Alan K. Henderson's Weblog

Journalist Andy Ngo was assaulted during the protest.

This Mitt Romney tweet did not age well.  The guy can size up Russia, but he can't recognize domestic terrorism when he sees it?

Labels: Crime

Headline: Woman stabs husband with squirrel for not buying beer Christmas Eve.

Labels: Crime

When your blood alcohol exceeds the Major League Baseball batting average by a wide margin, you have had too much to drink.

Labels: Crime, Culture

From Cathy Shaidle: Raining on the Nelson Mandela Parade.

Apartheid was tyranny. So was the Mandela-led terrorist organization that "carried out terror attacks at shopping centers, movie theaters and other civilian targets, not just 'establishment' ones like courts and banks."

A reminder that the bad guys' enemies often include other bad guys.

Labels: Crime, History, Politics, World

Item one: New York Daily News reports, "The medical examiner found two injuries on Martin’s body: the fatal gunshot wound on his chest and broken skin on his knuckles, according to WFTV." If Zimmerman had assaulted Trayvon before Trayvon assaulted Zimmerman, the medical examiner would have found other injuries.

Item two: Zimmernam received multiple images to the head. According to Business Insider: "Forensic pathologist Vincent Di Maio...told jurors Tuesday he saw evidence of at least six impacts on Zimmerman's head. He also said those blows were likely the result of severe force, backing up Zimmerman's claims he killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in self-defense. The Blaze has photos of the injuries taken on the night of the shooting.

Item three: Trayvon was on top, according to forensic and eyewitness evidence. CBS reports Dr. DiMaio's testimony: "If you lean over someone, you notice the clothing tends to fall away from the chest..If instead you're lying on your back and someone shoots you, the clothing is going to be against your chest." According to the Las Vegas Sun, witness Jonathan Good testified that the guy in dark clothing (Trayvon) was on top of the guy in the red jacket (Zimmerman).

This combination of evidence is wildly inconsistent with the claim that Zimmerman instigated the attack. He couldn't have dealt first blows unless he pistol-whipped Trayvon's knuckles. He couldn't have had his head pounded into pavement if he'd shot Trayvon first. He wouldn't have given Trayvon the time to pound his head into concrete SIX TIMES (at least) if he'd simply pulled the gun on Trayvon before the scuffle began - and I have a hard time imagining anybody lunging at a guy who's just pulled a gun on him. Zimmerman's claim to self-defense is supported by powerful physical evidence and supported by at least one eyewitness.

Labels: Crime

Hot Air reports ten types of questions that were asked of "tea party" and "patriot" groups filing for tax-exempt status. The last one is barking insane - officials asked some groups to project future revenues and expenses for the next three years. The Office of Management and Budget can't even make those kinds of projections - you expect average citizens to do any better?

Labels: Crime, Politics

One of the lefty excuses for dismissing the Benghazi scandal is that it happened a long time ago. Didn't they pursue Iran-Contra for years and years after it became "a long time ago?" And the funding of the Contras ultimately saved lives. We don't know how many, but we do know the murderous legacy of Communism.

Labels: Crime, Politics, War on Terror

Seattle May Day Riots of 2012.

Seattle Anti-WTO Riots of 1999.

Labels: Crime, History, Politics

And they were right!

Missouri Governor Jay Nixon repeatedly denied knowing anything about Missouri illegally sharing its citizens private CCW information with the federal government, even after his own head of Missouri Highway Patrol contradicted him in a public hearing. Now we’ve learned that Nixon not only knew about the violation of Missouri law, but he was thanked in a letter by Janet Napolitano:

Labels: Crime, Politics

See my 2003 post on the anniversary of the Waco apocalypse.

Labels: Crime, History, Politics

Remember how folks were running wild with speculations that the once-obscure Aryan Brotherhood was behind the Kaufman County prosecutor killings? The case has taken a wildly different turn.

Labels: Crime

Colorado House of Representatives Rep. Joe Salazar is not overjoyed at the thought of armed women.

Randolph Roth, Ohio State University history professor says: "As I tell my female friends, as we move towards equality… you have start to killing more people...If you want to get rid of this gender business, you’ve got to start killing."

Labels: Crime, Education, Politics

NRO has an interesting article about Bowling Green professor Timothy Messer-Kruse's recent study into the incident. The traditional story goes like this:

[A] gathering of anarchists near Haymarket Square turned into a fatal bombing and riot. Although police never arrested the bomb-thrower, they went on to tyrannize radical groups throughout the city, in a crackdown that is often called America’s first Red Scare. Eight men were convicted of aiding and abetting murder. Four died at the end of a hangman’s noose. Today, history books portray them as the innocent victims of a sham trial: They are labor-movement martyrs who sought modest reforms in the face of ruthless robber-baron capitalism.

