Dreadful

    Lemmie, you’re welcome.

    I wouldn’t have spotted it if you hadn’t left a bunch of blank carriage returns at the bottom of your comment, which I went in to remove.

    Not that I’m encouraging you to do that sort of thing…

    :-)

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/dr-dreadful/ Dr Dreadful

    BTW, you’re not this Lemmy, are you?

    Righteous dude. And leader of quite probably the loudest band on the planet (although AC/DC give them a run for their money on that score).

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Lemmie, your citations don’t describe two different versions; they describe two different events in the sequence of events I have put in prose-form below. (It is the same scenario I provided in #114, but I’ve added responses to your questions in bold.) The only thing you have established is that Jose Guerena was still alive and breathing the second time Vanessa saw her wounded husband, when she was being dragged out the door by SWAT, at least five minutes after she placed the call to 911.

    SWAT arrives. Vanessa sees them point a gun at her through the window. She wakes her husband, then hides in closet with the toddler. Police break into home, shoot Jose, go out the door and reassemble outside, now with “a barricaded subject situation” to justify preventing medical help from going in. Around this time, the decision is made to commence the SWAT-is-here-light-and-siren show. Vanessa emerges from the closet (telling her child to remain there), and sees her husband in a pool of blood, making choking sounds.She goes back to the closet (near or in the kitchen I’d suspect, yes) where her child is to make sure he doesn’t come out and see his dad like that. She calls 911 and is on the phone for five minutes when SWAT reenters house, and drags Vanessa outside while the 911 call is in progress. This is when the operators lose contact with her. As SWAT is dragging her out the door (she resists because they’ve left the child in the closet), Vanessa sees that her husband is still alive, though gasping for air. She pleads with the men to call 911 back to get help, but they refuse. (The toddler is left inside; he comes out of the closet on his own after a long time and sees his dad.)

    A hole in your “two different versions” theory is that it doesn’t account for time alone for Vanessa to call 911, unless she made if from the closet, before she’d seen her dead husband, or the open door, or knew that the cops were outside instead of inside. Isn’t the “two different points in time” scenario I’ve described (a) consistent with your citations, the 911 call, and the video, and (b) much more likely than your “she-made-up-a-bunch-of-stuff-and-then-called-911-without-ever-leaving-the-closet-to-see-if-the-stuff-she-was-telling-911-was-true” scenario?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    I’m sorry for turning the page on your Motorhead video, Dr. D., but if Lemmie goes back a page and clicks on the link, it will open a new window and he can listen to it while he reads comment 126.

  • zingzing

    “And leader of quite probably the loudest band on the planet (although AC/DC give them a run for their money on that score).”

    hardly. my bloody valentine wins on that count. i saw them a few years ago and the SOUND off this section of this song, which is called “you made me realize,” but this bit, “the holocaust,” they call it, stretches for a good 15 minutes… i heard bombs going off and fighter jets flying by, and the hair on the girl in front of me was blowing in my face and my tears were streaking into my ears, which were thankfully plugged with the ear plugs they handed out at the door (not that i put them in before this started happening). this shit reaches just below the legal decibel limit. (just below the pain threshold.)

    it’s quite ridiculous. all off a “d” chord, i hear. anyway, any claim to “loudest” must go through mbv first. and any claim for “best live show i’ve ever seen” must go through this as well. i cried a good six or seven times.

    if i could have a groundhog day, it would be that day. it was an “i love new york” day, mixed with a “i’m in love with a girl” day, mixed with “i’m going to see a band i’ve fantasized about seeing since i was 16, and they didn’t disappoint, in fact, they blew my fucking mind” day.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/dr-dreadful/ Dr Dreadful

    Well, actually, I’d always heard that The Who were the record holders as far as an actual measured concert went (126 decibels, measured the length of a soccer field away from the stage). But yeah, in that clip MBV do seem to be loud to the extent that you can’t actually distinguish anything except the wall of noise.

    I can tell you, though, that when I saw AC/DC my ears were ringing for two weeks afterwards. With earplugs.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena
  • Lemmie

    Doc, I am not THAT Lemmy. :D

  • Clavos

    zing,

    A while ago you posted that you like metal. Listen to these guys and tell me what you think?

    I don’t know squat about metal.

  • Lemmie

    126# Irene, at what point in the video interview does Mrs. Guerena state that she “went back to the closet”? You don’t have to post the link, just give me the time point where she says “I went back to the closet to check on the child [Joel] because I didn’t want him to see his father like that” (paraphrased)

    According to Mrs. Guerena, Joel said: “Mommy, I was yelling at you and you didn’t come. So I came out and saw my daddy on the floor (para).”–KGUN, Raw Video, 6:17-6:23

  • zingzing

    doc, unless the who broke the law (and thus made everyone’s eardrums shatter), there’s no way they beat my bloody valentine. but go check out some of mbv’s other tunes. they’re not all wall of noise. that bit IS a wall of noise, but knowingly so. “loveless” is one of the most beautiful albums ever made.

