Every Cop in Chicago and Every Citizen of Chicago Should Support and Help Commander Glenn Evans

Much of recent history is now, practically speaking, unfalsifiable. Those who criticize the official narratives are fined or imprisoned. Free historical inquiry is dead; therefore, received historical narratives must be regarded with the same skepticism as ancient mythology or religious narratives. Anonymous from American Historical Association: James MacPherson defense of historical revisionism September 2003

History was always written by the victors and occasionally by people who valued the truth.  That came to a screeching halt in American universities in the 1970's.  That marked the rise of received historical narratives.  Simply put, the victory of Howard Zinn History - America is fundamentally wrong, racist, reactionary, sexist and priest ridden.

Take the Battle of Fort Dearborn Park in the south loop, as an example.  Recently, a Chicago Police Officer  was shot near the above mentioned park.  One of my neighbors, a CPD professional, remarked," Never heard of the Battle of Dearborn. Fort Dearborn Massacre, but no battle."  I agreed, but noted that  a small group of people determined that the word "Battle" was hurtful to John Low of Pokagon band of the Potowattomi Tribe and that the aggrieved demanded that history be erased and the hopelessly flawed Chicago Encylopedia's James Grossman could not be happier.

In the 1980s, the statue was acquired by the city, which moved it back to the neighborhood when the Prairie Avenue community began to be revitalized in the 1990s. Subsequently, it was again removed and placed in city storage, ostensibly to conserve it, where it remains.
The alderman's warning came true: Naming the park for Black Partridge was vetoed by various Native American organizations, including the American Indian Center. Once Black Partridge was out of the running, "Ft. Dearborn Massacre," wasn't a viable candidate.
"'Massacre' is such a judgmental word," Low said. "We discussed how, from another perspective, you might call it 'Victory Park.'"
Feldstein recalled the delicate negotiations it took to find a compromise acceptable to all parties.
"I got an unbelievable history lesson," she said
Others are less sure of what the lesson is. Grossman is pleased with the name change, from massacre to battle. He thinks it corrects a bias in the story of how the West was won -- and lost.
"If you look at standard texts, when the Indians win, it's a massacre," Grossman said. "But when the Americans win, it's a battle."
But Crimmins is troubled by the snub to Black Partridge -- and Chicago history, as he sees it.
"Historical revisionism typically takes heroes from the past and makes villains of them," Crimmins said. "As long as I write about it, I'm going to call it the Ft. Dearborn Massacre."

Remember that everything is for sale - Comiskey Park, Sears Tower, Chicago history, marriage.

Law Enforcement has been reduced to a yard sale, by revisionists and narrative architects.

Yesterday, one man fought back. Commander Glenn Evans filed suit against The City of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel's Independent Police Review Board (IPRB) and . . .my favorite . . .WBEZ.

The here you have the Leftist combine - Progressive politicians, appointed Good Government Citizens Blue Ribbon Activists and the Left Tilted Public Radio apparatus.

Commander Evans was lynched by people who see nooses everywhere as tools for public power and personal financial gain.  The so-called Innocence Industry pumps blood into print and fabricates compelling narrative doctrines to be blared from the pages of the Chicago Tribune, Chicago Sun Times and screeched by panelists on WTTW, or WBEZ.  Lawyers apply the narratives while judge shopping and in preparing cases brought against police officers. Politicians pander and provide street cash for T-shirts and future Pfleger-ite marches.

Every Police Officer in this city run by clowns and grifters should line up to offer any and help to the lawyers of Glenn Evans. His small victory might prevent the continuing Star Chamber attacks on working people doing their jobs.

Most of all Chicago citizens should study the Glenn Evans case carefully and note the rhetorical flourishes throughout each article, news cast and statement by activists and politicians.  Make note of the similarities.  Make a time-line of events and paste in the characters involved, like the former cop disciplined by Commander Evans turned IPRB investigator and the WBEZ reporter playing David Protess.  Make note of a particularly damning article in DNAinfo Chicago. Draw your own conclusion.


