Broadcast legend George Putnam has picked up Migdia Chinea’s story.

You may recall that her LAUSD classroom was burglarized and she endured an on-campus assault last month. According to Chinea, the burglar used a school district key to remove her laptop, wallet and glasses. Anyone check Sandy Berger’s socks lately?

And why does the LA Times fail to cover violent and property crime from LAUSD campuses? LAUSD students and teachers endure more crime most US cities! Hello! Times! Daily News!

Is anyone there!!!

Migdia Chinea shares her experience as a substitute teacher for the Los Angeles Unified School District. She describes herself as UCLA-educated with honors, refined, empathetic, college-level Spanish fluent and a Googleable professional screenwriter.

She describes LAUSD this way:

There’s no teaching going on at LAUSD – only confinement of the sort one may find in a penal colony, complete with walkie-talkie-carrying wardens and bullhorns. And I have “confined” at many different schools within central Los Angeles in the last six months. Many students scream “suuuuuuuub” when they see someone like me – a “guest teacher” – in their classroom and trample anyone and/or anything as they push and shove their way inside…

(One school is) surrounded by criminal street gangs and is widely considered one of the most dangerous campuses… most classes (are in) are in a complete state of disaster, absolutely filthy, with no computers available. There are no simple supplies, such as pencils, pens or paper, nothing to be found anywhere…

(M)any students… are violent and unpredictable. I was present, in fact, during a violent melee involving hundreds of students that brought in several police squad cars and helicopters flying overhead.

I have also endured several school “lock downs.” Here’s how a “lock down” works: As in a prison, the inmates and their jailers are not allowed to leave for any reason, nor let anyone out.

I always try to leave one classroom door open because I am often afraid for my life…

On Oct. 5, 2007, at another notorious middle school, I was deliberately body-slammed on the head by two to three large young men in a P.E. class of 53 students… I’m told by the local police that this sort of physical abuse on teachers occurs with disturbing regularity…

In my view, the LAUSD is completely corrupt, inept and broken, with many students having serious behavioral problems and disinterested in learning, whereas the teachers remain underpaid and exhausted – some of them just marking time until their retirement and giving out charity passing grades to high school students who can barely write or do math at a third-grade level… (more HERE)

“Disturbing regularity” is gophers digging up your bulbs, an employee showing up drunk, or forgetting to take out the trash. But after 30 years of the institutionalized intellectual vandalism of our city’s most precious and needy children, when will we call it DELIBERATE regularity? If LAUSD was a private company, it would have collapsed a generation ago like the stinking necrotic tumor it is.

Compare LAUSD with the people it serves: LA City’s $6.5 billion budget employs 40,000 who serve 4,300,000 residents, while LAUSD’s $32 billion budget ($11B operations & $21B construction) employs 80,000 who (ostensibly) serve 650,000 students. (continue reading post »)

This week, the City of Los Angeles continued to appeal the $15 million verdict awarded to three LAPD officers after LA’s former police chief and district attorney falsely charged them in the 1996 Rampart Scandal. (audio download)

Since 1980, LA’s politicians have crippled the LAPD by forcing some marginally competent (and some criminal) recruits into department ranks, under the pretext of diversity, to undermine the integrity of the LAPD. They did this because a crippled LAPD is less likely to find time to investigate the Mayor, City Council, or their shady friends (i.e., campaign contributors).

So when several of his criminal cops robbed banks, planted evidence, shot and framed innocent residents, LAPD Chief Bernard Parks’ convinced District Attorney Gil Garcetti to blame innocent cops as a public relations stunt – precisely what Mike Nifong was convicted of doing to Duke’s lacrosse players.

In his presentation to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, Attorney Edward Horowitz did what he could for LA taxpayers, while plaintiff’s attorney Jeffrey Ehrlich cut to the chase:

“(Chief Parks and his subordinates) hounded the District Attorney to file charges. The Chief made his agenda clear:

“‘We need to have a trial for public relations purposes…’ And when the DA said we’ll lose’ the Chief said it didn’t matter because the purpose of the trial wasn’t to gain a conviction - it was to make it appear to the public that the LAPD was (ridding itself of bad cops).”