  • zingzing

    clavos, i do like metal, but like every fringe, i demand something truly transcendent out of it. as pompous as that may sound, i don’t think “those guys” make it. too many signifiers, not enough doing something with them. metal is a great live format. over all the ugly, there’s this beautiful harmonic thing happening, and that’s where i get on board. black metal is the shit, but it’s hard to reproduce in the studio.

  • zingzing

    doc: “126 decibels”

    mbv hit 128.9 dB reportedly on one night, if you want to throw out numbers. their soundsytems are tested for much higher, and i tell you they got quite painful. but what you hear on that video versus what you hear in person is quite different. i was a good 10 or 15 rows back and my shirt was rippling from the force of the sound. i’ve never experienced anything like it.

    go listen to loveless if you like guitar rock. you won’t believe what a guitar can do. (and no overdubs, the main guy says. i don’t know if i believe him.)

  • Jordan Richardson

    In terms of sheer insistent volume, I haven’t been able to beat Sunn O))). They routinely drop 120-125 decibels of pure drone sickness.

    KISS apparently dropped 130 dB in Ottawa in July of 2009. Ouch.

  • Cindy

    Lemmie does not get it. Lemmie is inventing scenarios out of his own imagination. There is no conflict. Whether it happened exactly as Irene suggested or not. You are still imagining a conflict with statements that do not contain one.

    I was once at the mercy of a Lemmie-style thinker. A refrigerator at our company which contained some flammable chemicals caught fire–really it just started smoking. The “investigator”, who had a bunch of CSI stickers all over his kit, claimed we must have set the fire as there was a dent in the floor in the shape of a circle where we must have put some explosive chemical to set off the hoped for fire. This guy was serious and increasingly hostile based on his belief and his position that we were criminally responsible arsonists.

    Long story short–our own insurance company sent a competent investigator, who cleared us. And we discovered when the soot was cleaned that the dent which was “proof” of arson was actually old and painted over.

  • Cindy

    BTW Lemmie,

    Since you assign a lack of credibility based on what you perceive to be a change in a person’s story, what do you make of the Pima County Sheriff’s Dept, which factually changed its stories multiple times?

    Do you find they lack credibility because of those changes?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Lemmie, you are asking the kinds of questions a lawyer would ask in a cross-examination. A truthful person on the stand should be able to “fill in the blanks” to the satisfaction of the jury and judge.

    None of the questions you have asked so far couldn’t be answered in a way consistent with the stories presented. Each time I’ve answered, you’ve responded, not with an acknowledgment that it indeed, might have happened that way (CLAVOS DID THIS I SEE–THANKS FOR READING CLAVOS, AND YOU’RE WELCOME), but instead, you’ve responded with more cross-examination questions.

    The thing is, your questions are getting weaker and weaker. They are questions that a person, after watching the video interview ONE time, would be able to answer without having to make the effort to connect any dots at all.

    So, I won’t be answering any more questions, Lemmie, although I suspect you’ll post 8-10 more of them while I’ll be going about my Sunday afternoon doing other things.

  • Clavos

    zing, indulge me for a bit more, please? As I said, I’m totally ignorant of the genre, and don’t really like it, so I’m also ignorant of the criteria, and by extension, the language.

    What are “signifiers?”

  • Lemmie

    140# Irene, did you watch the full version of Micheal Storie’s interview? According to him, evidence suggests that Mrs. Guerena made not one, but two phone calls–one to 911; the second to a person in the other house that was raided.

    138# “Lemmie does not get it.”

    Cindy, I do “get it”. Irene is suggesting that Mrs. Guerena went to the closet twice and that this explains the apparent conflict in her stories. All I am asking for here is that Irene provide credible evidence to back up this assumption.

    Everyone else: Sabbath, Maiden, Dio, Judas Priest, Accept, KISS!, etc, etc, etc. YEEEEE OWWWWW!

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    Cindy I didn’t want to cut out without saying, Hi. It’s a beautiful day outside. There really are creeps in law enforcement, and they continue to get away with abusing the people they are supposed to protect.

    Keep on pressing for the truth. See ya!

