Hasta La Gadget!

Police icon John Timoney was laid to rest this week with seemingly endless accolades for his work as an “innovative crime-fighter,” who reformed police departments and “influenced law enforcement around the country.”

But, the real legacy of John Timoney is getting barely a mention in the rush to applaud his trajectory of “beat cop to top cop” memorialized in Timoney’s own memoirs. It is a legacy of violent suppression that anyone who takes to the streets in protest today inevitably confronts.

As Timoney rose through the ranks in the NYPD and became the first deputy commissioner in 1995 under Police Commissioner William Bratton, he dutifully implemented the “broken windows” policies of then-New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani.

Timoney’s alleged “innovative tactics to curb crime” included increasing the numbers of police on the streets, aggressively enforcing “stop and frisk” policies, and locking up people — predominantly people of color — for “quality of life” crimes.

By the time Timoney was recruited by then-Mayor Edward Rendell to run the Philadelphia Police Department in 1998, he had already gained a considerable reputation.

But, it was during his time as Philadelphia Police Commissioner that Timoney began his most enduring and impactful legacy as one of the preeminent architects of today’s model for policing political dissent.

Ahead of the 2000 Republican convention, Timoney traveled with other law enforcement officials to study the 1999 World Trade Organization protests in Seattle and the police response. He and other officials also traveled to Washington, DC as Global Justice activists gathered to protest the International Monetary Fund and World Bank in April 2000.

With the deliberate aim of controlling dissent, Timoney developed a playbook of tactics for a model of policing that social scientists call “strategic incapacitation.”

That playbook of tactics, honed against RNC 2000 protesters, included heavy surveillance and infiltration, the establishment of anti-free speech ordinances and sweeping “security zones,” political interrogations, unlawful stops and searches, preemptive raids on activist spaces, massive numbers of police in the streets, indiscriminate police violence, and mass arrests.

Once in jail, the playbook of tactics extends to city officials and the court system. As part of a concerted effort to keep protesters off the streets, political arrestees are commonly detained on prohibitively high bails, denied access to legal counsel, and held without arraignment in defiance of habeas corpus.

This form of policing worked so well for Timoney, his law enforcement cohorts, and the state, it was further honed over the years. Shortly after he left Philadelphia to become Miami Police Chief, Timoney oversaw one of the most violent and repressive responses to political protest in modern history during the Free Trade Area of the Americas summit in 2003. Miami Mayor Manny Diaz hailed the notoriously violent reaction as a “model for homeland defense,” thereby branding this approach to policing the “Miami Model.”

As technology has advanced and as more money has become available to municipal police forces, we’ve seen this model grow increasingly invasive, militaristic, and violent. Now, police can and do eavesdrop on cell phone communication without a warrant. We’ve seen an expansion of so-called “less-lethal” weapons, which are used with greater intensity and frequency. And, a greater number of battlefield weapons are being brought home and used on U.S. dissidents.

Timoney eventually took his expertise in controlling dissent to the private marketplace, working until his death for the global security firm Andrews International. Indeed, until Timoney was admitted to a Miami hospital with lung cancer earlier this year he was working to help the Bahraini monarchy control a years-long popular uprising happening in the small Persian Gulf island state. It was clearly his reputation for policing dissidents that landed him the job of helping the minority Sunni ruling class suppress the Shiite majority who have been agitating since the eruption of the Arab Spring in 2011.

One may attempt to eulogize Timoney as a “good cop,” but there is no question he was fervently opposed to free speech, most especially when used in the struggle for social change.

Today, as the Movement for Black Lives faces increasingly repressive police tactics and in the wake of the wholesale suppression of the Occupy Wall Street movement, the true legacy of Timoney continues to have far-reaching and harmful consequences for dissidents, political movements, and democratic societies alike.

* * *

Kris Hermes is an activist, legal worker and author of Crashing the Party: Legacies and Lessons from the RNC 2000 (PM Press).

