Crooks and Liars is reporting that 19-year old Jennifer Fox, who was beaten and sprayed last Thursday at the same OWS demonstration in which an 84-year old woman was sprayed, miscarried her three-month fetus on Sunday.
As someone who lost a three-month pregnancy, I am broken-hearted for this young woman. I weep tears of rage. I am trying to think of something eloquent to say, but all that will come right now is a howl of shame and disgust at what this country is doing to its people.
When I was 27, I was three months pregnant with Saoirse. The U.S. had just declared war on Iraq in 1991, and I marched many times while pregnant against the war. I thought that I had moral capital, carrying life inside me and protesting against the loss of life.
This poor woman has had the life within her crushed by police brutality. By the brutality of a system that feels threatened.
I mourn with her.
Here is the link. It appears to be broken, although you can access the link from the front page. Pregnant miscarries
From the article:
Seattle Post-Intelligencer photographer Joshua Trujillo snapped a picture of Fox in apparent agony as another activist carried her to an ambulance.
Seattle fire department spokesman Kyle Moore told The Washington Post that a 19-year-old pregnant woman was among those that were examined by paramedics.
While doctors at Harborview Medical Center didn't see any problems at the time, things took a turn for the worst Sunday.
"Everything was going okay until yesterday, when I started getting sick, cramps started, and I felt like I was going to pass out," she explained.
When Fox arrived at the hospital, doctors told her that the baby had no heartbeat.
"They diagnosed that I was having a miscarriage. They said the damage was from the kick and that the pepper spray got to it [the fetus], too," she said.
"I was worried about it [when I joined the protests], but I didn't know it would be this bad. I didn't know that a cop would murder a baby that's not born yet... I am trying to get lawyers."
I will update this story as more information becomes available.
UPDATE: The Seattle Stranger is doggedly pursuing records that will prove the miscarriage was caused by injuries suffered during the break-up of the demonstration. I'm sure there's more to come.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
emma peel 2
Donald Manns
The Flylooper
Vivian Henoch
Lydieth A
Sean Murphy
Salon.com
Comments
r.
Disconnecting myself from my own miscarriage remembrances here, it'll be interesting to see where those who support "fetal personhood" will come down on this. They'll probably blame her for putting herself in harm's way, and say that she should be charged. (That is, if they even believe that the actions of the police caused the miscarriage.)
as Jeanette said, this is a heck of a can of worms.
legally.
but it is the taking of a life.
i hope this story reaches the masses, who are consumed by
their reality shows & financial worries & raising their
kids to be responsible adults & their american idol & dancing shows too.
a death .
All the while advocating that we give them even more power.
Beaten???
Legal recourse???
Police brutality???
"They" said the kick and the pepper spray were the reasons???
Wrath, tears, revulsion?
Two other women who were not beaten by police had miscarriages are posting just in this thread. Hundreds of thousands of women will have miscarriages this year. But apparently a true cause and effect association is not important to those who want to make some people pure, innocent, and fighting the good fight…and others beasts, villians, cads, and killers.
It is unfortunate that the woman had a miscarriage...my sorrow extends to her. But to do with this situation what is being done here in this thread is part of our nation's problem...not part of the solution.
Yes. 1 out of 3 women will miscarry. But you know what? Many women will miscarry because of domestic abuse. There is cause and effect.
What is your objection to this information? That it will reflect badly on who, exactly?
I grieve for this girl, and am angry at her treatment at the hands of the police; (I'm also angry they pepper-sprayed a woman of 80+ years)
Seems to me we need to comment on and object to general Police over-reaction and aggressiveness to non-violent Occupy protests in cities nationwide. Riot gear to break up camps full of sleeping people in the middle of the night? Isn't that what you wear when there's a crazy person with a gun shooting people in public? Or when violent people are breaking windows, throwing rocks and torching police cars, instead?
Pepper-spraying people who are only protesting through their presence while seated on the ground, and are not causing any property damage of any kind?
This kind of ugly over-the-top aggression needs to be protested, most definitely. I hope the Seattle police and the Davis CA police department are going to be in a world of PR hurt because their conduct.
I think though that Jeanette de Main is right about this being a Pro-Choice Pandora's box.
rated
Frank. The doctors told her that being kicked in the stomach, and gassed, caused the fetal demise.
Yes. 1 out of 3 women will miscarry. But you know what? Many women will miscarry because of domestic abuse. There is cause and effect.
What is your objection to this information? That it will reflect badly on who, exactly?
First of all, you do not know the doctors told her any of that stuff…at this moment you just know SHE says they did. There is no confirmation on any of this…not that she was beaten, not that she was sprayed, not that she even had a miscarriage. All of those things may be true…but we do not know.