  • zingzing

    clavos: “What are “signifiers?””

    given the construction of your question and the fact that firefox seems to think “signifiers” is not a word, i wondered if i had simply made the word up. weird what the brain does to you at times.

    anyway, metal does have a big range, but it necessarily depends upon some cliched elements, like the growled vocals, the ultrafast rhythmic guitar strumming, and bpms that hover around 200. (there are more of these cliched elements, and bands don’t have to employ them all, or any of them really, but like any other genre, metal has its stylistic tropes.)

    i like metal when bands play with those elements, but do something extraordinary with them. napalm death took the bpm thing to its logical conclusion, with the drumbeats sounding like an incomprehensible blur, that, if taken as 4/4, probably were around 400 bpm. liturgy likes to play with the guitar harmonics, which when you’re playing at very high speed, can take on a whole new roll in the sound spectrum, much like it does in classical minimalism. mick barr makes guitar wankery with a purpose… he flashes some amazing technique, but does to make a larger point about showing off.

  • zingzing

    “According to him, evidence suggests that Mrs. Guerena made not one, but two phone calls–one to 911; the second to a person in the other house that was raided.”

    hrm. curious. i wonder if irene can answer why she did that… after all, she watched “the video interview ONE time,” so she should have all the answers by now. maybe she was innocently calling a neighbor (seems kinda foolish and useless to do so, but whatever), or maybe there really is something that connects the raided houses together. it’s all just speculation at this point.

  • Clavos

    zing,

    Thanks! I think I understand (at least a little bit) more about metal now.

    Full disclosure: two of the four youngsters in that band (the vocalist [growler?] and the lead guitarist) are soon to become my step sons, so I’m trying to learn what I can, because the boys’ lives are centered on the band and its music.

    Anecdote which might amuse you: I took my fiancee and two of her three boys to the Bahamas on the boat last summer. Before we left, the guitar player asked if he could bring his guitar with him, to which I replied, “only without the amp.” So the kid went out to a pawn shop and found a decent acoustic guitar for a price he could afford and brought that guitar instead. One afternoon he was playing it, and the melody he was playing really sounded very cool and mellow to me, so I asked him what he was playing. Turned out it was one of their songs, at which point I realized that, strip away all noise and growling, there actually is some pretty nice music in there sometimes.

    Just sayin’

  • zingzing

    heh. i thought there was something behind your rather unnatural curiosity. the band certainly has instrumental talent and maybe they have other songs that would appeal more to my rather out-there taste in metal. metal is a very insular world in a lot of ways. it has a strange relationship to tradition. those that are self-described “metalheads” clearly love that tradition, and they get something out of it that i don’t.

    case in point: in of my favorite black metal bands got booed off stage, not for their music, but because they showed up wearing jeans and t-shirts instead of trench coats and corpse paint. it’s a strange little world.

    brian (aka big guppy) would be the one around here to ask about metal. he’s got his own taste in it, which i would say is a little more open to the parts of metal music that i don’t particularly care for.

    that said, you should check out the adult swim show “metalocalypse” for a funny primer on metal’s more cliched cliches. and the documentary film “until the light takes us” if you want to scare the shit out of yourself.

    then go check out some xasthur (the earlier, the better, i say) and orthrelm’s “OV,” which i think is one of the best out-there metal albums ever. jesu is one of the most beautiful metal-ish bands out there, but he does as much as he can to annoy metalheads. i could go on. metal’s so awesome.

  • troll

    congratulations Clavos

  • Clavos

    Gracias, zing. My first wife (who, as you may recall, died two years ago) and I never had kids (wanted to, but couldn’t), so at this stage of my life, it’s a little intimidating on that score. Fortunately, they’re good kids.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    All the best, Clavos :)

  • zingzing

    i thought about that, clavos… i just didn’t realize it was two years ago already. time does fly by. well, good to hear that you’re back on your romantic relationship feet and have found new happiness. but yeah, i’d bet that the prospect of kids would be a bit daunting. “you’re never ready,” they say. best of luck on that front. do some metal namedropping if you familiarize yourself with it a bit more. mutual appreciation of music is the bedrock of many of my relationships. even my mother and i, after a bit of a rough patch, managed to repair and strengthen our relationship through music.

    my brother (well, his wife,) had a kid 3 days ago. first time unclehood for me. the kid’s in the icu at the moment… was having some trouble breathing this morning and turned gray. they’ve got him stabilized at this point, and have ruled out 2 of the worst possible reasons (heart defect, infection), and are pretty sure it’s just apnea, which is common in premature births (he as born at 36 weeks), and sure clear up within a few weeks time. still, it’s all a bit hairy now.

  • Clavos

    Congratulations on becoming an uncle (“unclehood” I like that), that I’ve been for more than thirty years; it’s pretty cool: you get all the good with little of the bad. Enjoy.