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

I think I realized that I didn’t have much power when I started school. I skipped kindergarten (much to my dismay) and went straight into 1st grade at a small town, mostly white, Christian, tight knit school where everyone’s parents knew each other and everyone had just finished graduating together three months before. They knew each other from being in the same neighborhoods, going to the same churches, attending the same fundraisers. Their older siblings were friends. They would carpool. They hung out together on the weekends and went to each other’s houses and had birthday parties I never heard about. I don’t think I made a single friend all year, except a little boy named Michael who I followed around because every once in a while he would turn around and say hi.

The girl with the most power (read: prettiest) in my class was a very pale girl named Mindy, with ice blue eyes and curly hair. She wore a lot of pink and glitter.

The boy with the most power (read: the most athletic) was an olive-skinned boy named Jordan with green eyes and a buzz cut. He was the fastest boy in class, even though I beat him once or twice.
Once I got so sick of the isolation that I tried to curl my unstraightened hair with my mom’s curling iron. It didn’t look anything like Mindy’s. I didn’t understand. I thought I was pretty. I thought that I was nice. Why didn’t anyone like me?

We moved to Milwaukee for second grade and things completely changed. The school was still small and tight knit but it was completely Black and this time, I was in; I went to the same church, lived in the same areas, and began to grow up with my classmates. I went to the birthday parties, had people over at my house, and developed close friendships. People thought I was nice! But I noticed,

The most powerful (read: prettiest) girl in my class had relaxed hair, an upturned nose, and pretty pink and purple school supplies.

The most powerful (read: most athletic) boy in my class was fast, great at sports, and taught himself how to backflip (I can’t outrun him to this day).

I was good at sports too, and fairly athletic, but because sports were a “boy thing” I was almost never invited to play. In fact, I would find myself laughed out of the gym when I would yell “CHECK ME” while the other boys in my class played basketball. Also because I ran so hard at recess I was admittedly not neat and pretty like my female classmates, so no power there, either. Once again, I clung to one person (Janna, my sister, who is basically biologically required to be my best friend, HA) and wondered what was wrong with me. I begged my mom to relax my hair. She finally obliged me.

Problem solved?

In middle school I excelled in my academics, especially reading, much to the delight of my teachers who would literally announce my state test scores to the entire school like they were trying to get me killed. I was still athletic, still creative, and still much nicer than I am today.

Again, the power players in my school were as follows;

The most powerful (read: prettiest) girl had beautiful dark, basically poreless skin and long, soft hair (“It NEVER gets nappy” a male classmate once exclaimed to me in awe).
The most powerful (read: most athletic) boy was fast, hilarious, and now, experienced; he had dated four girls, two at the same time, by the time we graduated the eighth grade.

Me? I had acne, dressed in big clothes to hide my developing body, and sported weird mushroom hairstyles complete with ribbons (WHY MOM) to hide my breaking hair and bald edges. The word on the street was that I was ugly. Not athletic or funny or nice. I was thought of as smart, thanks to my teachers’ constant announcements, but my lack of cuteness prevailed over all.

Never one to accept a situation as concrete, I began to study my peers; what they dressed like, what they did with their hair, what they listened to, how they danced, even what they ate. Pretty was not what it used to be; in 1st grade having nice hair, bright colored clothes, and a cute smile (basically looking like you were ready to be cast in a Nickelodeon TV movie) were enough. But now that puberty hit,
I needed to be thin, but not too thin.
I had to have the right shape AND
My body had to deposit fat in the right places
My hair had to be long and flowing
My skin had to be clear
My current eyebrows were unacceptable
I had to wear makeup but be skilled enough with it that no one could tell
I had to wear the right styles, colors, trends, and brands.

