Michael Baisden and the Assault on Black Radio: A Question of Leadership l Bob Law, former Vice President of Programming at New York’s WWRL radio

Michael Baisden and the Assault on Black Radio: A Question of Leadership

  By Bob Law
May 17, 2013

We are witnessing the very serious decline of Black radio in general and Black owned radio in particular.  This is happening at a time when Blacks can ill afford to be without voice in the marketplace of ideas.

It is important to take into account the factors that have made Black radio so vulnerable. Two Major contributing factors to the demise of Black owned radio are the 1990 Bill Clinton telecommunications ACT, and the bias inherent in the radio ratings system, a system whose incorrect information has consistently deprived Black radio of a fair share of advertising revenue, leading to the financial demise of a number of Black owned radio stations throughout the nation.With the hateful indifference to Blacks that dominates so much of what is considered mainstream media, Blacks must have access to social, political, esthetic and cultural expressions that are born of the Black experience in the world.

It is the Federal Communications Commission, however, where these destructive factors find their greatest support. One of the reasons that these and other unfair business practices persist is that the mega corporations, when taking advantage of Black stations that find themselves forced into irreversible decline, are assured that the FCC will grant them the stations broadcast license, in spite of what often appears to be unethical and perhaps even illegal behavior.

The mega media corporations in their rampage to consolidate and dominate all media markets have been able to strip the FCC of all rules and guidelines, making it impossible for members of the general public and independent station owners to have legal standing when appealing to the FCC to protect the air waves from mega corporate take overs.

Recently, Federal Communications Commissioner Mignon Clyburn standing on her own, blocked the commission from literally sneaking through additional rules changes that would have allowed further media ownership by Rupert Murdoch without giving the public ample time to review and comment. We applaud commissioner Clyburn’s integrity.

It is Congress however, that has oversight over the FCC, and it is Congress that must restructure the Commission, and since it is the Black community that has so much at stake, on Dec. 6, 2012 in our capacity as representatives of a putative class of African American citizens, Bob Law, Betty Dobson, Michael North and New York City Councilman Charles Barron appealed to the Congressional Black Caucus to place the FCC on the congressional agenda for 2013. We went directly to the then chair of the caucus, Emanuel Cleaver, with an open letter to the CBC office in Washington D.C. and as instructed by his Chief of staff, an email of the same letter to his district office in Kansas City.

Our efforts to engage the CBC were freely dismissed. We also emailed the letter to the New York congressional delegation, Charles Rangel, Yvette Clark, and Gregory Meeks, all of whom ignored us. The letter was hand delivered to Congresswoman Barbra Jackson Lee, of Houston Texas. To date the CBC has ignored this request coming from respected members of the Black community.

On the occasion of Martin Luther King’s birthday, Marcia L. Fudge, the new chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, announced that in the spirit of Dr. King, the CBC must commit itself to the fight for the rights of all people. This interpretation of Martin King comes at a very strange time.

When you consider that Blacks have the highest unemployment rate of all ethnic groups, the highest debt, the lowest median family income, the most dysfunctional schools, the highest incarceration rate, a street violence that is of epidemic proportions prompting a growing number of African Americans to even urge the president to address the needs of Blacks head on.

At this time, when their own constituents need them the most, the CBC ignores a direct appeal from Blacks, and according to chairwoman Fudge chooses instead to chase the broad ambiguous notion of securing everyone’s “version” of the American dream. As though the needs and concerns of Blacks do not qualify as a legitimate version of the American dream.

Were it not for the courage and commitment of Maxine Waters, the CBC would have no relevance at all. Nonetheless, the CBC overall raises significant questions for African Americans. At this point, can we really afford leadership, both elected and appointed, that is so befret of the skills and vision needed to move Black people forward?

It was Frantz Fanon, in his classic study “The Wretched Of The Earth” who pointed out that a deserving people, a people conscious of its dignity, is a people that understands and insist that the government and the political parties are to serve the interest of the people. Fanon says that ultimately, a government or a party gets the people it deserves, and sooner or later, a people gets the government leadership they deserve.

The overall condition of Black Americans remains bleak as long as we tolerate totally inadequate leadership. It is time to replace those leaders and elected officials who offer no vision or strategy to actually move Blacks forward. As long as we leave these politicians in place, we may be getting what we deserve!