Unlike most cops, I know what it’s like to be Nifonged by LA’s leftist political predators. Those cops deserve every penny of their $5 million verdict, and every American taxpayer should know their story and why it happened.

Kudos to Attorney Etan Lorant and his team. God bless the falsely accused LAPD officers, and may Bernard Parks, Warren Christopher, Mike Nifong, and their defenders reside in the hell they ALL so richly deserve.

Note: While Mike Nifong was convicted and stripped of his law license, Gil Garcetti recently headed LA’s Ethics Commission. Bernard Parks is a City Councilman.

According to this article, Jennifer Umolac of ImpeachforPeace.org had a lengthy conversation with House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Rep. Maxine Waters and Rep. Keith Ellison on the subject of impeachment. Suffice it to say that there’s alot of activity boiling beneath the surface on this subject despite Nancy Pelosi’s objections to it:

Unlike during his visit to Minneapolis, Rep. Conyers did not mention the matter of “time” as one of the factors against bringing forward H. Res 333. His most prominent rationale for not bringing forward the resolution was that he felt there wouldn’t be support for the measure and subsequently that it wouldn’t go anywhere. He spoke about all of the freshman Congresspeople who were elected in Red States and how they were unlikely to come out in favor of impeachment. He then stated that if he weren’t in his position, he would be “one of you…lobbying for impeachment.” I implored him to be one of us IN his position and to lobby his fellow Representatives in support of H. Res 333.

TRANSLATION: Rep. Conyers doesn’t want to follow through on his impeachment promises because he doesn’t want to put the Democrats’ majority in jeopardy. In fact, he essentially admits that freshman Democrats that got elected in red states would lose their seats if they brought impeachment forward.

Ms. Umolac wouldn’t be detered: (continue reading post »)

I didn’t get far into this LA Times editorial before spotting the first hint of BDS. Look at this misstatement of fact:

After the 9/11 attacks, Bush determined that U.S. intelligence agencies needed to be more aggressive in intercepting telephone calls and e-mail between suspected foreign terrorists and people in the United States. He then faced a choice: He could publicly ask Congress to remedy what he saw as shortcomings in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the 1978 law that required judicial oversight of domestic wiretapping of suspected foreign agents. Or he could act on his own, and in secret, to authorize the monitoring of electronic communications involving Americans.

Abetted by Vice President Dick Cheney, who long had resented what he regarded as congressional encroachment on executive authority, Bush made the latter choice.

Actually, President Bush didn’t act alone. Here’s what a USA Today article said about the NSA’s Terrorist Surveillance Program:

The Bush administration briefed select members of Congress 30 times on the National Security Agency’s surveillance programs since the Sept. 11 attacks,
according to a declassified list released Wednesday.

The fact is that the Bush administration briefed the chairmen and ranking members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees on the program. I’ll gladly admit that these meetings were confidential. After all, what’s the sense of having public hearings on a confidential program aimed at not telling terrorists that we’re intercepting their communications?

In other words, the Bush administration took prudent steps to prevent terrorist attacks after 9/11 while keeping members of congress with the proper security clearance informed. The editorialist clearly intended to paint the image that President Bush was evil for concealing the NSA’s TSP. (continue reading post »)

“A jury recommended the city should pay $3.7 million to a Fire Department captain who claimed he was retaliated against for refusing to give preferential treatment to a female recruit.
. . .

Lima claimed in his May 2006 lawsuit that he was discriminated and retaliated against because he was a male and applied the same standards in training a female recruit that he would have done had she been a man.” — LA Daily News, 6/09/2007

-

We expect fire fighters to conform to certain standards. If a fire breaks out we want them to be able to be physically capable of putting out the fire and savings lives. It does not matter if the firefighter is male or female, just that they are cpabale of doing the job.