Know this - Truth is tough and narratives are as easy as lying. A nice name for fiction.  There were not six Transgender Aztec Garment Workers putting up the flag on Iwo Jima - not yet anyway. Iwo Jima was not a property dispute, by the way.

Chicago owes much to Commander Glenn Evans

This was a the massacre of a Man's life. 

Every Cop in Chicago and Every Citizen of Chicago Should Support and Help Commander Glenn Evans

Much of recent history is now, practically speaking, unfalsifiable. Those who criticize the official narratives are fined or imprisoned. Free historical inquiry is dead; therefore, received historical narratives must be regarded with the same skepticism as ancient mythology or religious narratives. Anonymous from American Historical Association: James MacPherson defense of historical revisionism September 2003

History was always written by the victors and occasionally by people who valued the truth.  That came to a screeching halt in American universities in the 1970's.  That marked the rise of received historical narratives.  Simply put, the victory of Howard Zinn History - America is fundamentally wrong, racist, reactionary, sexist and priest ridden.

Take the Battle of Fort Dearborn Park in the south loop, as an example.  Recently, a Chicago Police Officer  was shot near the above mentioned park.  One of my neighbors, a CPD professional, remarked," Never heard of the Battle of Dearborn. Fort Dearborn Massacre, but no battle."  I agreed, but noted that  a small group of people determined that the word "Battle" was hurtful to John Low of Pokagon band of the Potowattomi Tribe and that the aggrieved demanded that history be erased and the hopelessly flawed Chicago Encylopedia's James Grossman could not be happier.

In the 1980s, the statue was acquired by the city, which moved it back to the neighborhood when the Prairie Avenue community began to be revitalized in the 1990s. Subsequently, it was again removed and placed in city storage, ostensibly to conserve it, where it remains.
The alderman's warning came true: Naming the park for Black Partridge was vetoed by various Native American organizations, including the American Indian Center. Once Black Partridge was out of the running, "Ft. Dearborn Massacre," wasn't a viable candidate.
"'Massacre' is such a judgmental word," Low said. "We discussed how, from another perspective, you might call it 'Victory Park.'"
Feldstein recalled the delicate negotiations it took to find a compromise acceptable to all parties.
"I got an unbelievable history lesson," she said
Others are less sure of what the lesson is. Grossman is pleased with the name change, from massacre to battle. He thinks it corrects a bias in the story of how the West was won -- and lost.
"If you look at standard texts, when the Indians win, it's a massacre," Grossman said. "But when the Americans win, it's a battle."
But Crimmins is troubled by the snub to Black Partridge -- and Chicago history, as he sees it.
"Historical revisionism typically takes heroes from the past and makes villains of them," Crimmins said. "As long as I write about it, I'm going to call it the Ft. Dearborn Massacre."

Remember that everything is for sale - Comiskey Park, Sears Tower, Chicago history, marriage.

Law Enforcement has been reduced to a yard sale, by revisionists and narrative architects.

Yesterday, one man fought back. Commander Glenn Evans filed suit against The City of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel's Independent Police Review Board (IPRB) and . . .my favorite . . .WBEZ.

The here you have the Leftist combine - Progressive politicians, appointed Good Government Citizens Blue Ribbon Activists and the Left Tilted Public Radio apparatus.

Commander Evans was lynched by people who see nooses everywhere as tools for public power and personal financial gain.  The so-called Innocense Industry pumps blood into print and fabricates compelling narrative doctrines to be blared from the pages of the Chicago Tribune, Chicago Sun Times and screeched by panelists on WTTW, or WBEZ.  Lawyers apply the narractives while judge shopping and in preparing cases brought against police officers. Politicians pander and provide street cash for T-shirts and future Pfleger-ite marches.

Every Police Officer in this city run by clowns and grifters should line up to offer any and help to the lawyers of Glenn Evans. His small victory might prevent the continuing Star Chamber attacks on working people doing their jobs.