Bob Law served as the Vice President of programming at New York’s WWRL radio for 3 years. Prior to that, he was the host of NIGHT TALK, the nation’s first nationally broadcast daily Black call-in show on the National Black Network for two decades. He is currently chairman of the board of the Black Spectrum Theatre in Queens, New York, and has begun a new career in filmmaking. His first film Saying it Loud, a documentary about the power and significance of Black radio, is being well received by audiences around the country.


Promoting the Dignity of the Invisible and Marginalized | Open Society Foundations

See on Scoop.itOUR COMMON GROUND News Board •● ☥●• The Third Eye Parenthesis

The 2013 Soros Justice Fellows work on behalf of constituencies often given little voice or visibility.

OUR COMMON GROUND Omnibus‘s insight:

Congrats to all of the Soros Justice Fellows who have an opportunity to make vital contributions to the field of criminal justice reform.

See on www.opensocietyfoundations.org

Private Prison Profits Skyrocket, As Executives Assure Investors Of ‘Growing Offender Population’

See on Scoop.itOUR COMMON GROUND Informed Truth and Resistance

A major U.S. private prison operator known for inmate abuse, violations, and disregard for the truth reported a 56-percent spike in profit in the first quarter of 2013, due in part to its new strategy for drastically reducing its taxes, the…

OUR COMMON GROUND Omnibus‘s insight:

GEO Senior Vice President John Hurley assured investors during the call:

We have a longstanding partnership with the Federal Bureau of Prisons, the United States Marshal Service and US Immigration and Customs Enforcement or ICE. … We continue to see meaningful opportunities for us to partner with all three of these federal agencies, notwithstanding the various issues with the federal budget, which we believe will have no material negative impact on our business. The federal bureau of prisons continues to face capacity constraints coupled with a growing offender population.

See on thinkprogress.org

The Reactionary Nature of Black Politics l Pascal Robert

The Reactionary Nature of Black Politics

Posted: 05/11/HUFFPO
Pascal Robert

Lawyer, Co-Founder of The Haitian Bloggers’ Caucus


2013-05-11-BlackPolitics.JPGThe image above is the cover jacket from Professor Frederick C. Harris’ excellent book, “The Price of the Ticket: Barack Obama and the Rise and Decline of Black Politics”In 1619, the first 19 Africans brought to the shores of the United States landed in Jamestown, Virginia starting the tortured history of what would be the centuries long relationship between Black people and the United States. The nature of the relationship was innately economic and political from the start. Sadly, the organizing mechanisms of the Black American social enterprise since that time have been poorly grounded in sound application of either economics or politics, barring rare exceptions.

What has caused Black people, after almost 400 years in North America, and after 150 years of emancipation from slavery, to be mired in a social condition that is becoming more debilitating by the day? One need not sound off the various statistics available illustrating the evisceration of whatever illusory semblance of progress Blacks have made, particularly since the post movement era after the 1960s.

Contrary to the inclinations of racists and many self-hating Blacks to deem this failure as some innate shortcoming in the Black American psyche, the social and political condition of Black America is a direct consequence of the level of political sophistication and sheer brutality of the tactics that have been used to deny them clarity of vision and planning as a means of rectifying this pervasive cavern they have found themselves in for generations.

The main vehicle allowing this constant social and political demobilization of the Black community stems from the problematic reality that Black politics has traditionally been grounded in a purely reactionary response to the phenomenon of racism — particularly without a clear understanding of the purpose of racism in its application to Blacks.

This stems from a failure to understand basic key aspects of the relationship of Blacks to America and racism, mostly because the sheer terror used under the guise of racism to maintain the prevailing order has been so atrocious that the political focus by Blacks has been to concentrate on that terror and attempts to neutralize it without truly addressing its root cause.

From the beginning, Europeans did not bring Africans to the Americas because they were racist. They brought Africans to the Americas to expropriate labor from them as workers in an economic system that denied compensation for that labor to maximize return on investment for the presence of those Africans. The function of Black people in America was an innately economic one from the start rooted in a politics that was based on protecting the sanctity of that economic relationship. All the terror and brutality used to maintain that system was purely ancillary to the goal of protecting that economic system of exploiting free Black labor. Yet many Blacks, even educated ones, will say that Europeans brought Africans to the Americas because of racism and White Supremacy. Racism is merely the rationale and tactic used to justify that exploitative economic relationship, and White Supremacy is the subsequent accrued benefit of the successful maintenance of that relationship — in varying degrees — over time.