Looks like the LA Fire Department is more concerned about affirmitive action then they are about safety.

This lesson will cost the taxpayers $3.7 million plus legal fees.

Here a Captain was treating all firefighters equally and he got into trouble.

They are playing with our lives. This must end. who will be brave enough to file a lawsuit to protect the community, our lives and our property. It is obvious the the LA Fire Department is mor einterested in discrimination than in safety—no wonder insurance rates are so high!

—

Steve Frank is the publisher of California Political News and Views and a Senior Contributor to CaliforniaConservative.org. He is also a consultant currently working on gambling issues and advising other consultants on policy and coalition building.

Read more of his work here or at his blog.

Several years ago, a woman from a wellness organization visited our station to advise cops of the health risks of smoking, high fat diets, and alcohol.

She meant well, but she was really fat. Unless you dumb yourself down with cartoons or college professors, it’s hard to sit still while Rosie O’Donnell lectures you about diet, exercise and morality.

I bring this up because of two essays that were recently sent to the LA Times (AKA “dog trainer”) for publication. Both were related to law enforcement. One was written by an LAPD insider, the other by a university professor. You’ll never guess which one they printed.

(Here’s a hint – an essay by Joel Stein is on the same page)

In her essay, Celeste Fremon describes the “out-of-control May Day cops” and Villaraigosa’s choice to replace former commanders with Sergio Diaz. Commander Sergio’s probably a nice guy (I never met him), but you can bet that when Tony Villaraigosa’s East Coast Chief picks someone that LA lefties like, you can expect more disasters, lawsuits, and crime for LA residents.

But if you want a real taste of what LA lefties have turned the LAPD into, you should read the essay that the LA Dog Catcher did not publish:

When the Last Hero Leaves L.A., Will Anybody Notice?

By Robert C. J. Parry

Despite the tenor of news reports surrounding last week’s violence in MacArthur Park, many officers in the Los Angeles Police Department are valorous and dedicated. In fact, this morning, 17 current police officers will receive the LAPD Medal of Valor. Notably, three of them now serve in other communities.

In fact, according to the L.A. Police Protective League, fully 60% of LAPD officers have been with the department less than five years. At that rate, almost the entire department could have been replaced twice since the 1992 riots. Notably, officers who leave the LAPD in their first five years have to repay the City for their academy training.

If you want to understand why the LAPD can’t retain officers, don’t look to the Los Angeles Times. The story below was first told to five of their top staff writers. Each deemed it interesting, but none reported it. In fact, this very column was presented to their OpEd section, and was rejected because a vaguely similar piece ran last year, addressing a less compelling set of facts. Apparently, only limited space is allotted to critical local issues in Los Angeles’s newspaper of record.

So, instead of looking to the Times, look to two other certified heroes: officers Troy Zeeman and Bryan Gregson. Last November, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger presented them with California Medals of Valor, for engaging a suspected killer in a running gunfight through a South L.A. apartment building.

The LAPD, by contrast, ruled them tactically deficient, worthy only of retraining.

If that’s confusing to you, it wasn’t to Zeeman and Gregson. They’d both spent a decade in the LAPD hall of mirrors.

But to get the details, you’d have to drive to Newport Beach. That’s where both cops moved months after the shooting.

The Los Angeles Board of Police Commissioners’ (BOPC) official account of the 2005 shooting (available at LAPD Online) provides no reason to consider them anything but courageous. On February 17 of that year, while on patrol in the violent Harbor Gateway area, they spotted gang member Frank Garcia. They knew the 22-year-old Garcia was suspected of having killed a woman with a stray bullet in a late 2003 drive-by shooting. In November of 2004 they arrested him following an extensive search with helicopters and K-9s. He was released when no citizens would testify, Zeeman explained.

Three months later, two hours into a Thursday afternoon shift, they spotted Garcia and other gangsters outside apartments at 227th Street and Harvard Boulevard. He drew their attention by suspiciously hiding behind bushes. They pulled over, he ran — trespassing through the apartments — and the chase was on.