If she truly was trying to extracate herself from the situation and was caught up in a police action…it is sad, sad, sad.
But the tone of your post is something I personally am protesting…that of “we are all right” and “THEY are all wrong.”
You actually wrote: This poor woman has had the life within her crushed by police brutality. By the brutality of a system that feels threatened.
In answer to your questions, “What is your objection to this information? That it will reflect badly on who, exactly?”…I suggest:
My objection is that the information is fine…the analysis sucks. And I think it reflects poorly on all of us who are interested in making America a better place in which to live. Report the facts if you want…but if you are going to stretch things as far as you did with that last quote, expect some objections to arise.
Once again...some cops are probably reacting too strongly. Some protestors are probably trying to instigate strong reactions.
It is my opinion this is the wrong tactic.
And before anyone starts berating me about the rights to one's body, I am not making a statement about my beliefs which have no place here, it is the irony I am lauding.
--upton sinclair
"One withstands the invasion of armies; one does not withstand the invasion of ideas."
--victor hugo
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both."
supreme court justice louis brandeis
occupy party reaches critical mass/seismic effect--now what?
However, if you are going to a place where you know there is a history of violence and you get caught up in it, then shame on you. As a mother to be you have a responsibility to not do stupid dangerous things.
You are spitting on people who have the guts to stand up for common decency and the expectation that the police would protect the innocent and peaceful. Shame on you!
I really feel that mothers and mothers-to-be are our most potent force for protesting inequality. There is nothing about the occupy movement that inherently provokes this kind of treatment by the police. It is unnecessary. It is wrong. I hope that this will be a tipping point.
As for restitution, she won't be able to get them for murder. It was a fetus, after all. And money? Well, I suppose, but having a miscarriage ... nothing can make that better. I bet it wasn't the kicking but the pepper spray, honestly. That stuff is bad, and the grade used in the US is very strong. A small percentage of people die when sprayed with it.
The trolls that come here to defend this act or to suggest she deserved to be kicked or pepper sprayed: I have a suggestion. Let's SHUN them. It's time for a good shunning. Just pretend they don't exist. Works for me.
On another note, I wonder what right to lifers have to say about this. I suspect that largely they don't care. Extreme stances are more about ego than anything else.
Jennifer Fox has refused to assist the newspaper.
Their response ....
"her story looks increasingly dubious"
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2011/11/21/pregant-woman-blasted-with-pepper-spray-by-spd-reportedly-miscarries
And the mainstream Post-Intelligencer raises the same questions:
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Flaws-noted-in-Occupy-Seattle-protester-s-2283349.php
Per the Washington Post:
Seattle police spokesman Mark Jamieson says the department is looking into the situation because of the seriousness of the allegations.
The Times reports that Fox’s family doubts her story.
Her former foster mother, Lark Stebbins, says Fox has a history of exaggerating and never mentioned she was pregnant when they spoke recently.
"Fox has declined to provide medical records supporting her claim that she had a miscarriage five days after being hit, and her family has cast doubt on the claim.
But Seattle police have launched an internal investigation because of the "seriousness of her allegations," spokesman Mark Jamieson said.
"Their goal is to find any — any — info that supports her claims," he said. "You have to take her word."
In an interview Tuesday at the Occupy Seattle encampment on Capitol Hill, Fox said she had three ultrasound pictures of her fetus in her tent, but declined to show them to reporters.
She also said she did not plan to pick up medical records at Harborview Medical Center that could document the miscarriage until after a planned memorial service Saturday, and she declined to sign a waiver allowing reporters to obtain the documents independently. She said the baby was a girl, to be named Miracle.
"I have some stuff to do today," said Fox, who described herself as a homeless former foster child. "I have to get some stuff done."
Fox's former foster mother, Lark Stebbins, said Fox called her from Harborview after one recent protest but did not mention she was pregnant.
Stebbins said Fox, whom she parented for 10 years, has a pattern of exaggeration. "My daughter is a compulsive liar," Stebbins said. "She's a wannabe drama queen."
Stebbins' older daughter echoed the statements in a separate interview.
"I seriously doubt, that if she is claiming she had a miscarriage, that she was even pregnant," said Nicole Botes, who has known Fox for a decade. "I'd like to see actual medical reports."
Fox's allegations, first reported by The Stranger, were widely disseminated by media, including The Washington Post, as part of a growing concern about an overly aggressive police response to Occupy protests, including those in Seattle last week.
Those protests were marred by the use of pepper spray against 84-year-old Dorli Rainey. An image of Rainey's face became an Internet phenomenon, and Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn apologized to her.
Fox has conducted several interviews with local and national media, and said she plans to consult an attorney.