I started my freshman year with a flat wrap (bye bye poofy mushroom hair), tweezed eyebrows, and fresh sneakers. I came to school the first day. I came to a couple school events out of uniform with my new threads. People reacted coolly to me, instead of put off.
I HAD TASTED POWER.
AND I NEEDED MORE.
Of course. You can never have enough.
I started shopping for Tommy Hilfiger clothes and K-Swiss. I graduated to a cell phone and hair appointments. I got more into makeup to cover my acne scars and accentuate my already very round lips. And kids started liking me even more.
SWEET, SWEET POWER.
Wore my jeans tighter.
POWER.
Wore my braids down my back.
OMG DELICIOUS POWER.
Got a boyfriend.
HOLY FATHER THIS POWER TASTES SO GOOD THAT IT HAS TO BE FATTENING OH GAAAAAAWD.

I stopped serving things that didn’t give me power. Stopped reading as much. Stopped being athletic outside of PE class. Stopped being creative with how I dressed and did my hair (I had JUST gotten this power, I wasn’t going to mess it up with something like imagination. C’mon). I was afraid to experiment with crazy makeup outside of my dresser mirror, no matter how much I wanted to.
Because while those things made me feel good, not being treated like less than by my peers made me feel better. I had subconsciously learned through my peers, my favorite books, my TV shows, music videos of my favorite music artists, ads, and even my parents than a woman’s main source of power is in the way she looks. Everything was background.

The prettier the better, and it had to look effortless but also perfect.
Even and especially when you just wake up. All the sitcom brothers who made jokes about their pretty sisters made that clear.

Pretty also meant fit, but not too fit, and not too sweaty, because then you would be a manly slob and they had almost no power.
And nice clothes that showed off your figure, but not too much, because then you’d be a hoochie, who have some power but don’t get respect.
And you should hang out with a couple guy friends so that you seem chill, but not too many because then you are a hoe and they have power over some guys but “not the ones with sense”.
You should be smart, but not too opinionated.
Also domestic, but be experienced at life.
Flirty but not sexy, otherwise you are a hoe.
Go to parties but only certain ones and you should know the difference or you’re a hoe.
Love yourself but don’t show anyone that you love yourself because then you are a conceited hoe.
Also these rules seemed to change depending on your popularity status, race, age, who you were dating, who liked you, who your girlfriends were…a myriad of other things…
And while I was getting more practiced with keeping up with the rules (ya’ll, I looked at my sophomore year high school diary and I literately kept a list. WTF) I felt more confused and less powerful every day. This persisted at various levels for the next decade or so. “Looking pretty” evolved into “acting pretty” , which apparently included being quieter, having a sweet, high voice, being delightfully insecure, and delicate. Literally all of these are the antithesis of who I am. I was starting to lose the battle.
Starting to lose my power.
NOT MY HONEY SWEET ALL-CONSUMING HARD EARNED POWER.
In the interest of transparency I will admit that I went a little batshit. See last week’s post.
This only stopped when I stopped dating for a nice, long while. I moved away from my environment and was the most alone that I have ever been. I “unplugged” so to speak, spent a lot of time by myself, and realized that yeah.
Basically, this was all complete bullshit.
When I stopped subscribing to all of that I felt more powerful than ever.
Yes.

Except that I still find myself analyzing my broad shoulders (from doing aerial silks) pinching my tummy (my buddy since birth) and pulling on my hair to make it stretch longer. As much as I kinda hate it, I still feel less powerful when I don’t feel attractive. For a long time, I chastised myself about that.

“I should love myself outside of my looks!”
“I shouldn’t care about my size!”
“I should be more positive about my body!”
“I…I…I!”… had to realize that I was living in an environment that put total emphasis on my looks and then shamed me for doing the same thing. An environment that placed my access to power on something mostly in the control of genetics then shamed me for attempting to tip the playing field in my favor after I found that I was losing terribly.
An environment that told me that now, after years of study and practice, that I was good at looking good, my confidence was insufficient.
An environment that told me that I should be more secure with my natural self while indoctrinating me my whole life to be the opposite.
An environment that ignores that everyone strives to be more powerful, in one way or another, and that everyone has things their confidence hinges on.
Some people access power with looks.
Others with intelligence.
Some with connections.
Some with savvy.
Some with athleticism, some with association with an organization they respect, some with their art.
Some with talents
Some with noise, some with peace
Some with marriage, some with being detached
Some with their family name
Some with education, some with parlayed life experience
Some with assimilation, some with standing out.
Some, with ways that clash with their current environment or culture.
Some feel forced to abandon their uniqueness in order to avoid being powerless.
It’s survival.
It’s all over the place.
And it’s all lost on the little kid watching their favorite show, wondering why the little girls never sweat and the little boys never preen.
The little kid unconsciously deciding to give up the power they were born with, the very power that they will spend the rest of their lives trying to recover.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