Since Garcia had a head-start, Gregson ran to the back of the complex while Zeeman chased Garcia into an alcove. Suddenly Garcia shouted, “you’re dead,” and fired a shot around a corner. Miraculously, it missed. Zeeman fired back, and chased Garcia west toward Gregson, who shot and captured the gang member.

As LAPD’s official reviewers of lethal force incidents, the members of the BOPC (most of whom have never carried a gun) nit-picked Zeeman and Gregson’s actions — literally step by step.

They complained the officers didn’t “make a plan” — as if Garcia had stood awaiting permission to run. They opined as to what should have been broadcast mid-stride over their radios –- berating Gregson for saying 228th Street instead of 227th –- and said that they “would have preferred” that Zeeman had ended the pursuit when Gregson separated. They even complained that Zeeman wasn’t broadcasting while shooting. “I dropped my radio when I ducked,” he explained.

Despite their penchant for second-guessing the officers, the members of the BOPC did not say what they themselves would have done. But “cower in fear” was not an option for Zeeman and Gregson.

Both cops were ordered to undergo formal re-training at the police academy. They complied — and left for Newport Beach within weeks.

Ignoring the nitpicking, Gov. Schwarzenegger presented their medals well after the BOPC’s ruling. The shameless LAPD touted their achievement in press releases and other announcements that often failed to mention that neither man continued to hold an LAPD badge.

Ironically, the same LAPD brass who attended the ceremony declined to give them department awards because of the BOPC’s ruling.

Monday morning quarterbacking is only half of the story. Not discussed in reports or press releases were the things that truly drove them to leave the streets of South L.A. to gangsters like Frank Garcia.

The sergeant who arrived at the scene had questioned them about the incident and separated them per the consent decree standard. But, he never inquired as to their welfare –- an inquiry that the consent decree doesn’t require. Locked in rooms at Harbor Station, they were treated as suspects in a grueling 14-hour interrogation. Had the location been Guantanamo Bay, civil libertarians would fume.

Zeeman describes being treated this way as “accepted,” much like he accepted that he would risk his life every day as a cop. What was not accepted was the second-guessing and stress from the politically-driven BOPC.

“I was confident that Gregson and I did what the public would expect — take a violent gang member off the street, even if it meant putting our lives and family in danger,” Zeeman said.

“But,” he added, “I doubted the LAPD, the city officials and the public would deem (it) good.” Instead, I felt they would not take into consideration the dangers and the decision to put our lives on the line.

While their supervisors offered support, Zeeman says, they too were driven by the requirements of the federal consent decree that governs almost everything LAPD cops do. It created a constant feeling that doing good, aggressive, honest police work is the slowest way to climb the LAPD ladder.

“Being proactive is a liability for the City,” said Zeeman. “The LAPD, the city officials and the public don’t want ‘good’ cops to do their jobs.”

Being proactive, he said, “is career suicide.”

At the time of the shooting, Zeeman was on the LAPD’s High Risk Management List, a watch list of potentially problem officers. “If you do good, aggressive police work, you get on the list,” he says. Though he had one previous shooting and had engaged in 10 years of violent altercations with resisting suspects, he’d never had any citizen complaint sustained for any reason.

Still, he’d been on the list for most of his career. As the department became driven more by politics and the consent decree than by common sense, disciplinary procedures became more onerous — and simultaneously more meaningless. The department now investigates every single complaint, regardless of plausibility. In one incident, repeated by many cops, an officer was questioned for allegedly “stealing a woman’s ovaries.” A 28-year-old officer was investigated for “raping a woman every day for 55 years.”

It would be a joke, except for this: when a complaint is filed, an officer’s career goes on hold.

“Most complaints take a year for the department to investigate,” Zeeman says. “While it’s open, you can’t promote or transfer.” So, gangsters’ lies and psychotics’ delusions limit career prospects for certified heroes like Troy Zeeman.

