Bicycle Dreams: Race Across America (RAAM)

This Wednesday, 7 pm, Southside Works Cinema: Bicycle Dreams, a documentary about the Race Across America (RAAM).

I am really looking forward to this movie, although it has nothing at all to do with any kind of bicycling I've ever been involved with, or will ever be involved with.

Me going to this movie is sort of like a limo chauffeur watching a Nascar race Demolition Derby. These people do incredible things, against all understanding, and it involves bicycles.

Here's my favorite RAAM story (so far): Alberto Blanco is in third place when he experiences Shermer's Neck, which happens when your neck muscles are exhausted from holding your head and helmet at a peculiar angle for a very long time.

His support team used a backpack frame, some straps and coat-hangars, and a lot of Duct Tape to fashion a rig to keep him riding.


More? From Bike-Pgh.org:

Bicycle Dreams, the award-winning feature-length documentary about the Race Across America (RAAM), will premiere in Pittsburgh at the Southside Works Cinema on Wednesday, January 25 at 7 p.m. as part of the film's ongoing nationwide winter tour. The screening is co-sponsored by BikePGH and the OTB Bicycle Café.

The film, which has won numerous awards at film festivals all over the world, "is an up-close look at what RAAM riders go through," says Stephen Auerbach, the director and producer of Bicycle Dreams. "They deal with searing desert heat, agonizing mountain climbs, and endless stretches of open road. And they do it all while battling extreme exhaustion and sleep deprivation. It's a great subject for a film."

Before and after the movie, the OTB Bicycle Café on East Carson Street and will be offering discounts to moviegoers before and after the event. Movie goers can enjoy $3 Snow Melts, $1 Sloppy Joe's and $2 off Great Lakes.

“An astonishing documentary,” declares Pez Cycling. “This film is a ride of many stark contrasts; when it ended I felt both shattered and triumphant. I realized I was experiencing its genius. A central theme of Bicycle Dreams is the profoundly inspiring strength of the human in facing monumental challenge and tragedy. Bicycle Dreams is a race of truth.”

“This film isn’t for those who want to shy away from the tragic side of the human experience, unwilling to risk the cracking of their shell of denial, not willing to risk their coping mechanism,” writes Cycling-Review.com. “Bicycle Dreams captures the human condition like few other films. Bicycle Dreams moves us to break through the barrier of the fear of death. I have seldom found a film that captures this ‘life drama’ as powerfully as does Bicycle Dreams.”

Adds Podium Café, “Bicycle Dreams is the ultimate inner journey. If you thought the life of a cyclist was an internal struggle, wait until you see what Auerbach unearths in this film. Bicycle Dreams is an unprecedented exploration of the subject of the suffering on the bike.”

About.com writes, “As we fall deeper and deeper into Bicycle Dreams, what we witness grows more terrifying, yet more compelling. Auerbach’s masterful direction exposes the raw lessons that drive people to push beyond the limits of human endurance. Revealing what lies at the heart of every impossible human endeavor is what Bicycle Dreams is all about.”

Tickets will be $11 in advance and $15 at the door the night of the show.

Newt's Brilliant Ayn Rand Marriage Strategy

I think most people have completely failed to imagine the possibility of Newt Gingrich's strategic brilliance this week, and it demonstrates the capability of a visionary leader with a solid grounding in our nation's exceptional history to move beyond what seems possible.

This week's maneuver in which the second Mrs. Gingrich (M-G^2.0) described Newt's suggestion and exploration of a novel way to preserve a marriage, which is the foundational bedrock of our culture, was misunderstood by many as a setback when it was actually a game-changing repositioning by the Gingrich campaign.

Cain-supporter Stephen Colbert came the closest to understanding, when he pointed out that "at least Newt asked permission. That’s a Southern gentleman. That’s what Robert E. Lee would have done."

M-G^2.0's outreach to married women was also a brilliantly conceived attempt to connect with Ron Paul's LLV's (Libertarian Leaning Voters). Newt's beyond Mitt Romney; it's a mop-up operation now, and it's time to bring the Apostate's Apostles into Newt's Big Tent where they belong.