This week’s most recent Pokemon GO update includes an Appraisal feature with a set of vague values that we’ll be explaining today. Exact values of each Appraisal can only be found through a teardown of the APK of the newest version of the app. We don’t expect every user to do this – as such, we’ve got these values torn … Continue reading

Samsung appears to have underestimated the potential performance of its new flagship handset. The company said today that increasing demand for the new flagship is putting pressure on supply. The statement itself suggests that initial sales of the handset that was launched on August 19th in several markets across the globe including the United States are strong. Samsung is now having to manage demand and supply and this has resulted in the Galaxy Note 7 release being delayed in a couple of markets.

“As pre-order results for the Galaxy Note 7 have far exceeded our estimates, its release date in some markets has been adjusted,” Samsung said in a statement provided to Reuters. The company didn’t comment on the markets where the release is going to be delayed.

Previous reports have suggested that the Galaxy Note 7 release is being delayed in markets like Malaysia, Russia, and Ukraine owing to increased demand elsewhere. Some additional markets across Europe might also see a delayed launch.

Samsung did tell the scribe that it’s working hard to boost production at the facilities where the Note handsets are manufactured and that it’s looking to meet increased demand “as early as possible.”

The company went through something similar last year when the Galaxy S6 edge was released. It faced difficulties in producing curved displays for the handset which caused it to miss out on a significant number of sales. Investors are worried that if the demand-supply issues are not resolved Samsung might not be able to take advantage of the Galaxy Note 7’s full potential.

Samsung Says Galaxy Note 7 Demand Putting Pressure On Supply , original content from Ubergizmo. Read our Copyrights and terms of use.

The last hundred days have found me on the campaign trail—travelling with a candidate who has high approval ratings and low negatives. His name, though spoken often in this tortuous political season, is not even on the ballot. Yet from what the handwringing and distraught undecideds and decideds have told me, as I crisscross the country, Ronald Reagan is the real winner in this election. And he will win on his economic, foreign policy, and legislative agendas, and more importantly, he will win on his character.

What accounts for a strong Reagan showing in this political season is the three-decade durability of the Reagan political platform and policy agenda. But what’s more, it’s Reagan the man who the electorate want back in office. People want his unique balm of optimism and confidence to be applied to a troubled and unstable world. Many have told me they cannot find a candidate of Reagan’s vision and integrity anywhere in the political constellation today—much less on the ballot of either party. From the road I hear an almost a fatalistic tone from those ready to give up on American politics. Just then I remind them Reagan never gave up and would be saying with conviction–even today–that “America’s best days are still ahead.”

Traversing the campaign trail now–with a new Reagan book, released by the publisher just as this disruptive season political season launched–has brought back memories of the stops Air Force One made in the 1984 presidential campaign. It was an exciting time for those of us on the President’s team, and although there were a few challenging rallies and a few protests along the way, the Reagans were generally riding high and the ultimate result–winning 49 states–was convincing enough. Now thirty-two years later, I have visited many of the same cities, spoken in many of the same halls and town squares Reagan did on his campaigns, but this time I am hearing a different tone coming from voices in the audiences of those who come out to listen and talk and just trade Reagan stories.