She said she learned the sex of her fetus about 10 weeks into her pregnancy via an ultrasound test, although gender typically is not detected via ultrasound until the 16th week of pregnancy, according to a medical journal. Fox said the baby's father is in jail.
In September, Fox told police she was three months pregnant when officers confronted her and five others on a criminal-trespass complaint at a Seattle City Light facility, according to a police report obtained by KIRO-FM. The report described Fox as crying and clutching her stomach at the scene before being transported to Harborview.
When confronted by a KIRO reporter on Tuesday, Fox said police must have misheard her saying she was one month pregnant.
In an interview with The Seattle Times, Fox said Harborview medical staff, whom she could not name, described the fetus as healthy during treatment after the Nov. 15 protest.
Fox said she began cramping late Saturday and was taken by ambulance to Harborview on Sunday, when medical staff said no fetal heartbeat was detected.
"They said [pepper spray] caused a little bit of damage for the heart, but the kick and bike caused damage to the body," Fox said.
"I cried a lot. I wanted to have a kid," she added. "But things happen for a reason. Yeah, I lost a kid, but this makes me stronger.""
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2016829484_occupybaby23m.html
So…disagree with you…and suddenly you are a troll—someone to be shunned.
You are not advocating shunning, Odetteroulette, you are advocating closing your mind to anything but what you want to be the truth.
Most of the people who disagree with you are mentioning worthwhile alternate perspectives to a horrible situation, but you want to characterize those thoughts to suit your own agenda.
Miscarriages happen all the time; NO DOCTOR has come forth so far to say the miscarriage was the result of the kick or the pepper-spray; and the woman should not unnecessarily have put herself into that situation. There is absolutely no need for all the villification of the police and other authorities. You can think of this as a terrible situation…one worthy of sorrow and empathy, without all the histrionics. But the drama serves your purpose.
In any case, pretend the people who disagree with you don’t exist if that is the only way you know of to handle disagreement. But they exist nonetheless—and you will always have plenty of people who will come here to “cringe” with you rather than actually use their brains to think things through completely. You and they are part of the problem--not the solution.
Although I guess that if she gets a really good lawyer, then maybe her recovery will vault her into the 1%. Wouldn't that be ironic?
Rather than talking about the problems brought up here by the instance and trying to bring some clarity into these questions, everyone assumes facts not proven and then responds loudly, attacking those who dare to disagree.
This is an excellent example of why Open Salon is not a meeting place where those with opposing opinions can interact, but generally a mob scene where the 'received wisdom' is trumpeted.
It would be refreshing to read respectful, divergent comments. I sometimes learn quite a bit from people who disagree with me...
"UPDATE on Nov. 22 at 4:18 PM: Acting on an anonymous tip, we heard that Seattle police found Fox in a house nearly nine weeks ago. According to a police report in which the names have been redacted, a suspect who appears to have a three-letter last name "said she is three months pregnant... and began crying when [a suspect] was arrested. [The person with a three-letter last name] began holding her stomach and screaming that it hurt." The woman was transferred to Harborview Medical Center. We are attempting to contact Fox to ask if she is the woman in the police report.
SPD has now provided a statement, saying that no complaint has been filed in the original incident. Seattle police sergeant Sean Whitcomb says: "We are aware of a claim that a pregnant woman who attended the November 15 Occupy Seattle march has been treated for miscarriage. We are also aware that she has attributed the miscarriage to the use of pepper spray and physical contact by Seattle police officers. No formal complaint has been made. Consistent with standard procedure, the Office of Professional Accountability, or OPA, has initiated an internal investigation to look into the matter further. The OPA investigators will be actively searching for any information that will support this claim."
Now that there is at least some possibility that the facts may not be as assumed in this discussion.
Any of the previous discussants care to apologize to Frank Apisa for the way his remarks, and he, were treated when he asked for some amount of critical thought on this issue?
Not to say what your saying is COMPLETLEY wrong,
It's just that where I live the cops aren't exactly 'nice' they will give you tickets for things they shouldn't (in my opinion) and a lot WILL beat you if you make the slightest move they see as unfit for the situation, where as a cop in the towns surrounding mine do not, if you move to the side or take your hands off of the car they will simply cuff you.
So yes, I would say here at least, I expect police brutality...
This "What Gordon Osmond, the traveler and Apisa are doing is blaming the victim, a standard retort by authorities who behave brutally. The whole protest movement is a reaction to official misbehavior."
is just a total perversion of what I said. I have no idea what is true or fact about that issue. My point was and is was that everyone here went from scarce facts to diatribes about things that may or may not have happened - and then accused people who asked for critical thought of being, amongst other things, trolls.