A perfect example of how these realities are confused can easily be shown by attempting to ascertain from most people what the actual purpose and function of Jim Crow Segregation, which started with the consummation of Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, and lasted to the end of the Civil Rights Era in 1968, actually was. Many would say things like: keeping Blacks subjugated, or denying blacks the ability to compete with Whites, or racism/White Supremacy, or fear of Black male sexual potency via White women. In reality, Jim Crow was a purely intentional reaction by White Southern agricultural interests meshed with Northern industrialists to combat the rising political and economic militancy and mutual co-operation of Blacks and poor Whites during the progressive era of the 1890s with the combined efforts of the Farmer’s Alliance and the Colored Farmers Alliance in order to maintain economic hegemony and cheap exploited labor for capitalist interests in the South, primarily Agricultural but also industrial, with the slow but new development of Southern industrialization. Jim Crow was rooted in economic control, not simply racism and brutality. Those were the tools used to keep the system intact.

Moreover, few people will admit that the main reason for the collapse of Jim Crow starting in the 1930s, and expanding rapidly into the post World War II era, had more to do with three key factors as opposed to the romanticized notions of how the valiant fight of the ancestors during the Civil Rights Movement brought us freedom: First, the new methods of mechanized agricultural farming technology started to make the need for Black farm labor in the South obsolete. Hence, the need for the disenfranchisement and related oppression became more about form rather than substance; second, the rise of Hitler and Nazism made the notion of race-based exclusion in the United Stated unpalatable, particularly in the face of Hitler’s anti-semitism; thirdly, the Cold War era and the fear of American racism being an obstacle to the competitive advantage over the Soviet Union in winning the hearts and minds of the newly independent Black, Brown, and Yellow third world would rapidly assure desegregation and ending Jim Crow being an American primary domestic agenda.

As African American political science professor Adolph Reed, Jr. states in his essay “The Color Line Then and Now,” found in the anthology, Renewing Black Intellectual History, when discussing some of the egalitarian social science and legal strategies to end Jim Crow:

This intellectual enterprise was no more responsible for defeating early-twentieth-century race theory than Charles Hamilton Houston’s and Thurgood Marshall’s legal arguments were for defeating codified racial segregation, probably much less so. Factors like the leftward shift in the domestic political climate in the 1930s and 1940s, the embarrassment that Nazi extremism presented for racialist ideology, and cold war concerns with the United States’ international image were undoubtedly more important.

An excellent treatise that explains the relationship between the Cold War and the Civil Rights victories we often wrongly think were a result of these romanticized protest activities is Cold Civil Rights: Race and the Imagery of American Democracy, by professor of law and political science, Mary L. Dudziak, in which she states about Brown v. Board of Education: “According to the Justice Department, the interest of the United States in school segregation was that race discrimination harmed American foreign relations.”

This is not to diminish the efforts of the hundreds of thousands of Americans who waged moral protest to the brutal and racist treatment of our nations Black citizens. To diminish in such a fashion could have the effect of discouraging the belief in the human capacity to make social or political change. The point is to show that our desires to romanticize certain periods of history, especially dealing with African Americans, lead to a limited and pedestrian understanding of the factors that truly shape events.

In the face of the reactionary nature of Black politics, we can better understand the post Civil Rights dilemma that has plagued the Black political scene. If the illusion of racial equality is touted as one of the greatest achievements of the 20th century American democratic experiment via these Civil Rights victories, how do you create a Black politics in a post Civil Rights era when the political traditions of this group has been rooted in combating or reacting to the racism that society now forces them to accept as no more, when in fact that is not the case?

Now we understand the root of the past 45 years of increasing Black political demobilization — meaning Black politics being unable to actually achieve lasting policy that succeeds at remedying the true root of Black suffering: economic inequality.

The ultimate sign of that demobilization is the over 97 percent support of Black America for a president whose agenda is to introduce neoliberal privatization of government resources at rates never seen before that might ultimately demolish those same communities that supported him — i.e. Barack Obama.

This is why Black America is in a crisis, because Black politics is in a crisis. That crisis is a product of the place from which Black politics was born and grew. We now need a new politics, if we shall even call it Black politics, that is not rooted in reactionary response to racism, but seeks to foster cross-racial coalitions with those similarly situated to crush the barriers to economic equality while allowing Blacks to maintain social autonomy and ideological integrity in recognition of the need for nuance in neutralizing the tool of racism that has been used to distract them from the ultimate problem of economic injustice. This is the work that must be done, but the question is: Who is up to the task?