“While young people provide hope for the future, it is those who lived and worked during Reagan’s two terms who feel they have the most to lose from this election. “

At every stop from Seattle to Cleveland and from Houston to Jacksonville I have heard sounds of desperation and seen tears shed for the future of our country. Many have articulated their fear that the light in the shining city metaphor Reagan often referred to is now growing dim. People often ask in bewilderment how this all happened and how we can find someone like Ronald Reagan and put them in a leadership role. There is a feeling that their country has been lost–and is not coming back in their lifetime. This is plainly what I am told by people who assume because I have written the latest book about Reagan that I can bring him back or at least have a politically satisfying solution that might give them hope.

On the streets of one town where I was signing books, a brilliant young high school student and history scholar recalled for me how his principal told him his personal safety could not be assured because he is a conservative. He went on to recount how he was threatened and had his grades lowered because he was a Republican. And yet he asked me to share with him how he could be more like Ronald Reagan and adopt the courage and vision of the 40th president.

At a stop in the Midwest, a nine-year-old boy came dressed in a navy blazer and white shirt and professed he was there because he wanted learn how to be like Reagan. I put him up on a chair in the front of the room and started my talk by introducing him as one hopeful sign for our future. In New England, another nine-year-old listened intently and then told his parents on the car ride home about how he could pattern his life after Reagan because he finally understood his character—referring to the President as a “knight going into battle with his armor on.” On a western college campus, students who professed to be largely ignorant about Reagan wanted to follow him as a role model and asked how we could start an initiative to develop more personal integrity and character in our leaders.

While these young people provide hope for the future, it is those who lived and worked during Reagan’s two terms who feel they have the most to lose from this election–and told me so. One woman told me her grandmother had been saved from drowning in the Rock River by Reagan, the youthful lifeguard, who reportedly saved a total of seventy-seven lives while he worked there several summers. Another told of meeting Reagan on the back lot at Paramount while she was merely a young gofer carrying a tall pile of scripts when the actor Reagan stopped to help her carry the load and encouraged her to become a film producer. She felt he had given her the vision and hope for her success which she was later able to achieve. One man was just about to walk out the same door Reagan did at the Washington Hilton that fateful day in 1981 when he heard the shots ring out and ran back into the building. One foster mother told of her son’s service on the USS Reagan the day the 40th President died and how he had charge of lowering the flag and folding it for delivery to Nancy Reagan and how much this meant to him. And this is just a tiny fraction of the stories I have heard. These are ordinary Americans thinking back and thinking forward but always thinking about life in America and considering their options in November.

Ronald Reagan was a force of character. He drew people up close to his ideas, ideals, and to his platform. Never to himself. He was too shy, too reticent, to sell his personality so instead he chose to sell his view of America and his brand of optimism for its future. He set a standard against which the current nominees are a startling comparison. Since there are so many Americans who lived and prospered under Reagan, their recollection of him actually helps form and contributes to the historically high unfavorable ratings of both the candidates. It is the inevitable comparison between what they remember of a leader who cared more about America than himself– and wanted to be remembered for that–than what they hear and see on the campaign trail now.

The current candidates talk of bridge and highway building through infrastructure bills they will sponsor in Congress. Reagan built bridges and roads between people and between political parties. The candidates speak in ways that will continue to divide Americans along hardened lines of social and cultural phenomena. Reagan felt the strength of America depended on his bringing people together not dividing them. These candidates want to lead by telling people what to think. Reagan lead by encouraging people to tell him what to think. Our current choices somehow are the ones who know better than we do and yet ask to us to place them in a position of ultimate political power.

The most profound meaning of what I have heard from a majority of my fellow Americans I have met on this tour and what gives me hope is that they have convinced me that they understand what true character-based leadership and that they will know it when they see it expressed by their leaders. Reagan set the character bar high and while voters don’t want to take it down–just now, for a moment in history, their political options are limited are limited. I think they have a feeling they need to get to work and produce, train, and encourage potential leaders for our future who will earn their trust and lead America as did this man–the one candidate standing in shadows of recent history who they would call back on stage for a second act.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.