I suggested that people might take the opportunity to deal with some interesting issues brought up, even by the hypothetical situation.
For example, the young woman called it 'murder' by the policeman; murder implies the death of a being (at 3 months). How does this square with the attitude of those of us who believe in the right to choose?
If the 'kick' was inadvertent and in the course of trying to do his/her duty, is the policeman culpable? Is it accidental? Is it murder?
You, of course, leave no opportunity to display your ability to be horrified and distraught and, of course, misread every statement to your own cause.
You are defending the right of the police to behave brutally towards peaceful citizens. Whether that is exemplified by the case under discussion or not, I cannot agree with you and I find that attitude totally reprehensible.
Everyone has a right to question her " unproven claims" without being called names. Smart people will take the time to question her claims and weight the evidence. If her claims turn out to be false, and she turns out to be a poor confused young woman, she'll be vilified and she will have provided the naysayers with reason to dismiss the whole thing out of hand. (I've read a number of other sources on this. I will hold my judgement until more proof is offered).
The issue of police brutality against peaceful protesters does not need added drama to make it more offensive. It offends on its own. A more even-handed, less emotional approach to this would have stirred a worthy discussion. This is just emotional name calling that adds to the polarization of the issues at hand. Well done everyone. Give yourself a wedgy.
Subsequently the woman in the case under question has been accused of lying and being of disreputable character. And the utterly unrelated problem of a woman's choice of having a pregnancy discontinued has been entered as a total distraction. These are all ploys of disreputable character smearing and propagandistic viciousness particular to the McCarthy era and Karl Rove tactics and have no relevance to the discussion as to whether police brutality and government misbehavior is justifiably worthy of public protest by any responsible citizen, no matter their status.
Please point out where Frank and the Traveler blamed the victim. I read their comments and found them reasonable in light of the fact that this is all just conjecture until the claims of the victim are proven. Creating more hatred and anger among people who are generally like minded is fruitless. Traveler said it best:
"My point was and is was that everyone here went from scarce facts to diatribes about things that may or may not have happened - and then accused people who asked for critical thought of being, amongst other things, trolls."
Seriously? You want to go there? What's next, calling everyone Nazis who doesn't blindly accept the questionable facts in this post? Jeesus.
(Sigh). You are not paying attention.
there are a lot of products on sale. Which one is better for 48 years old mom? Handbag,glasses or biniki? Please help.
A more measured approach to this story, one that didn't intentionally stoke people's rage. It's a Fox news approach to the story. As soon as the initial story came out, there were articles that questioned the veracity of the claim. The issue doesn't need a miscarriage to make it more important. If the miscarriage happened, it's an important issue on its own.
The real story/issue is totally lost here and if it turns out to be false, a poor confused young woman will be vilified and the movement will lose more credibility. The peaceful protesters have made a huge impression on those sitting on the sidelines. It's too easy to dismiss these youth as liars and losers. If it turns out she's lying, this plays right into their hands.
My point: let's wait for the facts to come out before we start a war.
You have missed my point entirely. my contentions have nothing to do with whether the woman was actually pregnant or not or whether or not she lost her child.
I was pointing out that the attitude that a pregnant woman has a perfect right to participate in a public protest over the totally reprehensible agendas of those in power and should be admired for doing so. That this particular woman may have misrepresented her condition in no way affects the general principles of citizen protest over social misbehavior. You have apparently swallowed whole the bait of the three commenters I confronted to distort and misdirect the fundamental issues.
If the story is true, the police should be held accountable. If it is not, everyone's energy has been misplaced, at best. (I wrote more on my blog about this.) This is the most viewed post on OS today. I hope fingerlakeswanderer updates it for accuracy soon.
But to your point, everyone has a right to protest, but if you think there is no risk you will be hurt, you've not been paying attention. And it's not just the police, it's just as often the black shirted anarchists or rowdy hockey fans who turn a peaceful event into chaos.
You keep changing your position on this. First you claim Frank and co are blaming the victim and then you are saying they are saying she has no right to protest while pregnant. I keep revisiting Frank's comments and can't see any of that. Here's what I took from it and agree with:
"My objection is that the information is fine…the analysis sucks. And I think it reflects poorly on all of us who are interested in making America a better place in which to live. Report the facts if you want…but if you are going to stretch things as far as you did with that last quote, expect some objections to arise."
I think the post went too far before any of the facts were known. It's needlessly inflammatory. The peaceful approach is getting good results elsewhere. Why stir the pot on unproven accusations. As we've seen with the Arab Spring, the army or police eventually join the people. This post has people arguing semantics and calling names. What we want is measured posts that stick to the facts and encourage respectful debate. That's how we move forward. Leave the sensationalism to the tabloids....they are owned by the 1% - keep your eye on the bread and circuses.