Sometimes public leaders have to speak in code. For instance, when Newt talks about janitors and food stamps, we know what he's referring to. It's fun being in on a stealth conversation.

When Marianne Gingrich (M-G^2.0) tells her story of Newt asking for an "arrangement" or an "understanding", those code words are appealing to two distinct constituencies with just one message.

• He appeals to Romney's Francophile supporters, who know that if this were France, nobody would consider this cinq à sept newsworthy.
• He directly channels the Libertarian spirit of bold individuality and appeals directly to Ron Paul's core followers.

Two targets, one shot. Brilliant.

Ayn Rand famously wanted to have an affair with her young assistant Nathaniel Blumenthal, so she worked it out with her own husband and then approached the young man's wife proposing an arrangement to her two employees. Ayn Rand was faithful to that arrangement until the young man foolishly reneged on his committment^2.0 to Ayn. Which was very painful to her, and we've all known pain in our lives.

By having Marianne Gingrich (M-G^2.0) tell the story of Newt ending up in the same philosophical position viz-a-vis monogamy, Newt realizing the way to save our foundational bedrock institution of marriage was to accomodate the outsourcing that has made our economy a place where job creators can do their best, unencumbered by paperwork and legacy standards, Marianne was speaking directly to Ron Paul's LLV's (Libertarian Leaning Voters) who understand Libertarian code-words.

In fact, when you look at the history of Newt's relationships, you'll see his continuous commitment to Randy philosophy (a philosophy which resulted in Rand's being considered Cougar Zero). Early polling shows support for Ron Paul dropped 35% overnight, and most of those voters indicate they're moving into Newt's Big Tent.

Newt is synthesizing the individual-driven Objectivist philosophy of Ayn Rand with the rebirth we see in Christian forgiveness. You get into the new relationship with Ayn Rand; you get out of it with Christianity. Only a mind with the inquisitive breadth of Newt Gingrich could manage this fusion. That's why We Need Newt.

Newt Gingrich. Ayn Rand.

• They share a vision to save Marriage.
• They share a vision for America.

---

Anyway, how does a guy with three wives end up criticizing a Mormon?

A Curious 1963 Bicycle Safety PSA: One Got Fat

One Got Fat is a short bicycle safety film from 1963. I love these old movies because it lets me show my children the movies I saw as a child, sort of a documentary of my own youth.

The movie emphasizes the modern "Vehicular Cyclist" paradigm expressed by John Forester: "Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles."

There's a few quirks in the movie and IMHO it's worth watching. It may surprise you.



The Public Service Announcements (PSA) of the time period were generally innocuous - wash your hands, be polite, stop-drop-roll, etc. The quirkiness of this 49-year-old short movie, and its position in the public domain, has led to its recent use in several music videos.

The film is sampled in "Everything You Do is a Balloon" by Boards of Canada, "Bloody Palms" by Phantogram, "20 Inches of Monkey" by Lamps, "Fool's Life" by Dr. Dog, "St Peter" by The Black Spiders, and "January" by Venetian Snares, and "Oh Me, Oh My" by Nerf Herder.

Like a lot of children's stories it may reveal more than originally intended.

• Today the fat kid is a loser; in this movie, the kid who got fat was the winner.
  
• Using injury as a motivator would be considered stigmatizing and unacceptable today.
  
• And then there's the racism thing...

---

The plot relies on the Ten Little Indians theme from Agatha Cristy's 1939 novel and subsequent 1945 movie, And Then There Were None.

Let's review the provenance of this storyline. In 1864 Septimus Winner wrote a song called Ten Little Indians.

In 1868 the song was adapted and renamed (possibly by Frank J. Green) as "Ten Little Niggers" and became standard fare in blackface minstrel shows. It was a very popular, well known song.

Agatha Christie used the story in her novel of the same title, "Ten Little Niggers", about a series of killings on remote Nigger Island. This novel is the most successful (in terms of sales) mystery novel of all time.

Agatha Christie's novel was published as "Ten Little Niggers" in England and Europe. For the American market it was edited and renamed And Then There Were None. The brilliance of American marketing was to change the named "other" to Indians, (swapping out one exploited and deprecated group for another) and to make two of the victims into "good guys" that the audience could root for. One might claim that Indians held the same role in American history that the original title reflected in British perspective.