 Follow Pascal Robert on Twitter: www.twitter.com/probert06

The Reactionary Nature of Black Politics

See on Scoop.itOUR COMMON GROUND Informed Truth and Resistance

The Reactionary Nature of Black Politics – Pascal Robert

Lawyer, Co-Founder of The Haitian Bloggers’ Caucus

OUR COMMON GROUND Omnibus‘s insight:

"What has caused Black people, after almost 400 years in North America, and after 150 years of emancipation from slavery, to be mired in a social condition that is becoming more debilitating by the day? One need not sound off the various statistics available illustrating the evisceration of whatever illusory semblance of progress Blacks have made, particularly since the post movement era after the 1960s."

See on www.huffingtonpost.com





MILTON ALLIMADI             MAY 11,2013

[Publisher’s Commentary]

There are many unanswered questions about the violent death of Malcolm Shabazz, the 28-year-old grandson of legendary freedom fighter Malcolm X.

U.S. authorities should be involved in any investigation into the death. The Shabazz family should also hire private investigators to work alongside official investigators; supporters of the family must extend any assistance the family may need.

The most authoritative account so far comes from Miguel Suarez, who’s been described as a person who organized Mexican workers in the United States and was expelled from the U.S. in April.

Suarez reportedly told the Associated Press that he was with Malcolm Shabazz when he was killed. Malcolm Shabazz had traveled through San Diego to Mexico, and then traveled to Mexico City by road, accompanied by Suarez’s mother, according to the account.

He was to help the Mexican by lending his well-known family name to publicize Suarez’s deportation.

More information is needed. How exactly was Malcolm Shabazz to help Suarez? How did Malcolm know Suarez and for how long? Who organized the trip? What has Suarez’s mother said so far?

It’s important for as much information to come out, given the legacy of the Malcolm Shabazz family: being in the public eye for such a long time and not unfamiliar with violent ends including to his famous grandfather.

Suarez told the The Associated Press (AP) that he and Malcolm Shabazz went to a bar at Plaza Garibaldi on Wednesday, where the attack occurred hours later, and Malcolm died on Thursday.

According to the Associated Press, although the Plaza Garibaldi, where the two went, is popular with tourists “the pair were at a bar across the street from the plaza in an area of rough dive bars tourists are warned against going to.”

“We were dancing with the girls and drinking,” in the bar, Suarez, told the AP, and added that the owner of the bar wanted them to pay a $1,200 bar tab, for music, drinks and the girls’ companionship.

“We pretty much got hassled,” the AP quotes Suarez as saying. At this point the story gets very murky.

Suarez told The Associated Press that a “short dude came with a gun” and took him to a separate room.

“Suarez said he heard a violent commotion in the hall and escaped from the room and the bar altogether as he saw half-naked girls running away, picking up their skirts from the dance floor,” according to the AP’s account.

“Minutes later, Suarez came back in a cab to look for Shabazz and found him on the ground outside the bar severely injured.”

“He was in shock. His face was messed up,” Suarez is quoted saying by the AP. “He was alive.” He’s also quoted saying: “I grabbed him, and I called the cops.”Malcolm Shabazz  was then taken to a hospital where he died hours later of blunt-force injuries, according to Suarez’s account to the AP.

There are many unanswered questions at this point:

1. How did Suarez himself survive the gunman whom he says took him to another room?

2. Why was he taken to another room and what happened while he was there?

3. How long was Suarez in the other room with the gunman and how did he escape?

4. How long was Suarez away before he returned for Malcolm Shabazz in the cab?

5. Who else witnessed the beating of Malcolm Shabazz since, presumably, there were other patrons inside the bar and there were also people outside the bar?

6. Was this a bar that Suarez had frequented in the past and did he know the people who own or operate the bar?

7. Perhaps the most important question: Suarez says he was taken away by a gunman and that while he was in another room he “heard a commotion”; presumably this was Malcolm Shabazz being beaten.

Yet, even after he had been held at gunpoint and somehow managed to escape, instead of calling the police immediately, Suarez left and then “came back in a cab to look for Shabazz.”

It was then only after he found Shabazz with his face “messed up” that he called the police.

One would hope that someone held at gunpoint and who heard a “commotion” suggesting his companion to the bar was being harmed would call the police first.