I too would like to see Fingerlakes return to this post and update it accordingly.
"My objection is that the information is fine…the analysis sucks. And I think it reflects poorly on all of us who are interested in making America a better place in which to live. Report the facts if you want…but if you are going to stretch things as far as you did with that last quote, expect some objections to arise.
Once again...some cops are probably reacting too strongly. Some protestors are probably trying to instigate strong reactions.
It is my opinion this is the wrong tactic."
That is a very mild disapproval of blatantly sadistic police action that has been clearly documented in many posts.
It indicates that the police are within their rights to pepper spray and club peaceful participants. That is where my objections reside and if you approve of the police actions in this and the many other documented cases then I have no hesitation in declaring you totally wrong.
You are assuming that the actions of the police were "brutal" and that the actions that the police took against her happened. If she is lying about the miscarriage doesn't that add to the possibility that what happened to her is also a lie?
If a woman who is expecting whats to go to a peaceful protest, more power to her. If she wants to go to a place marked by violence, where by your thoughts violence is going to occur, shouldn't she be held to a higher standard? Doesn't she have a duty to not do something that has a high degree of danger?
According to you the police are brutal. They will do brutal things to the people that they meet at these protests. Should it happen? Of course not. Are you saying it's going to happen? Yes you are. So she should know that if she goes and confronts the police she will get beaten up, she did, and according to her it happened. It shouldn't have, if it did, and according to her it did. You say she has zero blame in what she claims happened to her.
You make choices everyday. You suffer from what happens from those choices. You drive, you get in a car accident, it was your choice to drive. It's a measure risk. The odds are you are not going to get into a car accident, but they do happen. People win the lottery and get struck by lightning. I don't play the lottery and I don't go out in a thunderstorm with a large metal pole. Do you?
Are you declaring that, despite the clear documented evidence of the police use of tear gas, flash bombs, pepper spray and openly brutal tactics of smashing unresistant people to the ground, that the police are not acting brutally? (Should I assume you are among those who declare water boarding a mere gentle way to evoke truthful testimony?)
The police have a long history of brutality (see: http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/11/23/the-swing-of-that-truncheon-thing/) and they are in no way acting out of character. The big difference is that today everybody has a camera and inspite of police smashing the cameras and declaring them illegal (which they are not) the evidence is becoming openly known.
There are many sources for this clear evidence of police brutality on the web. Must I present them or are you adept enough to find them yourself?
I would appreciate your not stuffing baloney into my statements. I have no doubts that there are many generous decent police and the world without their actions would indeed be chaotic madness.
But to deny the long traditions of maximum force to counter non-resistant objections is to be blind.
It is a very rare thing that the police are held fully accountable for very dubious actions in everything from handing out irresponsible traffic tickets to executions of totally innocent individuals. And the good cops had better keep their mouths shut or the system will come down very hard on them.
It's a sociological no man's land full of psychologically explosive mines and I do not envy the very many hard working decent cops who find themselves with internal battles of conscience. Of course the public at large is not totally innocent in the matter but there is no doubt at all that the police agenda represents the iron fist of the elite in control and those guys are screwing the world royally.
That's what it's all about.
If it could I think it would find it more difficult to understand why its own mother was killing him rather than a thug.
risk that any one person might be the unlucky victim of bad police behavior. If you want to take that risk, fine.
A pregnant woman is putting the baby at that small risk without the consent of the baby. That is irresponsible. Was her presence there that important? Most mothers wound say no.
You don't want to make a comment other than you don't like the police? Does that mean you agree with the rest of my statement?
But perhaps the general public that accepts the death of innocents under the category of collateral damage might view fetuses in the same way. Real live thinking people are daily blasted into eternity with very little consideration when that subterfuge is produced so perhaps sugar coating the pill that way would put everybody's mind at ease.
Do you mean I should concur that life is chancy? How can I doubt that? When a pregnant woman gets up out of bed in the morning she could easily slip and fall downstairs. Things happen.
Should that excuse cops beating up innocent bystanders?
The facts may be no more than a comic book and yet many, including you, are attacking those who ask only that the facts be verified before getting out the torches.
Your agenda isn't well hidden by your words.
It's all very well to say a person, esp. a pregnant one, should avoid dangerous situations. But peacefully protesting in freedom-lovin' America should not be a dangerous situation. The violence came from the police.
I keep saying (but no one listens - the story of my life) that TPTB should just ignore the campers and marchers and whatever (issue them permits) and they'll die away.
TPTB learn nothing - not from your own American experience with the civil rights protests nor current events elsewhere, as in Egypt. Police action add fuel to the fire.