British versions of the book continued to use Agatha Christie's original title up until 1985. A 1987 Russian version used the title Десять негритят, or "Ten Little Negroes". Try to imagine a book and a movie called "Ten Little Italians", or "Ten Little Israelis".

Remarkably, the Ten Little Anythings storyline derives from a blackface vaudeville song dating from the Civil War. It's a racial song from the days of slavery. How can this possibly be the plot device used for a publicly funded, 1963 bicycle safety movie?

But wait, there's more.

---

Just like the American version of the book abandoned Agatha Christie's original title and used "Indians" as the "other", this 1963 bicycle safety movie abandoned the American Indian motif and instead uses monkeys for a metaphor.

All the stupid kids who can't follow the sensible rules are monkeys. The one kid who played the game by the rules turns out to not be a monkey at all; he's a white kid just like everybody else. Holy Happy Ending, Batman.

Monkeys have a special place in "our" coded narratives. Consider King Kong: black, taken from Africa against his will, shackled and chained, owned as an asset and seen as the key to fortune, entranced by a white woman and eventually shot down by the Army and the police. Can anybody deny that some aspect of King Kong's monkey is a racial metaphor? Does anybody believe that the whole "save the white woman from the black beast" narrative is just about explorers and show business?

"One Got Fat" was released in 1963. Something else that came out in 1963 was Pierre Boulle's book La Planète des singes. In 1968 the derivative movie, Planet of the Apes made its debut.

The Planet of the Apes book and movie series used astronauts and monkeys as a metaphor for racism, privilege, bigotry, and justifiable rebellion. During test screenings, reviewers noted out that black audiences drowned out much of the dialogue by cheering "Right on!".

Introducing the monkeys brought Agatha Christie's original title full circle.

---

That's a lot of stuff to find in one video. It really is a documentary of my youth.

If nothing else, it's interesting how modern music videos are connected to an 1864 slavery ditty. Fortunately, we've all moved beyond that now. Right?

Deconstructing the Despicable "Band of Brothers" Imagery

By now most people with web access have seen the despicable photo working its way across the ether, the "money shot" picture of a band of brothers celebrating their victory, all in their uniforms, the heady moment when they could do anything and it was great to be alive.

What were they thinking? The answer is, they weren't thinking, they were just acting out their understanding of their assigned roles. They've slayed dragons, they've beat the enemy, they've come out ahead. They're winners, heroes, gladiators. They couldn't pass up the photo op.

When people ask, How could they do that? I respond, This is what they are, at their essence; you're not seeing a quirk, you're seeing the nature of the beast. And we're responsible for them; our pressures, expectations, and rewards drove them into this, with our blessing and approval.

Taking the picture was bad judgement; they were carried away by testosterone, arrogance, and their power. They've lost their perspective on the bigger human condition and any claim to decency. Their hubris is way out in front of them. In the moment of the photo, they've put pretense and posture aside and let their Inner Warrior stand proud. This camera doesn't lie.

People from other cultures will look at the photo and wonder, What have the Americans come to? But deep inside, to some extent, we Americans recognize and even embrace the behavior. We won't hold this against these men.

The guys in the picture will have to live with this for the rest of their lives, but they really only regret the publicity of it; they're good with the activity. I suspect if you had drinks with them in private, they'd admit "hell yes I'd do that again".

In the future, when they're under stress and having a "fight-or-flight" moment, they'll remember their experience and the lessons that have been imprinted onto their psyches. Don't be surprised to see this callous indifference again.

The attitude on display is so embedded in their "culture" that they can't even understand what's wrong with it; therefore, anybody who objects to it must be out of touch. Some of their colleagues and fellow-travelers are obliviously defending the photo right now.

Just to ensure there's no ambiguity, we are talking about the photo below, right?



They've completely lost their decency, their moral compass, and their connection to the American people. If they had any sense of shame, they'd withdraw into obscurity and do public service work.

---

And as far as that other photo (the Marines in Afghanistan), I find myself agreeing with Robert Wright; this is what happens in war, and when you choose to start a war you set yourself up for this.