Most of all Chicago citizens should study the Glenn Evans case carefully and note the rhetorical flourishes throughout each article, news cast and statement by activists and politicians.  Make note of the similarities.  Make a time-line of events and paste in the characters involved, like the former cop disciplined by Commander Evans turned IPRB investigator and the WBEZ reporter playing David Protess.  Make note of a particularly damning article in DNAinfo Chicago. Draw your own conclusion.


Know this - Truth is tough and narratives are as easy as lying. A nice name for fiction.  There were not six Transgender Aztec Garment Workers putting up the flag on Iwo Jima - not yet anyway. Iwo Jima was not a property dispute, by the way.

Chicago owes much to Commader Glenn Evans

This was a the massacre of a Man's life. 

Northwestern Professor Protess , Our Tweedy Fagin of Medill

Fagin: Clever dogs, clever dogs. Never blowed on old Fagin.

David Protess:

Maybe the Chicago Innocence Project will be going great and I won't want to go back (to Northwestern) because of the hassle ... Maybe it won't succeed and I will want to go back. Or maybe I'll want to go somewhere else, go to some other university. All of my options are on the table.

Chicago Tribune Editorial April 9, 2011:

If Protess misled administrators and attorneys in this case—and it appears he did—what does that say about all those cases he has worked on with students? That question will linger at least until prosecutors and McKinney's lawyers resolve what happened in his case.

That day can't come soon enough.

Had Anita Alvarez caved to the limitless media enabling of Professor David Protess, the Fagin of Medill, all would be just dandy and it ain't. I have long suspected that David Protess was a later-day "kidsman." A Kidsman was a 19th Century recruiter of children for training and guiding pickpockets and cut-throats. The vicious Bill Sykes was one of Fagin's students. The Artful Dodger, who befriends the naive orphaned child of privilege Oliver Twist, is on his way to the next level of crime. Fagin beats and threatens his "children" with warnings of dire consequences for "peaching," or "blowing" on Fagin's activities.

The "children" are rewarded for doing Fagin's bidding.

When Anita Alvarez initially petitioned for Fagin Protess's student e-mails, notes and records pertinent to the McKinney case, the academic, journalistic and legal communities marshaled a formidable army of protest and calumnies leveled at Anita Alvarez.

CNN, Huffington Post, Salon, The New York Times, MSNBC, joined the Chicago Tribune editorial board in terming Cook County States Attorney Alvarez a Gestapo bully. A former Federal Judge, of dubious record and achievement, wrote frequent attacks on Alvarez and defences of Fagin Protess. Click my post title and view a few.

Most telling were the star Protess pupils, now rewarded with CNN, AP, and other blue-chip journalistic postings. The kids did alright by Medill, The Innocence Project and old Fagin himself -Professor Dave Protess.

The Innocence Project and Northwestern University have been besmeared by the very advocacy they demand - outcomes be damned. That is as old as John Dewey, the bespectacled avuncular father of generations of Progressive Fagins.

Fagin was the leader of gangs of children, in Charles Dickens' Oliver Twist, patterned on the historical 19th Century criminal Ickey Solomon of London.

What does American philosopher and granddad of American public education have to do with David Protess's Procrustean pedagogy? Plenty.

John Dewey holds that Inquiry is Truth - play, if you will, the root of the Laboratory Method in education that established the Lab School of University of Chicago - play long enough and arrive at the original point of inquiry.

The start of an inquiry is an indeterminate situation, usually coming from some practical matter ( convicted felon we want out of jail to raise a the larger issue of systemic failure of American Justice). The first step is to getting a clearer and more specific picture of the problem; the indeterminate situation becomes a “problematic situation”. The inquiry then proceeds by coming up with possible solutions to the problem That is, hypothesis that might help to act upon in the problematic situation. Evaluation then takes place; possible consequences of different solutions are considered, and by doing this the relative value of the solutions are estimated. The final test is when a solution actually is tried as a guide to action. The question of truth and falsehood come into play at this last stage of inquiry, and it is dependent on whether the consequences of acting upon the hypothesis under test are such that they resolve the problem and settle the indeterminate situation. Here, it is important to keep in mind the fundamental that role that Dewey ascribes to the indeterminate situation. It is our conceptions of this situation that guide the rest of the inquiry, and that determines how to evaluate and praise ideas and hypotheses. The indeterminate situation is the beginning of an inquiry, but also controls it throughout [p.207]. Coming back to the correspondence relation, it could be said to hold between the between the first and last stage of inquiry.

