[Content Note: Misogynist violence/sexual assault; infanticide; religious intolerance.]
Today is Independence Day in India, and the nation's new Prime Minister Narendra Modi used the occasion of his first Independence Day address to challenge his country to meaningfully address gendered violence:
Addressing the nation from the Red Fort citadel in Delhi, Modi called on Indian parents to take responsibility for the actions of their sons, rather than put the blame on their daughters. He said every Indian household should have a toilet within the next four years, and promised separate toilet facilities for girls in public schools.
"Our heads hang in shame when we hear about rapes," he said. "Why can't we prevent this? When a daughter steps out, parents demand to know where she's going. But when a son returns home, does anyone dare ask where he is coming from? He might have been with the wrong people, doing wrong things. After all, a person raping is someone's son. Why don't parents apply the same yardstick of good behaviour for their sons as for their daughters?"
..."The law will take its own course, but as a society every parent has a responsibility to teach their sons the difference between right and wrong," the prime minister said.
Modi's tone throughout his hour-long speech in Hindi was part beseeching, part admonishing, as he took up issues ranging from eradicating poverty and ending Maoist violence to reforming bureaucracy and ending Soviet-style central economic planning.
But he got the maximum applause when he spoke on gender-related issues. "Look at our sex ratio – 1,000 men to 940 women," he said. "Who is creating this imbalance in society? Not the Almighty. I appeal to doctors not to kill the girl child."
Modi called on politicians to ensure more toilets were built for girls and women. "Can't we just make arrangements for toilets for the dignity of our mothers and sisters?" he said.
In May two teenage girls were found hanged from a tree after being gang-raped while going to the toilet in the fields because – like around half of the country's population – there was no toilet at home.
"We are in the 21st century and yet there is still no dignity for women as they have to go out in the open to defecate and they have to wait for darkness to fall. Can you imagine the number of problems they have to face because of this?" Modi said.
Modi is not without his problems; one of the criticisms of his speech was that he glazed over recent inter-religious violence and "ended his address with slogans dear to Hindu nationalists," which is extremely problematic within the context of
his role in and reaction to the 2002 Gujarat riots which targeted the Muslim minority. I don't want to give the impression I believe he is above criticism.
On the issue of gendered violence, however, and using this highly scrutinized occasion to speak about it so bluntly, he did very well indeed.
And while I'm sure there are people who will accuse Modi of opportunism, to use this event in order to "repair India's reputation" after a series of high-profile cases of gendered violence, that seems like a pretty cynical view—and one that depends on subscribing to a shitty narrative about how India is somehow unique in the world in its incidents of gendered violence.
To be honest, I frankly don't even care if that
was part of his calculation. Because even if he was doing it for political reasons, he was still
saying out loud before his nation and the world that rapists are responsible for rape and that misogynist violence needs to end.
I cannot even imagine a US president giving a national address on gendered violence, no less talking about it in such detail as to point out how misogyny affects women even right down to their toileting habits.
I hope that these words will inspire change. I hope that Modi will listen to the many amazing activist groups of women across India who have long been working on gendered violence, and invites them to be a part of developing policy to meaningfully address it.
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
[Content Note: Carcerality; indefinite detention; racism; classism; disablism.]
"Hartfield asked a court to order him freed because his speedy trial rights were violated by the fact that Texas imprisoned him for more than three decades without trial. Yet a Texas appeals court just told him that it is powerless to help him until after his criminal trial for an offense Texas refused to try him on for over 30 years."—Ian Millhiser, on the case of Jerry Hartfield, a black man with an intellectual disability who has been imprisoned for 34 years without a conviction (his original conviction on a murder charge was tossed out 31 years ago "because the process used to select his jury was unconstitutional"), and whose request for release has been denied for the above-described circular fuckery.
The justice system! Plus or minus actual justice.
* * *
Yesterday, Shaker Brunocerous and I were talking about this story, which Brunocerous had passed on to me, which recounts studies finding that white people in California and New York are likely to favor harsh sentencing policies after being shown images of black people in prison.
[O]ne of the study's authors pointed out that not only do people more often associate blacks with violent crime, but that "simply thinking of crime can lead perceivers to conjure up images of Black Americans."
The upshot is that reminding white people of racial disparities in the prison population led them to favor policies that contribute to those very disparities. So what to do? The researchers write:
Many legal advocates and social activists assume that bombarding the public with images and statistics documenting the plight of minorities will motivate people to fight inequality. Our results call this assumption into question ...This produces quite a challenge for those striving to create a more equal and just society. Perhaps motivating the public to work toward an equal society requires something more than the evidence of inequality itself.