These are the kind of questions that investigators should seek to address and Suarez may have good enough answers. But in the meantime, there are too many red flags and the sooner we get answers the better.

Also, as Black Star News columnist Patrick Delices noted in his article, Malcolm Shabazz has actually written about the possibility of being taken out — not in a purported bar fight but at the hands of U.S. agents. This is part of what Malcolm Shabazz had posted in March:

“The formula for a public assassination is: the character assassination before the physical assassination; so one has to be made killable before the eyes of the public in order for their eventual murder to then deemed justifiable. And when the time arrives for these hits to be carried out you’re not going to see a C.I.A. agent with a suit & tie, and a badge that says ‘C.I.A.’ walk up to someone, and pull the trigger. What they will do is to out-source to local police departments in the region of their target, and to employ those that look like the target of interest to infiltrate the workings in order to set up the environment for the eventual assassination (character, physical/incarceration, exile) to take place.”


Why the United States Is Destroying Its Education System l Chris Hedges

Why the United States Is Destroying Its Education System

April 1, 2013

Photo illustration by PZS based on an image byLin Pernille Photography

By Chris Hedges

A nation that destroys its systems of education, degrades its public information, guts its public libraries and turns its airwaves into vehicles for cheap, mindless amusement becomes deaf, dumb and blind. It prizes test scores above critical thinking and literacy. It celebrates rote vocational training and the singular, amoral skill of making money. It churns out stunted human products, lacking the capacity and vocabulary to challenge the assumptions and structures of the corporate state. It funnels them into a caste system of drones and systems managers. It transforms a democratic state into a feudal system of corporate masters and serfs.

Teachers, their unions under attack, are becoming as replaceable as minimum-wage employees at Burger King. We spurn real teachers—those with the capacity to inspire children to think, those who help the young discover their gifts and potential—and replace them with instructors who teach to narrow, standardized tests. These instructors obey. They teach children to obey. And that is the point. The No Child Left Behind program, modeled on the “Texas Miracle,” is a fraud. It worked no better than our deregulated financial system. But when you shut out debate these dead ideas are self-perpetuating.

Passing bubble tests celebrates and rewards a peculiar form of analytical intelligence. This kind of intelligence is prized by money managers and corporations. They don’t want employees to ask uncomfortable questions or examine existing structures and assumptions. They want them to serve the system. These tests produce men and women who are just literate and numerate enough to perform basic functions and service jobs. The tests elevate those with the financial means to prepare for them. They reward those who obey the rules, memorize the formulas and pay deference to authority. Rebels, artists, independent thinkers, eccentrics and iconoclasts—those who march to the beat of their own drum—are weeded out.

“Imagine,” said a public school teacher in New York City, who asked that I not use his name, “going to work each day knowing a great deal of what you are doing is fraudulent, knowing in no way are you preparing your students for life in an ever more brutal world, knowing that if you don’t continue along your scripted test prep course and indeed get better at it you will be out of a job. Up until very recently, the principal of a school was something like the conductor of an orchestra: a person who had deep experience and knowledge of the part and place of every member and every instrument. In the past 10 years we’ve had the emergence of both [Mayor] Mike Bloomberg’s Leadership Academy and Eli Broad’s Superintendents Academy, both created exclusively to produce instant principals and superintendents who model themselves after CEOs. How is this kind of thing even legal? How are such ‘academies’ accredited? What quality of leader needs a ‘leadership academy’? What kind of society would allow such people to run their children’s schools? The high-stakes tests may be worthless as pedagogy but they are a brilliant mechanism for undermining the school systems, instilling fear and creating a rationale for corporate takeover. There is something grotesque about the fact the education reform is being led not by educators but by financers and speculators and billionaires.”

Teachers, under assault from every direction, are fleeing the profession. Even before the “reform” blitzkrieg we were losing half of all teachers within five years after they started work—and these were people who spent years in school and many thousands of dollars to become teachers. How does the country expect to retain dignified, trained professionals under the hostility of current conditions? I suspect that the hedge fund managers behind our charter schools system—whose primary concern is certainly not with education—are delighted to replace real teachers with nonunionized, poorly trained instructors. To truly teach is to instill the values and knowledge which promote the common good and protect a society from the folly of historical amnesia. The utilitarian, corporate ideology embraced by the system of standardized tests and leadership academies has no time for the nuances and moral ambiguities inherent in a liberal arts education. Corporatism is about the cult of the self. It is about personal enrichment and profit as the sole aim of human existence. And those who do not conform are pushed aside.