What catches my eye is that prominent historians somehow overlooked one of the most crucial original sources (emphasis added):

[Messer-Kruse's] first step was to consult the conventional scholarship - works published by labor historians Henry David in 1936 and Paul Avrich in 1984. “I thought it would be easy to learn what happened,” he says. Yet neither account satisfied him. Then the Internet came to the rescue: Messer-Kruse discovered that the Library of Congress and the Chicago Historical Society had just digitized a large collection of material on Haymarket, including a transcript of the trial. He slogged through thousands of pages, consulting other primary documents to gain a sharper picture of what lay buried in the historical record. Along the way, he realized that earlier researchers had not consulted this transcript. Instead, they had relied on an abstract of the trial prepared by defense lawyers, drawing their conclusions from a flamboyantly prejudiced account of the bombing and its aftermath. “The best source had been hiding in plain sight,” says Messer-Kruse.

Read the whole thing.

Labels: Crime, History

ABC headline: Chicago murder rate far worse than during Al Capone 'gangland' days.

(Link via Instapundit)

Labels: Crime, History

Until they get hold of your emails.

Irving Mayor Beth Van Duyne is calling for an investigation into the actions of City Manager Tommy Gonzalez.

A News 8 investigation Thursday night raised questions about e-mails in which Gonzalez appears to openly solicit sports tickets and other favors from parties doing business with the city.

According to Irving Weekly, Gonzalez makes "$428,000 a year in salary, benefits and incentives."

Update That Irving Weekly article dates back to June 26, 2009 - two three and a half years ago. In a January 31, 2013 article, WFAA.com places the estimate at $450,000.

Update Math error corrected.

Labels: Crime, Politics

We know a little about the assailant's background, and it goes without saying that anyone who engages in a mass shooting has deep psychological problems. But investigators may never know the motive behind the shooting that took the lives of 20 children, six school officials, and the one person who could tell us the most about Adam Lanza - his mother.

NRO contributor D. J. Jaffe has suggestions on what Federal and state governments can do to improve policy regarding those with mental disorders.

Every time a mass shooting occurs, a lot of kneejerk reactions turn to the panacea of gun control. The problem is that its effect is the opposite of what is intended. Strict gun control has led to an increase of violent crime in the UK. Strict gun control in Norway did not prevent one of the world's worst mass shootings. Crazy homicidal people do not obey laws, including gun laws. And outright prohibition would only foster black markets, a new source of revenue for organized crime.

Update: John Fund explores the history of mass shootings.

Labels: Crime, Politics

Michelle Malkin reports on the recent union thuggery in Michigan. Anybody remember Kenneth Gladney? Never travel alone to a protest. If possible, bring a martial artist with you. And a first aid kit. And a video camera. There's a cash reward for turning in the guy who assaulted Steve Crowder.

Labels: Crime, Politics

A Hurst attorney's office was targeted.

Labels: Crime

Adams offers a what-if scenario: stockholders learn that a successful CEO had murdered a guy to get ahead in his career.


[T]he CEO doesn't get convicted because his clever attorney gets him off on a technicality. Assume in this hypothetical situation that the public correctly believes the CEO killed a guy to advance his career. Should the board of directors allow the superstar CEO to keep his job? Or is killing a guy to advance your career always a firing offense?
In a second hypothetical, Adams replaces the CEO with with Barack Obama. Afterward, he makes this assertion:


I predict that every one of you favored firing the hypothetical CEO for killing a guy to get ahead. My second prediction is that every Republican reader of this blog favored firing President Obama in the hypothetical and imaginary case of him murdering a citizen to get elected. My third prediction is that supporters of President Obama will quibble with the hypothetical example, or my comparison to the CEO, or say President Obama is still a better option than Romney. In other words, for most supporters of President Obama, I don't think there is such a thing as a "firing offense." Instapundit excerpts this portion of Adams' article:


Personally, I’d prefer death to spending the final decades of my life in prison. So while President Obama didn’t technically kill a citizen, he is certainly ruining this fellow’s life, and his family’s lives, and the lives of countless other minor drug offenders. And he is doing it to advance his career. If that’s not a firing offense, what the hell is?

Who is this fellow doing jail time for the sake of Obama's career? I immediately thought Adams was reacting to the arrest of Innocence of Muslims producer Nakoula Basseley Nakoula. But that's not it.