What that "something more" is, they don't say.
I said to Brunocerous (our conversation shared with his permission): "The conclusions make me think that white Americans are under the impression that the legal system is just and fair—so if more black people are in jail, that means black people must be committing more crime. Which in turn reminds me of the thing
you heard on the radio, about how it's better to be white and rich and guilty than black and poor and innocent. Basically, white folks know the justice system 'works' for them, and they wrongly assume it 'works' for everyone else. Angry face."
To which Brunocerous replied: "Exactly. Much the way innocent people are later called 'suspects' by law enforcement, to transmit the idea that they were doing something that justified police involvement. The media and the consumers of media go along with it. So. Angry."
(Note that he made that observation
yesterday, before today's police press conference in Ferguson.)
My point is this: I think that a very crucial (and goddamned dangerous) piece of white privilege (which intersects with class privilege) is the luxury of believing that the US justice system works; that it is fair.
For everyone.
That is not the case. And it's never going to change as long as the majority of white people are convinced it doesn't need to.
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
[Content Note: Police brutality; victim-blaming; racism.]
The family of Michael Brown, via their attorneys, released the following statement earlier today, following Ferguson Police Chief Tom Jackson's press conference:
Michael Brown's family is beyond outraged at the devious way the police chief has chosen to disseminate [piecemeal] information in a manner intended to assassinate the character of their son, following such a brutal assassination of his person in broad daylight.
There is nothing based on the facts that have been placed before us that can justify the execution style murder of their child by this police officer as he held his hands up, which is the universal sign of surrender.
The prolonged release of the officer's name and then the subsequent alleged information regarding a robbery is the reason why the family and the local community have such distrust for the local law enforcement agencies.
It is no way transparent to release the still photographs alleged to be Michael Brown and refuse to release the photographs of the officer that executed him.
The police strategy of attempting to blame the victim will not divert our attention, from being focused on the autopsy, ballistics report and the trajectory of the bullets that caused Michael's death and will demonstrate to the world this brutal execution of an unarmed teenager.
Benjamin L Crump, Esq.
Anthony D. Gray, Esq.
Daryl D. Parks, Esq.
Yep.
As I also noted
here, Dorian Johnson told police (days ago, it appears) that he and Brown stole the cigars. And yet somehow he is not even under arrest despite the fact the same crime is being used to justify Michael Brown having been killed.
That is an inconsistency we're not meant to notice. Or question.
Because it undermines the disgusting game the Ferguson PD is trying to play here.
* * *
UPDATE: "Thomas Jackson, the police chief of Ferguson, Missouri,
said later that the officer did not know Brown was a suspect in the robbery when he stopped Brown. Asked why Brown and [Johnson] were stopped, the chief said: 'Because they were walking down the middle of the street blocking traffic.'"
So, the police are openly admitting he wasn't stopped as a suspect. Thus they are tacitly admitting that the release of all the information about the robbery has literally nothing to do with the shooting, except to demonize Michael Brown.
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
Matilda.
As always, please feel welcome and encouraged to share pix of the fuzzy, feathered, or scaled members of your family in comments.
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
Eddy Grant: "Electric Avenue"
I remember loving this song when I was a kid, and dancing on my bed when it came on the radio. I just thought it was a great pop song, and it was only years later I really heard the lyrics and understood what it was about.
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
Here is some stuff in the news today...
[Content Note: Police militarization] Democratic Representative from Georgia Hank Johnson is "drafting legislation to limit a Pentagon program that provides surplus military equipment to local law enforcement. ...'As the tragedy in Missouri unfolds, one thing is clear. Our local police are becoming militarized,' Johnson's office said in a statement. Johnson said he will introduce the bill in September, when Congress returns from a five-week recess. He has been worked on the legislation for months, but his office said the current situation highlights the need for the bill." At Salon, Matthew Harwood details "How America's Police Became an Occupying Force." And at the New Yorker, Jay Caspian Kang notes, in another terrific piece on police militarization, that: "In many instances, the receipt of these military-grade weapons is contingent on their use within a calendar year." Which explains, in part, why we're seeing so many displays of this increased militarization.