Losing Faith: 1960's Alabama and Relative Perniciousness

Relativity is tricky, in both physics and ethics. Sometimes it's pretty clear that two things are both "bad", but it's hard to say which is worse, to quantify or evaluate relative perniciousness.

In a recent incident, an Allegheny County police officer says he stopped at a congested intersection. There were two Township policemen and a Township Councilman. The County Cop says that when he asked them about the intersection, one Township cop punched the County cop in the throat and knocked him down, then the two Township cops filed affadavits and charged the County cop with criminal charges. The charges were without merit and were dismissed. The County cop is now suing.

Here's a question: Which was worse:

1. the Township cop assaulting the County cop, or
2. the two Township cops filing false statements, charging a crime that didn't exist, and attempting to put the County cop in jail?

The assault is a one-time violent wrong, which if survived will diminish over time; the perjury, conspiracy, and false imprisonment will have life-long effects if successful.

Here's an observation: the perjury, conspiracy, and false imprisonment of the County Cop didn't succeed, but the "justice system" did not follow through; there was no accountability for the two Township cops - who, if the County cop is right, committed crimes of their own. The criminal justice system did not deal with the false reports and fake charges; the victim had to resort to a civil lawsuit to try to right the wrong. And this is a policeman.

---

I believe in our system and our society. More to the point, I want to believe in our system and our society. (Because in the end, it's all about me.) And so I think, ok that's just one event. Aberrations happen. It's the exception that shows how good things are, most of the time. I want to believe that. All my inclinations make me want to believe.

Increasingly, I'm having trouble believing that there's just one problem every few years.

---

For instance, from the Post-Gazette's Sadie Gurman, Nov 13 2010:

The Allegheny County district attorney's office said it will review dozens of criminal cases involving a pair of Pittsburgh police officers charged Friday with framing two men in what prosecutors called a wrongful drug arrest.

Officers Kenneth Simon, 49, and Anthony Scarpine, 58, were put on paid leave and could face termination in light of the charges against them, which include conspiracy, official oppression, unsworn falsification and obstruction. Officer Simon also was charged with felony perjury and is accused of stealing more than $800 from the pockets of one of the men he and Officer Scarpine arrested.

The charges were the result of a months-long probe by the district attorney's office into the July 7 arrests of Tim Joyce, 22, and David Carpenter, 38, at a North Side car wash. Numerous drug offenses against the men were filed -- and later withdrawn -- after the officers wrote in sworn accounts that they witnessed a hand-to-hand cocaine transaction that the district attorney's office said did not take place.

Surveillance footage from the car wash, in the 2900 block of Stayton Street, "does not depict any contact whatsoever" between either suspect and shows Officer Simon taking a wad of what appeared to be cash from Mr. Joyce's pocket, prosecutors wrote in a criminal complaint.

Charges against the police officers were dismissed.

---

Sure, maybe there's more than one bad cop out there; it's not all of them, just some. And I'd like to think that the rest of the criminal justice system protects us from those few bad apples. Because the really bad stuff, that all happened in Alabama in the 1960's. Not in these modern times, not in Pennsylvania. Couldn't happen here/now.

---

From Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, we have this:

The "Kids for cash" scandal unfolded in 2008 over judicial kickbacks at the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. Two judges, President Judge Mark Ciavarella and Senior Judge Michael Conahan, were accused of accepting money from Robert Mericle builder of two private, for-profit juvenile facilities, in return for contracting with the facilities and imposing harsh sentences on juveniles brought before their courts in order to ensure that the detention centers would be utilized.

Two interesting sidebars to mention:

• Is this what happens when you privatize government functions (such as prison) - maybe when you run government like a business, justice goes away and you get business-like results?
• None of this is trivial when one of the possible outcomes of our criminal justice system is execution.

How did these Luzerne County kids end up? How did the false imprisonment change them, their view of society, their view of justice? As a parent, what do you do when the Cops, the Judge, and the Prosecutor falsely imprison your child, and your kid gets raped in jail, joins a gang, and comes out a different person? Does anybody believe that expunging their criminal record makes them whole?