Jan Sands for Secretary General!
What have I done to deserve such extreme punishment?
Since you are so hot on the Constitution now, are you going to support my right to the 2nd amendment and get rid of some of the 20,000 firearms laws that are on the books? How about telling places like DC and Chicago that I can have a CWP?
Knowing that everything has a risk why would you want to knowingly put yourself and unborn child in a place where the risk is going to be close to 100?
According to this ladies family and the local paper this woman has problems with the truth. So did the miscarriage happen? Not looking good for her side. Did the police really beat her up? Haven't gotten that one on the proof side yet either.
What we do know about these camps is that rape, thief, drug use, property damage, rocks and bottles thrown at cops, people taking a dump on cop cars, and even murders are taking place. When the police give someone an order to do something and they refuse you want them to just say "You look tired. Take a nap and I'll get back to you later." Never going to happen.
No, these camps are dangerous places for the people in them and for the police trying to break them up. The cops have a set of rules to get people to do things. They ask, they tell, and it goes up from there and when you seem to put the officer in physical danger he doesn't have to wait until he has a bullet hole in him before he can move on the things you claim are police brutality.
If this woman lost a child it's a real problem. If she did then she should be charged with something but we don't arrest people for being stupid, which is what she was. It is 100% her fault for being in a place that is marked with violence and not leaving when it started or following the lawful orders of a cop.
Please present sources for your allegations of criminal violence in OWS. I am much interested. All reports I have seen indicate brutality by the police but not the protesters. A refusal to move by occupiers does not justify brutal beatings, tear gas and pepper spray.
Well, aside from propaganda by authorities attempting to justify the brutal rout of oppressed citizenry legally expressing in public their right to object to gross government mismanagement I have searched and found no general violence by OWS groups. No OWS person has ever pulled gun on a cop and the cops attack in full battle gear with brutally offensive tactics on peaceful demonstrators and on innocent bystanders.
Your comments bespeak either of some sort of official agenda or perhaps the wild hysteria of a somewhat paranoid attitude. Your pleading for the rights to carry lethal weaponry is characteristic of someone living in unsubstantiated fear of his fellow citizens and perhaps it requires professional attention.
You are really going to sit there and tell everyone that you have not heard the reports of women and men being raped, seen the youtube video of a protester pushing over a bike cop, the protester who was arrested after he posted a video saying he was going to fire bomb Macy's, the interview on MSNBC where the protester admits to O'Donnell that rocks and bottle were thrown at police before they used force to break up the crowd, the guy arrested for shooting the White House was from the protests, the property damage from fires and breaking out windows of businesses, and on and on and on.
You have never heard any of these reports?
"Rather than talking about the problems brought up here by the instance and trying to bring some clarity into these questions, everyone assumes facts not proven and then responds loudly, attacking those who dare to disagree.
This is an excellent example of why Open Salon is not a meeting place where those with opposing opinions can interact, but generally a mob scene where the 'received wisdom' is trumpeted."
Jan Sand said:"What Gordon Osmond, the traveler and Apisa are doing is blaming the victim, a standard retort by authorities who behave brutally. The whole protest movement is a reaction to official misbehavior. To blame a woman's beauty for her being raped, to blame a child for being a child as the victim of a pedophile, to blame a robbed storekeeper for having a defective alarm system, to blame a Jew for being a Jew when murdered by a totalitarian regime, to blame a pregnant woman for being pregnant if her baby is killed by a vicious cop is a totally reprehensible attitude and is no excuse for vicious official behavior. These are the people who sit quietly and do nothing while the thugs take over society."
The_Traveler said:
"is just a total perversion of what I said. I have no idea what is true or fact about that issue. My point was and is was that everyone here went from scarce facts to diatribes about things that may or may not have happened - and then accused people who asked for critical thought of being, amongst other things, trolls. "
Jan Sand said:
"You are defending the right of the police to behave brutally towards peaceful citizens. Whether that is exemplified by the case under discussion or not, I cannot agree with you and I find that attitude totally reprehensible."
"Diverting this topic into abortion is, of course, to bury it in an opinion swamp which probably was the intent of the person who introduced it.
But perhaps the general public that accepts the death of innocents under the category of collateral damage might view fetuses in the same way. Real live thinking people are daily blasted into eternity with very little consideration when that subterfuge is produced so perhaps sugar coating the pill that way would put everybody's mind at ease."
Jan, Has your many years of residence outside the United States somehow made your reading comprehension of English suffer?
I didn't say any of the things you accused me of.
And you know it.
My point was, as it still is, that it is silly to make hearsay into facts and to use that to condemn anyone's actions.
I await some factual material on Ms Fox's miscarriage etc. and your apology.