The opposite of John Dewey was the mathematician and philosophical historian Bertrand Russell whose rigorous methodologies eschewed "play" for study. Russell takes apart Dewey's playful assertions that begin and end in the very same place. Dewey, and his child Fagin Professor Protess "look" into the assertion that the American Justice System is flawed, because it is sytemnically and intrinsically racist, brutal, dishonest, lazy and corrupt - "What do you think, kids?"

Here is Bertarnd Russell's deconstruction of Dewey in summary by Swedish student of philosophy Björn Östbring:

His (Russell) version of the ( Dewey) correspondence theory is the classical one: the relation is between statements, propositions or beliefs to an independent reality, to empirical facts. A statement is true if what is referred to also posses the properties that the statement asserts. Dewey’s theory is obviously radically different from this, and in Russell’s view it does not even deserve to be called a correspondence theory. Russell’s description of Dewey’s whole theory of inquiry and truth is as follows (2): individuals engage in inquiry with the purpose of better interacting with their environment. In an inquiry, “assertions” are tools, and these assertions can be “warranted” to different degrees. The degree to which an assertion is warranted is determined by their ability to produce the desired results. During inquiry assertions can come to be replaced by better assertions, and sometimes they are the very means that lead to better assertions. The term “better” simply means that it produces more of the desirable results, lets us cope better with our environment, and hence “better” could basically be substituted with “more warranted”. An inquiry does not end; no assertion is the best for all times. The important point in this summary is that an assertion is warranted if it produces the desired results, and that the idea of truth thus loses its static and privileged nature.

Dewey and Protess begin inquiry with the conclusion and all the rest in between is just "play." What student would not rather play than work? Bertrand Russell's logical positivism is damned hard work.

Deweyesque inquiry is tailor made for a Fagin and advocacy journalism and education provides the charming "Master" with high moral ground and an embracing protective laissez faire attitude

Unlike the probity of Russell, the Dewey trained journalists, scholars, and academics will apply no further "inquiry" to other Fagins. Protess, now in disgrace with Fortune and Men's eyes will be an anomaly. A freak.

While the Medill engine will trot out more Heater cases and our Justice System will be further deconstructed in the advocacy playland that is John Dewey's Progressive America, David Protess will disappear into the shadows. Nothing to see here, folks! Inquiry? We don't need no stinkin' Inquiry! Right, Judge Stinky Sarokin?

Police, prosecutors, judges and juries will be villainized and criminals will always have much more benefits than doubts and greater Fagins than David Protess will threaten and reward more students - so long as they don't "peach," or "blow" to the cops.

Americans are fair-minded, but not really all that stupid. No one wants an innocent man punished, but no one wants any and all faith in our justice system destroyed by Fagins and an equally culpable media. We can thank States Attornney Alvarez for sticking to her guns during this entire shabby inquiry.

*

Fagin is described as "disgusting" to look at. He is the leader of a group of children, the Artful Dodger and Charley Bates among them, whom he teaches to make their livings by pickpocketing and other criminal activities in exchange for a roof over their heads. At the time of the novel, he is said by another character, Monks, to have already made criminals out of "scores" of children who grow up to live—or die—committing the same crimes as adults. Bill Sikes, one of the major villains of the novel, is hinted to be one of Fagin's old pupils, and Nancy, Sikes' girlfriend and sex worker clearly was.
Whilst portrayed as relatively humorous, he is nonetheless a self-confessed miser who, despite the amount he has acquired over the years from the work of others, does very little to improve the squalid lives of the children he takes in, allowing them to smoke pipes and drink gin "with the air of middle-aged men". In the second chapter of his appearance, it is shown, albeit when talking to himself, that he cares less about those children who are eventually hanged for their crimes and more about the fact that they do not "peach" on him and the other children

http://bjornostbring.wordpress.com/2009/10/13/dewey-vs-russell-on-truth/

Judge H. "Stinky" Lee Sarokin is Back Doing Medill Bidding and Wrong from the Headline

Judge H. "Stinky" Lee Sarokin is a retired East Coast Federal Judge who quit amid a cloud twenty years ago for sunny Californ-eyeAy!