But the part of the system that finally made Zeeman move on was the most humiliating. Although the department never sustained any complaints against him, it also failed to clear some of them. “My complaints were mostly for using ‘discourteous language,’ and most were ruled ‘unresolved,’ meaning the department couldn’t decide between believing me or a felon.”

It was one insult too many from a city whose gangsters had twice tried to kill him. So, both cops abandoned their half-vested pensions and found a community that embraces a partnership with its cops: Newport Beach.

In L.A., the complaints and second-guessing create a paranoid ambiance that causes officers to prioritize political perceptions over capturing criminals — and even their own safety. “I know a lot of cops who don’t carry batons,” said a South L.A. gang investigator who refused to be identified in print, fearing LAPD retribution. “They’d rather watch a crook run away than risk a fight,” he explained. “Gangsters ask me why I don’t carry one and I say ‘I’m not gonna end up on YouTube. If you want to fight me, we’ll do it with fists.’”

Though he attended the Police Commission’s re-training as ordered, Zeeman said most cops don’t take the Commission very seriously. He said: “their motivation for any decision is ‘job security.’” Yet that “security” comes from a mayor who is driven purely by political winds.
So, in their quest to hunt down even the slightest defect in LAPD officers, the members of the Commission have marginalized its influence.

As Zeeman prepared to leave LAPD, his commanding officer pleaded with him to stay, saying she wished she could pay him better. But nothing could possibly convince him to stay. “No amount of money … would have kept me working in that environment,” he said.

To the media, the LAPD story is about “secretive” personnel hearings and the virtues of the consent decree. One reporter who ignored this story said to me: “cops leave the LAPD all the time, what’s the big deal?” Apparently, a story about certified heroes fleeing the police department does not fit the agenda of the newspaper of record in America’s second largest city.

Like many reporters, that gentleman regularly seeks analysis from police critics like civil rights attorney Connie Rice. Quoted by the Times in 10 stories in as many months, despite having never worked the street, she is deemed credible because she issued “Rampart Reconsidered,” a report criticizing the department’s “warrior culture.”

On page 47 of that report, which was issued days after Officer Kristina Ripatti was shot and paralyzed, Rice blamed this “warrior culture” on “the myth and lore of urban policing.” Notably, not one interview since has questioned whether Rice considers Ripatti’s experience to be “lore,” merely a “myth” — or perhaps a case history from which officers should learn.

While The Times seeks critics to parse police actions, it ignores those critics’ ethical lapses. BOPC President John Mack publicly condemned the LAPD shooting of Devin Brown weeks before he was appointed to the Police Commission. But, in a glaring conflict of interest, he later voted on the BOPC’s ruling about the incident. Yet The Times ignored this obvious conflict of interest — and even quoted his statements on the case without caveat.

So, five valorous cops — Zeeman, Gregson, and three who will be decorated today — move to other agencies. Yet the political and media focus simply magnifies the factors that drive cops like these out of the Los Angeles Police Department. The results are not hard to gauge.

Weeks after Zeeman and Gregson were decorated, 14-year-old Cheryl Green was murdered — a mere 20 blocks from the site of the Frank Garcia chase. In reaction, Mayor Villaraigosa launched a highly publicized gang crackdown with full media fanfare. Mayor Villaraigosa may have political savvy, but his city is missing something far more important: two courageous and experienced cops who know Cheryl Green’s neighborhood better than the mayor ever will — and who know gangs better than the newly-hired 60% of the department.

There is an ironic post-script to this story. Three blocks from the scene of the Garcia shooting, two other LAPD officers shot a gang member during a running gun battle in an apartment complex.

One must wonder if they will receive medals from the LAPD, or new badges from Newport Beach.

But, if you want to know, the last place to look is the L.A. Times.

There are some relevant comments by other cops posted here. If Celeste Fremon or the collapsing LA Dog Catcher need help, I’ll be glad to explain it to them.