My guess that either will be a long time coming.
One must, I assume, have a rather rigid mental preset to view this whole world reaction to unemployment, poverty, government corruption and oppression on a vast scale, total frustration on the possibilities of a reasonable future, huge and unmanageable personal debt, great loss of any security in basic health care, monstrous homelessness with no help in sight and a good deal of just plain hunger as merely inconsequential excuses for wild rapists and adolescent delights in chaotic and meaningless violence against an assumed beneficent and respectful police force.
To assume that this is a baseless popular movement of idiots and perverts out to have a wild antisocial party strikes me as being totally out of touch with reality at a time when that touch is vitally important to the whole future of civilization whose foundation lies in deep concern for each other's mutual welfare.
My point, which you consistently choose to ignore and obfuscate is that the actuality of whether or not the victim; Ms. Fox, actually had a miscarriage is irrelevant to my argument. You seem to find justification in the use of police brutality on a helpless victim if that victim did not suffer remarkably dire consequences as the result of her mistreatment. My point has always been that the police brutality is a reality which you cannot deny, as it has been heavily documented, and that it is not in any way acceptable. If you deny its acceptability, I would be delighted to read that you make that commitment.
Your criticism of my understanding of and capabilities with English may be valid from your point of view which I take it is somewhat skewed from reality but these are very personal literary concerns. I do the best I can manage.
Is your point some sort of code that is buried in that?
" You [ The Traveller] seem to find justification in the use of police brutality on a helpless victim if that victim did not suffer remarkably dire consequences as the result of her mistreatment."
BTW, Jan Sand, victims are inherently helpless by virtue of being victims.
======
* Quoting The Traveler:
"I didn't say any of the things you accused me of.
And you know it.
My point was, as it still is, that it is silly to make hearsay into facts and to use that to condemn anyone's actions."
Your point is clear and objective. Thank you.
I was admittedly working on implications.
I received the implication that if the Fox woman was lying and the miscarriage was a falsehood therefor the brutality of the police which is a documented fact was acceptable and the police were thereby exonerated. I have yet to see a denial of that acceptability or the confirmation that the police were at fault in attacking the protesting citizens as if they were dangerous criminals. I will be satisfied with that agreement. I apologize if my English is below normal communicative levels.
Jan we all got that you were arguing your own agenda, what was confusing was your refusal to address the actual facts this post raised and the danger of allowing those claims to stand unchallenged, which apparently Ms Fingerlakes is willing to do.
I was dealing with general principles.
The official tactic in dealing with this very real problem of widespread human misery is to claim it is rife with chaotic criminal violence, with unjustified and illegal protest, and constitutes a real danger to accepted social norms and therefor officialdom is fully justified in confronting it with totalitarian vigor.
In effect it attempts to claim that standard political and social procedures are effective in handling the major economic and social problems the country is now obviously undergoing.
It ignores the fact that the horrendous financial corruption which has almost totally obliterated the effectiveness of the standard governmental elements in the executive, legislative and legal branches makes these protests the only avenue open so that democratic reaction can be openly and vigorously expressed.
It is a standard totalitarian ploy to label public objections to governmental misbehavior as criminal and thereby lay them open to violence and prosecution. That is why I am so disturbed.
Sort of Tawana Brawley tactics, with you as Al Sharpton.
Are you so stuck on your principles that you can't even admit you were wrong?
@the traveler
What I find completely disturbing is your statement about Jan's inability to the articulate the position he holds in his statement.
If anyone on OS were as articulate and crystal clear,we would save a lot of time in argumentation.
Your behaviour towards a person who is one of the most intelligent on OS,is intolerable ;it is a severe insult.
People uproad have in my opinion a better understanding and capability of analysing the facts than you might be aware of.
I have read all comments here,and not once did I have the impression that Jan had used this rudeness in tone in order to give his arguments more emphasis.
Whether she was pregnant or not, we won't know until she chooses to release information after the memorial service she says she is planning for today (Saturday).
Until then, I'm not going to get into a "she said, she said" discussion. I feel to do so would be the equivalent of telling someone they were not raped. Until someone says one way or the other what happened, I will not take a position on her credulity.
I will say that if I was wrong because of faulty sources, I will acknowledge that. Until those sources prove one way or the other, I'm not going to make a statement.
Jan Sand is welcome to say almost anything he wishes.
What he isn't free to do is to accuse me of saying something that I did not.
He can have his own opinions but not his own facts.
If you are not blinded by your dedication, you can read for yourself either the originals or my extracts.
Ask Jan Sand why he won't admit what is evident, that I did not 'blame the victim' and apologize to me for his error in saying I did.