[CN: Police brutality; racism; death] In California earlier this week: "A father of five died after he was involved in an altercation with deputies who suspected him of burglary. The Victorville Daily Press reports that Dante Parker, 36, was suspected of attempting to burglarize a Victorville home on Tuesday afternoon. The person who reported the burglary said the suspect fled on a bicycle and, according to the San Bernardino County Sheriff's office, Parker was seen riding his bike near the scene. ...NBC Los Angeles reports that, according to authorities, Parker resisted arrest and became 'uncooperative and combative,' according to police. It was at that point that the female officer trying to apprehend Parker shocked him with a Taser 'multiple times,' according to a release obtained by the station." How many times have we heard the same story now? A black man "fits the description" of someone who committed a crime, and is killed by police after becoming "combative"?
[CN: Police brutality; racism; death] Meanwhile, the parents of Trayvon Martin and Jordan Davis are at the United Nations in Lake Geneva, Switzerland, at an event hosted by the US Human Rights Network discussing racial discrimination in the United States ahead of "the UN review of US compliance with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), which was ratified by the United States in 1994."
France has passed "a sweeping gender-equality law this week that eases current restrictions on abortion, encourages paternity leave, and promotes gender parity at home and in the workplace. ...The new law also addresses...the sharing of domestic duties at home and provides measures to support women vulnerable to domestic abuse and poverty." I can't even imagine something like that getting passed in the United States.
The Clintons had a meal with former San Antonio mayor and incoming Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julian Castro, and this is just perfect: "President Bill Clinton invited [Castro] to dine at the Clinton's private D.C. home last week, the Washington Post reported, making it impossible for the media to ignore the 2016 implications." IMPOSSIBLE! It is IMPOSSIBLE to ignore THE IMPLICATIONS!
"Engineers in the US have built a swarm of 1,000 little robots that can shuffle into specific formations on command." !!!
And finally! WHO'S A GOOD DOG? "When Meg, a three legged dog rescued in 2008 from Rochdale's RSPCA started whimpering at the rescue center's ceiling, her owner and facility manager, Jean Spencer, knew there was something wrong. Upon investigating, Spencer found five kittens trapped in the ceiling. Those cute little kittens are alive and safe today thanks to Meg. ...'Meg is really fond of the kittens,' Spencer told itv.com. 'She is really kind and gentle with them and is always licking them. It is very sweet to see.'" ♥
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
[Content Note: Anti-choicery. NB: Not only women need access to contraception.]
I present to you Republican Representative Mike Coffman, currently running for reelection in Colorado's 6th district:
[Coffman, a thin middle-aged white man with white hair, and his Democratic opponent Andrew Romanoff, a thin middle-aged white man with dark hair, sit at a table in front of a room at a hotel, before an audience.]
Moderator (a man's voice from offscreen): Mike, what do you see as the differences between you and Andrew when it comes to women's reproductive rights and health care?
[Romanoff hands Coffman the microphone, as the audience oohs over the question.]
Coffman: I'm pro-life. You know, I believe that, uh... [applause] I'm proud of that. And, uh... I do not support personhood, but, uh, I support a woman's access to, to, um... [waves hand] ...certainly, certainly to...um, this Hobby Lobby decision... [waves hand] ...uh, to, um... to get uh... [he waves his hand at his head, to indicate he can't remember; touches Romanoff's arm, as if to ask for his help]
Crowd: Birth control.
Coffman: Birth control!
[laughter; Coffman sets down the microphone and slumps forward, then leans back in his chair and crosses his arm and smiles embarrassedly]
Romanoff: I don't support the Hobby Lobby decision...
Now, everyone gets word aphasia from time to time, so I don't want to be too unforgiving about his not remembering the words "birth control" (or "contraception") for a moment, but, the thing is, someone who is used to thinking and talking about this issue could have, you know, just substituted: "I support a woman's ability to control her reproduction." Whoooooops except for Coffman, who can't say that, because he doesn't. He's "pro-life." Which means he was limited to saying very explicitly he only supports a person's access to contraception. Darn.
And even that is a dubious claim, because he also supports the Hobby Lobby decision. (As his team made clear after the event, since he couldn't even effectively communicate that here.)
Also: "I do not support personhood"? Um.
This doesn't suggest a person who has thoroughly considered convictions about reproductive rights. It suggests someone who really doesn't want to talk or think about it all.
LADIES?
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
[Content Note: Police brutality; victim-blaming; racism.]
Ferguson Police Chief Tom Jackson held a press conference this morning in which the name of the officer who killed Michael Brown was finally made public.
During that press conference, Jackson:
1. Named the officer: Darren Wilson.
2. Noted that Wilson has no record of disciplinary action.
3. Provided no details of the interaction between Wilson and Brown that resulted in the deadly shooting.
4. Said that Michael Brown was the suspect in a robbery shoplifting.
Following the press conference, information was made available to the media, including a police report that details the robbery shoplifting* in which Brown was a suspect and still images from the camera at the scene of the robbery shoplifting.