Judge Sarokin was the the legal-air-freshener for all Stinky Jurors and Library Card Holders back in the day. Hence my sobriquet -that and Judge Stinky* is doing hack work for the Medill Empire and the Greek Pastry Arianna Huffington at Huffington Post. Hey, why not pick up a few nickels!

Here's the deal Professor Dave Protess a Progressive Sacred Cow stepped on his ethical Johnson, or rather bid his Kids to do the stepping by bribing (it seems) crack-head Witnesses for the Prosecution's Overturn in the Andrew McKinney Case.

Andrew McKinney is an Innocence Project pet-Convict - McKinney was convicted of murdering a security guard -Professor Dave and Kids Demand that McKinney is Innocent, because the Innocence Project has adopted McKinney. Professor Dave Protess is a Scared Cow in a Herd of Scared Cows - Medill Empire -Northwestern Law and School of Journalism.

Walp! Cook County States Attorney Anita Alvarez did not roll-over and 'accept' Protess Protestations of McKinney Innocence. In fact Alvarez asked for Discovery Items - student notes and other such stuff. Judge Stinky Lee Sarokin has labeled States Attorney Alvarez a Gestapo thug. A bit strong there Stinky . . .well, you are Okay with strong.

Protess and be Damned!

The Medill Empire goes Jihad on any and all critics and has trotted out an endless parade of Protess Protestors including Judge Stinky and the Editorial Board of the Medill rival Sun Times who have manged to get that paper as close to closed as possible.

Judge Stinky Sarokin is a howl. Here is his headline from Huffington Post:
Voila!
Cook County Prosecutor Continues to Investigate Students for Trying to Free an Innocent Man

Nope. That is not why, nor is she investigating the Kids, Stinky.

She, Alvarez, subpoenaed their notes and academic records for Professor Dave's class; now, Dave had them act like Private Investigators (P.I.s) and argues that they are journalists and Medill's lawyer managed to insult the judge in the case and it was revealed that the kids appear to have bribed a witness.

Not only did Stinky paste up a dead-wrong headline but his last paragraph is what the non sequitur is all about!

The Medill Innocence Project was successful in exonerating 11 inmates and the Illinois governor cited those wrongful convictions in commuting the sentences of everyone on death row. One can understand that the prosecutor's office might be embarrassed as a result by the efforts of a bunch of journalism students, but such embarrassment does not warrant a vendetta against them. ( really?)The prosecution should join in the righting of wrongful convictions not be investigating the students engaged in the effort, no matter what their personal motives may be. ( Follows Whta?)If they get a good grade for freeing an innocent person, they deserve it. Right now the prosecution is flunking. (Participle Dangling? The Flunking Presecution? Flunking Science? Flunking Broadway. . .Do The Flunking Broadway?)

Medill. Protess and the Innocence Project do not smell too good at this point -Sacred Cows or not - but Judge Stinky thinks that it is Chanel # 5!

*On June 5, 1996, Sarokin announced that he would resign outright from the Third Circuit, effective July 31, 1996.[10] Sarokin cited his fear that his opinions from the bench might be used politically. "It is apparent that there are those who have decided to 'Willie Hortonize' the Federal judiciary, and that I am to be one of their prime targets," he wrote in a letter to President Clinton. "In the current political campaign, enforcement of constitutional rights is equated with being soft on crime and indeed, even causing it."[10]

In a separate letter to colleagues, Sarokin denied that his decision to retire had had anything to do with the court's decision not to allow him to move his chambers to California.[10]