“It is extremely dispiriting to realize that you are in effect lying to these kids by insinuating that this diet of corporate reading programs and standardized tests are preparing them for anything,” said this teacher, who feared he would suffer reprisals from school administrators if they knew he was speaking out. “It is even more dispiriting to know that your livelihood depends increasingly on maintaining this lie. You have to ask yourself why are hedge fund managers suddenly so interested in the education of the urban poor? The main purpose of the testing craze is not to grade the students but to grade the teacher.”

“I cannot say for certain—not with the certainty of a Bill Gates or a Mike Bloomberg who pontificate with utter certainty over a field in which they know absolutely nothing—but more and more I suspect that a major goal of the reform campaign is to make the work of a teacher so degrading and insulting that the dignified and the truly educated teachers will simply leave while they still retain a modicum of self-respect,” he added. “In less than a decade we been stripped of autonomy and are increasingly micromanaged. Students have been given the power to fire us by failing their tests. Teachers have been likened to pigs at a trough and blamed for the economic collapse of the United States. In New York, principals have been given every incentive, both financial and in terms of control, to replace experienced teachers with 22-year-old untenured rookies. They cost less. They know nothing. They are malleable and they are vulnerable to termination.”

1     NEXT PAGE >>>

The World As It Is: 

Dispatches on the Myth of Human Progress

A collection of Truthdig Columns
by Chris Hedges

Keep up with Chris Hedges’ latest columns, interviews, tour dates and more at www.truthdig.com/chris_hedges.


Greenwald vs. Maher on the ‘Unique’ Nastiness of Muslims – Truthdig

See on Scoop.itOUR COMMON GROUND News Board •● ☥●• The Third Eye Parenthesis

Friday night on Bill Maher’s “Real Time,” Guardian columnist and former civil rights litigator Glenn Greenwald attacked the view that Islam is a “uniquely” threatening force in the world and that Muslims should be deprived of the benefits of the…

OUR COMMON GROUND Omnibus‘s insight:

"On the show, Maher said the United States is not responsible for the prevalence of dictatorships throughout the Middle East.


Greenwald responded: “We were supporting and propping up Mubarak for 30 years. Even as we were cheering for all the Tahrir Square demonstrators as if we were on their side, it was our government that kept Mubarak in power, just like we’ve done across the entire Muslim world. And it’s amazing for you to say that, ‘Look at all these Muslims. The minute you give them a little freedom they go wild and they start being all violent.’ How can you be a citizen of the United States, the country that has generated more violence and militarism in the world over the last five or six decades and say, ‘Look at those people over there. They are incredibly violent.’ ”

See on www.truthdig.com

More Than $100 Billion in Subsidies for Too Big to Fail Banks – Truthdig

See on Scoop.itOUR COMMON GROUND News Board •● ☥●• The Third Eye Parenthesis

A Bloomberg Markets magazine study estimates that dirt-cheap borrowing programs and other benefits have saved the nation’s six largest banks—JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley—$102 billion…

OUR COMMON GROUND Omnibus‘s insight:

"Hilariously, big bank officials briefly considered pushing smaller community banks—which don’t enjoy the subsidy that the big banks get and are thus at a competitive disadvantage—to help them with the pushback, the WSJ reported. Wisely, they dropped the idea."

See on www.truthdig.com

Officers Reportedly Beat California Man to Death as He Begs for His Life – Truthdig

See on Scoop.itOUR COMMON GROUND News Board •● ☥●• The Third Eye Parenthesis

A defense attorney says a number of witnesses caught the beating on cellphone cameras, but those phones were seized by deputies before an arrest warrant was served.
– 2013/05/13

OUR COMMON GROUND Omnibus‘s insight:

"Witness Ruben Ceballos, 19, says he saw two officers beating the victim with batons. “They were hitting his head so every time they would swing, I could hear the blows to his head.” Ceballos added that he could hear Silva screaming for help, but says those cries didn’t stop officers from continuing to beat the man.

Another witness, who said his first name was John, said Silva “wasn’t resisting arrest, he was begging for his life.”

A number of people are said to have caught the incident on cellphone cameras. Those phones, however, were seized by deputies before an arrest warrant was served, a defense attorney says."

See on www.truthdig.com