---

Which brings me, inexorably, to Jordan Miles. Jordan Miles (the violin-playing honor student at the magnet school) was beaten, tased, and had the hair ripped out of his scalp by three Pittsburgh policemen. The policemen submitted affadavits and charged Jordan Miles with crimes.

Fortunately, Jordan Miles had family and a clean record. If he'd had a marijuanna bust a few years prior and if English wasn't the primary language in his house, it all would have gone differently. But his family supported him, his community supported him, and the charges were dropped.

The more I think about it, the beating and scalping weren't the worst things those cops did to Jordan Miles; the attempt to falsely imprison him looms much larger. And if he didn't have a clean record and family support, it would have happened.

The more pernicious crime may be the filing of false statements, the conspiracy of the official report, and the attempt to deprive Jordan Miles of his liberty, to label an innocent man a criminal, and to (in fact) make him into a different person by sending him to prison for a few years.

---

I want to believe in our system, I really do. But when I look at the conspiracy to falsely imprison Jordan Miles; when I look at the fabrication of a story about Tim Joyce and David Carpenter, and again with Officer Ray Hrabos; when I look at the police escorting Big Ben in Georgia; and when I look at Luzerne County, I think: don't be naive, don't be a sucker.

And in each of these cases, the criminal justice system didn't self-correct; Ray Hrabos and Jordan Miles are seeking justice in civil court.

And when these incidents are left unchallenged, when the wrongs are not made right, our entire system is degraded and the people lose faith. And so the damage done by these perjuries, conspiracies, and false imprisonment accrues to both the instant victim and to our society at large. This hurts everybody.

---

And finally, I need to say: this is not most police, who are good, caring people. I would go further and acknowledge that most of those good police are prisoners of the system too. I understand why Alexis Madrigal expresses empathy for John Pike of UC-Davis. Peter Moskos attributes a lot of this to flawed training and places the blame on police departments, not police officers. James Baldwin recognized that notorious Alabama Sheriff Jim Clark was merely the endpoint of a system that shaped the sheriff just as it shaped the people the sheriff attacked.

The understanding that most police are not the problem does not mitigate the issue; as Allegheny County police officer Ray Hrabos said about his experience, "Wrong is wrong, and this needs to be righted".

Every complaint needs to offer a recommendation or else it's just whining; the recommendation is, We need to treat false reports and false charges (not wrong charges) as pernicious crimes against both the individual and society.


JusticeForJordanMiles
justice4jordan

Veracity of the Official Police Version and Public Confidence in Justice

From the always excellent Rich Lord in the Post-Gazette:

A 2010 incident that pitted police against police is now the subject of a lawsuit in which an Allegheny County officer said that Springdale Borough officers roughed him up, baselessly charged him and lied about it all.

The complaint, filed today in U.S. District Court by county Officer Ray Hrabos, said that Springdale Officer Mark Thom pulled a gun on him and pushed him into a snow bank during a brief dispute over a blocked street. Another Springdale officer later filed charges against Officer Hrabos, most of which were dismissed at the district judge level. The last charge -- disorderly conduct -- was thrown out and mocked by a judge on appeal.

"If this can happen to Officer Hrabos, then who among us is safe from police officers who are willing to lie?" asked attorney Timothy P. O'Brien, who is representing the officer. "Any citizen can be in the same context as Officer Hrabos, where two or three police officers or public officials can fabricate charges if they're willing to state something that wasn't true."

Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Robert Gallo dismissed the disorderly conduct charge on appeal, telling both sides the matter "should have been settled that night. ... This is insane to come down here on this case. Just insane to even bring it here, this far."

Officer Hrabos said he was not worried about being ostracized for suing other officers. "Wrong is wrong, and this needs to be righted," he said.

The Jordan Miles case is about the same thing: integrity of the official version, a citizen's rights, and the (public servant vs military) police orientation.

Increasingly, people are being mistreated by police in the same shameful way that blacks have been mistreated for a long time. Now they're even treating cops like they mistreat black people. I've said it before; in today's environment, increasingly we are all black Palestinians, and maybe we're going to discover what all that noise was about.