Back to Adams' article:


For the record, President Obama did not technically kill anyone to get elected. That was just a hypothetical example. But he is putting an American citizen in jail for 10 years to life for operating medical marijuana dispensaries in California where it is legal under state law. And I assume the President - who has a well-documented history of extensive marijuana use in his youth - is clamping down on California dispensaries for political reasons, i.e. to get reelected. What other reason could there be?
The citizen is Aaron Sandusky (not likely to be related to America's most evil sports figure), owner of G3 Holistic, which was prosecuted by Federal authorities. This excerpt from the linked HuffPo article is relevant to Adams' outrage (emphasis added):


Throughout his first campaign, Obama had said he wouldn't use federal resources to circumvent state laws about medical marijuana. During a 2009 press conference, Holder followed up on that promise, saying that federal raids on medical marijuana dispensaries would be coming to an end unless the shops violated both state and federal law.

It appears that the State of California didn't press any charges, but to be absolutely sure on that score that's the the first question I'd ask an FBI spokesperson. I'd follow up with more questions. Did the federal charges stem from activities that G3 engaged in that other dispensaries do not? If so, what were those activities? If not, are all California-licensed dispensaries vulnerable to federal prosecution?

It will be difficult for many Romney supporters to sympathize with a medical marijuana grower. A lot of folks have a hard time imagining that a) marijuana really does have medical benefits, and/or b) California's system adequately keeps medical marijuana away from recreational outlets. Neither of those is the issue at hand. Sandusky was assured by public remarks by Candidate Obama and later by his Attorney General that his line of work would not get him into federal trouble. If there's some issue unique to G3 Holistic we need to hear about it. In any case, Obama and Holder have a lot of 'splainin to do. Government officials, especially those charged with prosecuting it, must be honest about what the law is and isn't. For either of them to lie about a citizen's standing with the law would be utterly evil.

Labels: Crime, Politics

The film Innocence of Muslims came to the attention of the Islamic world on September 6, when it was first reported by an Egyptian daily newspaper. A clip was televised on Salafist TV station al Nas on the 8th. Protests erupted in Egypt.

But did the film have anything to do with what happened in Libya?

The Washington Post has a chronological list of statements made about the attacks. Early on we were told that spontaneous protests over Innocence of Muslims sparked the Libyan attacks.

For instance, on September 16, Susan Rice claimed: "Based on the best information we have to date ... it began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo."

But on September 20, Margaret Brennan of CBS News reported: "Witnesses tell CBS News that there was never an anti-American protest outside of the consulate. Instead they say it came under planned attack. That is in direct contradiction to the administration’s account."

Who do we believe - Rice, or eyewitnesses? Since she also made the laughable claim of "a substantial security presence with our personnel and the consulate in Benghazi," I vote for the eyewitnesses.

We were also told that the administration didn't know early on whether or not it was a terrorist attack (as opposed to a mob action). On September 19, Mathew Olsen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, stated, "What we don't have at this point is specific intelligence that there was a significant advanced planning or coordination for this attack."

But now the White House says it knew within 24 hours that it was a terrorist attack.



Did the White House have any intelligence prior to September 11 that an attack against the Libya consulate might be in the works? Kim Sengupta of The Independent reports, "According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and "lockdown", under which movement is severely restricted."

Later that day (September 14), Jay Carney responded: "I have seen that report, and the story is absolutely wrong. We were not aware of any actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent. That report is false."

On its website on September 6, the Overseas Security Advisory Council had posted a memo stating that "OSAC currently has no credible information to suggest that al-Qa’ida or any other terrorist group is plotting any kind of attack overseas to coincide with the upcoming anniversary of September 11." The blog Speak With Authority reports that the memo was scrubbed, some time between the 8th and the 12th. Why?

Congressional leaders of both parties want answers regarding the already-established misinformation. Most troubling are the allegations reported in The Independent that the administration had "actionable intelligence" (in Carney's words) prior to the attacks, contrary to claims by Carney and the OSAC memo. I would hope that Kim Sengupta's sources would come forward and tell us what they knew and when they knew it.

If the film didn't sparked the Libya attacks, what did? Sengupta states: "There is growing belief that the attack was in revenge for the killing in a drone strike in Pakistan of Mohammed Hassan Qaed, an al-Qa'ida operative who was, as his nom-de-guerre Abu Yahya al-Libi suggests, from Libya, and timed for the anniversary of the 11 September attacks."

Labels: Crime, Politics, War on Terror