    Small world department: My fiancee is a peds nurse with 25 years clinical experience in NICUs. Oddly, we were talking about apnea in preemies just the other day (boy, am I learning a BUNCH of new stuff!). For the past several years she’s been teaching nursing and isn’t doing clinical work anymore.

    Thanks for the advice on familiarizing myself with the music, it’s good advice and I’ll do it.

  • zingzing

    i will enjoy it. i had a crazy uncle who used to take my brother and i “almigator hunting” in the swampy bay next to his lake cabin up in minnesota. i plan on being the crazy uncle, because having a crazy uncle is pretty damned necessary, i say.

    yeah, from the symptoms to the timing of the onset of those symptoms, apnea of prematurity seems to be the correct diagnosis. luckily, it takes care of itself and causes no longterm effects. but fuck if a limp, grey 2-day-old isn’t a terrifying sight. they should have warned him this was a possibility, although i guess that would have made him paranoid (luckily, his wife is pretty zonked out on percocets still, so she’s not as overly excitable as, say, my mother, who is driving me bonkers because she’s putting on a brave face for my brother, which i guess is necessary… but i have to be the sounding board for all the rest of it).

    here’s a song by liturgy, who is one of my favorite newer metal groups. they are pretty divisive within the metal community. some call them “hipster metal.” while it does contain the rather annoyingly cliched “metal vocals,” it also shows a band who is searching for beauty, and while no video sound recording equipment can quite capture the harmonics floating above the sound, the chunky riffage and the higher elements of the guitar sound can be heard, which is about as you’re going to get. (unfortunately, not even their studio albums are able to properly replicate their live sound, which comes across as the metal equivalent of the music of the spheres.)

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    For the record–actually it’s already in the record, comment #116, first paragraph–

    Oh never mind.

  • Cindy

    Congrats to Step-dad Clav and uncle zing. Hiya to Irene :-) and a cutie just for troll.

  • Lemmie

    146# “Full disclosure: two of the four youngsters in that band (the vocalist [growler?] and the lead guitarist) are soon to become my step sons, so I’m trying to learn what I can, because the boys’ lives are centered on the band and its music.”

    Clavos, dude, congratulations on becoming a parent. It is a great feeling, but buckle up and get ready for a rocket ride.

    Your sons will definitely familiarize you to this “new” kind of music. Oh, yeah. I’m glad mine takes more interest in going to the range and putting a few rounds through the Mosin. I do not know if I could take the noise both there AND at home. :)

    RIP, Ronnie James Dio (I did not cry when he passed, but I sure felt like it)

  • lac denis

    No one sees a problem with this? We can break responsibility into layers. One guy has the intelligence. One guy gets the court order. One guy gives the police order. One guy drives over. Another few guys make entry. One guy starts firing. Everyone else starts firing. One guy dies. Now, who is held responsible for a death. If I were to accidentally kill someone I would wind up in prison and lose my job, family, home, and everything I have worked for my entire life. With this system it creates spreading blame and pointing fingers which leads to a slap on the wrist and maybe the loss of a job. The only punishment is monetary. This is unacceptable. Each individual needs to be held individually responsible as if they were wholly responsible. This will prevent hasty warrants like this one.

  • Lemmie

    “We can break responsibility into layers. One guy has the intelligence. One guy gets the court order. One guy gives the police order. One guy drives over. Another few guys make entry. One guy starts firing. Everyone else starts firing. One guy dies. Now, who is held responsible for a death.”

    A problem with this analysis is that one person is left out–the individual who broke the law and started the ball rolling. I would say that this person is probably the responsible party.

  • PR

    LaRaza IS A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION THAT WANTS TO OVERTHROW THE U.S. GOVERNMENT. ALL SUPPORTERS OF LaRaza SHOULD BE ARRESTED AND TRIED AS TERRORISTS.

  • April

    Great article. Also note — blacks are still selling blacks into slavery! Check out: American Anti-Slavery Group based in Boston MA. my husband used to be in advertising and did pro bono work for them. I was shocked to learn that CURRENTLY many blacks in Africa are forced into slavery: sexual, work slaves, etc. AND, nobody talks about it, but it’s mostly the BLACK MUSLIMS WHO ARE DOING IT!!!! This is where political correctness has brought us — too many are afraid to speak the truth for fear of being labeled racist. Who cares?!? These people need our help…check out the website.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/irene-athena/ Irene Athena

    I owe SFC MAC an apology for assuming that she was just another anti-Latina, anti-Vanessa voice from Tucson in the wake of Jose’s death. Seeing that I cared enough about what was happening to Vanessa, I should have written my own article, or at least introduced the other news from Tucson in a more gracious manner. Instead, I behaved like a misguided SWAT team myself.