Frankly I am quite complimented that you take my assertions so seriously. Your questioning the validity of an injured person's statement is in itself a move to blame the person for the injury but strictly speaking it can be evaluated as innocent as you claim. It is quite standard for the authorities to throw blame on rape victims and that is the attitude I assigned to you. If you are so blue eyed as to believe that is a completely innocent inquiry then you can have it your way. Strictly speaking, you did not blame the victim, you merely threw doubt on her statements that would tend to blame the victim. Since there seems little doubt she was attacked by the police I felt that was sufficient cause to put the police in a bad light. Am I mistaken in assuming you were happy with the actions of the police? I would be delighted if you would deny that.
I hope this comment meets your linguistic standards.
Don't take it as a compliment.
No, you are making unwarranted inferences from my original statement.
I asked only that people not rush to judgement before the facts are established.
It is only that your bias assumes the worst on the part of any government action that you can take take any call for reasoned response as a defense of the police.
Your pose of a gentleman's behavior seemingly does not extend to admitting you made a mistake, accused me wrongly and just apologizing.
My feelings are in no way gentle. Is that linguistically clear or would you prefer stronger language to clarify my emotional reactions to someone who evidently would prefer that the woman did have a miscarriage in order to justify her revulsion at her treatment?
For fairness reasons,I will go through the blog in about two hrs,then you can read my comment.
Your anger at what you think did happen in no way justifies your accusing me of 'blaming the victim.' and going on to mis-characterize me in following posts.
Additionally, your dancing around and trying to justify your mistake and attack on me as being done in your pursuit of some higher purpose is really reprehensible.
I was injured because you were either mistaken or purposefully miss-spoke and you continually maintain that falsehood.
I want you to correct your statements simply and honestly and apologize..
It is as simple as that.
now that I have read the complete blog again,I would like to say that I experienced your argumentation as moderate,keeping strictly to the -so far-given facts.
You and Jan were getting into a battle of arguments,and at the end you both ended op in a no- win-situation.No more comments needed,I guess.
Clearly you lied about what I said.
I quote from a PM I received that your behavior is making me agree with.
"I have found that arguing with Jan is useless. He is a phony...and that is not a charge I make lightly.
Do what you will...continue your give and take with him if you choose, but I would respectfully you simply allow him to "win", because he has neither the grace nor character to acknowledge the obvious."
You are a hypocrite and a phony, willing to say whatever is necessary to make a case for your beliefs, ignoring facts.
This should be an unfortunate example for your 'followers' that smooth talk and intricate sentence structure does not indicate honesty or integrity.
First you criticize me for having an inadequate grasp of English and now you complain that my language is too intricate and smooth. I assume the adjective "smooth" implies high technical competence. Your accusations about me are as self contradictory as your implied accusations over the Fox woman. You seem to have problems. Since my main fault seems to be that I remain inconclusive over the truth of the miscarriage and prefer to accept the word of the woman involved and you seem anxious to deny the truth of the woman's statements in what I presume is a defense of police brutality we seem to have problems about opposite preferences. If that makes me a liar and dishonest then it seems that anyone who disagrees with you is thereby a liar and dishonest. I envy your smug comfort in that type of conclusion.
"I have found that arguing with Jan is useless. He is a phony...and that is not a charge I make lightly.
Do what you will...continue your give and take with him if you choose, but I would respectfully you simply allow him to "win", because he has neither the grace nor character to acknowledge the obvious."
Whoever said this ,is completely beside the point,and now that this statement can be read by anyone here,I consider this to be defamation.(and this can be sued)
For goodness sake,I urge you to come to your senses.
Just a small reminder:Whatever a person says,reflects on him and his state of mind,always.
So the person who made this misjudgement,testifies about his own inability to an extent that is rather embarassing.
I hope he reads my comment here so to avoid further insults.
"97.3 KIRO FM has learned that Fox was once suspected of trying to lure two young children away from their mother. In a police report dated August 3, 2011, a mother stated a young woman had approached her daughters at Seattle's Pritchard Beach Park during a swimming lesson. Police sources confirm that woman was Fox."
"Fox stated she had just returned from Greece where she had won every event she had entered in a swim meet," according to the report. The girls told their mother Fox had asked them to leave with her, and had offered them a ride if they came to Bellevue to swim with her.
Lifeguards at the facility decided to call police, who questioned Fox upon arrival.
"(Fox) stated she had been trained as a swimming coach while on the 'Special Olympics team.' (Fox) stated she had 48 gold medals."
Officers determined Fox "may be suffering from a mental illness or drug addiction," and allowed her to leave, with the condition that she not return to the park. But, the incident adds to the growing suspicion that Fox was not pregnant during the clash with Seattle police last week that she said resulted in a miscarriage."