That’s the only way to describe this article in the New Republic. Here’s the first tip that it isn’t rooted in the truth:

In the 2000 election, of course, Florida was the ultimate swing state. But in 2004, George W. Bush won the state handily, and Republican Mel Martinez captured retired Democrat Bob Graham’s Senate seat, thanks especially to Christian conservative support in rural districts. Florida, it seemed, was becoming as dependable a red state as Georgia or Alabama. But the closing of Coral Ridges’ political arm is just the latest sign that the Christian right is no longer at the center of Florida politics. Indeed, Florida is becoming less like a Deep South state and more like Virginia or even–perish the thought! — California. It isn’t necessarily becoming Democratic, but its voters are moving steadily away from the conservatism of President Bush and Reverend Kennedy.

I have several friends who are GOP activists in Florida, including one person who chairs his county’s Republican Party. The notion that Florida is getting bluer is nonsense. In fact, my contacts say that Democrat efforts to cut off funding of troops is turning more people off towards the Dems. (continue reading post »)

While hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens take to the streets of major US cities to protest their treatment by the US government, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers arrested 148 illegal aliens, criminals and immigration fugitives during a four-day enforcement operation in Dallas.

Called Operation Cross Check, this localized, targeted enforcement initiative is part of an ongoing nationwide initiative focused on arresting criminal aliens. During this operation, ICE officers arrested 148 illegal aliens, including 41 with criminal convictions. Among those arrested were 124 men and 17 women; seven juveniles were also apprehended and returned to their countries of origin. Of the 148 aliens arrested, 84 have already been returned to Mexico.

“ICE will continue to fulfill our Congressional mandate to apprehend and deport those who entered our country illegally, especially those who have committed criminal acts,” said Nuria Prendes, field office director for the ICE Office of Detention and Removal Operations in Dallas.

“Our job is to help protect the public from those who commit crimes, and to protect the integrity of the nation’s legal immigration system.”

Those arrested included aliens from the following countries: Argentina (1), China (1), Colombia (3), El Salvador (10), Guatemala (4), Honduras (5), Mexico (118), Nepal (3), Venezuela (1), Vietnam (1) and Zambia (1).

The May Day protests scheduled throughout the country today are significantly smaller than previous anti-sovereignty demonstrations, but the sentiment of their organizers still serve to undermine the laws of the United States by championing illegal alien amnesty and open borders legislation in the U.S. Congress, according to activists such as the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps. (continue reading post »)

After their 2006 Communist May Day march, illegals and their handlers are at it again. They have resumed their “we want our rights” march. 1 May has become the illegals in the US new protest-against-the-US-and-its-“European”-population-day. Last year, the illegals carried Mexican flags, flew the US flag upside down at half-mast and demanded US citizenship. Groups including MEChA and the Mexica Movement also demanded all US citizens of European ancestry be deported. Note: Bear in mind, these demands are coming from illegal entrants to our country—not legal ones. But, then hordes invading countries have historically issued demands. The only thing that is new, this time, is that hungry-for-votes US politicians are listening to them. “Anything for power and anything for a buck,” appears to be the politicos’ mantra. For the illusion of power, they are willing to sacrifice not only the US’ national security but, anyone and everyone who gets in their way. These include we-the-people.

This year, the illegal aliens are not only demanding immediate US citizenship but that the US stop arresting and deporting them. Using their new excuse that ICE (US Immigration Control and Enforcement) is ‘splitting up families’, illegals are demanding that the US cease and desist the enforcement of its immigration laws. Carrying signs that say “Justice for Children of Immigrants” and “No Human Being is Illegal”, illegals have the support of local California councilmen and others. As examples, in San Jose, Councilmen Dave Cortese and Sam Liccardo are marching with the illegals and, apparently, support the ignoring US immigration laws. Councilman Liccardo commented: “We have too good of a community here not to be heard. And I know we are going to win!” With politicians behind them, the illegals no longer need to hide their crimes. They can now proclaim them with pride and in the light of day—then tell us that enforcing our country’s laws is the real crime. (continue reading post »)