This information has clearly been made available in order to explain and justify Officer Wilson's shooting of Michael Brown. I wish it went without saying that none of that actually explains or justifies their officer shooting and killing Brown—especially why he was shot multiple times with his hands in the air.
The police are essentially contending that it's better to kill a suspect than let him go and then take a minute to investigate, i.e. do their job.
Which is to say nothing of all the alarming inconsistencies in this account. The police did not have that security footage (in which it's not remotely evident that's Michael Brown) when Wilson encountered Brown. It's being released after the fact.
At the press conference Jackson stated that a 911 call was placed about a robbery shoplifting at the convenience store at 11:51am, and a description of the suspect was broadcast. Exactly ten minutes later, at 12:01pm, Wilson encountered Michael Brown, and by 12:04 he was dead.
The officer did not have access to the information in the police report, nor to the still images, when he encountered Brown. Brown merely "fit the description."
Also: Witnesses have said repeatedly that Wilson told Brown and his friend to "get on the sidewalk," which "isn't consistent with 'Brown was a suspect, which is why we stopped him.'" Further, if Brown was a suspect in a robbery shoplifting allegedly committed by two men, why have the police not interviewed (or arrested) his friend Dorian Johnson, who is listed in their report as Brown's alleged accomplice?
This is just complete bullshit. It utterly defies credulity.
And even if it were all true, it still does not explain or justify Officer Wilson shooting and killing Michael Brown.
Fuck this. This is just another betrayal of the people of Ferguson.
--------------
* It is not entirely clear (to me) what the correct terminology here should be: Robbery, shoplifting, or strong-arm robbery. Please see comments for further discussion. To state the obvious, Michael Brown was convicted of none of these crimes, and although the police are describing it as a strong-arm robbery, they are not neutral actors. The long and short of it is, there was a theft of some sort during which a weapon was not used and no one was injured.
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
[Content Note: Police militarization.]
Yesterday, after President Obama spoke about the situation in Ferguson, Jim Pasco, the executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police, criticized the President:
"I would contend that discussing police tactics from Martha's Vineyard is not helpful to ultimately calming the situation," director Jim Pasco said in an interview with The Hill.
"I think what he has to do as president and as a constitutional lawyer is remember that there is a process in the United States and the process is being followed, for good or for ill, by the police and by the county and by the city and by the prosecutors' office," Pasco added.
...Pasco said both police and members of the public are entitled to due process but said he is not convinced police have used excessive force in Ferguson.
"I'm not there, and neither is the president," Pasco said. "That is why we have due process in the United States. And this will all be sorted out over time. But right now, I haven't seen anything from afar — and maybe the president has — that would lead me to believe the police are doing anything except to restore order."
...The officer involved in the Ferguson shooting is a member of the Fraternal Order of Police and is being represented by one of its lawyers. His name has not been released to the public.
So, first of all: This was entirely wrong. However imperfect his statement may have been, the President "discussing police tactics from Martha's Vineyard"
was helpful to "calming the situation." The President, and the Governor, and Senator McCaskill, and others stepping in clearly made
all the difference.
All of it.
Secondly: One of the major problems in the US right now is police who don't see militarization, threats, and physical intimidation as "excessive force." That is a display of excessive force,
even before an officer puts hir hands on somebody. Or uses a weapon to harm them. And that the only way to "restore order" is to be increasingly aggressive.
To hear all of this coming from the top of the Fraternal Order of Police is not reassuring.
Especially because it's wrong. Demonstrably wrong. Dangerously wrong.
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
Suggested by Shaker yes: "What was your first interaction with the internet like?"
The very first time I was on the internet, I was at university, and—I don't even remember what the interface was; it was even pre-ICQ, I believe—I was talking to some guy (literally just talking to him, not "talking to" in the colloquial sense of sorta-dating) who was also at university, somewhere in Kentucky. He seemed very nice and funny, and then we started talking politics and social issues, and he turned into a nightmare the end.
That was my introduction to the internet. Yup.
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
[Content Note: Animal cruelty, but with a happy ending.]
This is just a really neat story about an ASPCA photographer who fell in love with a very timid and traumatized dog, and invested a lot of time and energy and love into rehabilitating him.
"He's the perfect dog." That just got me so hard.
I always remember Iain saying when we first met Zelda, and I noted her terrible leash manners and her aversion to having her paws touched, "If she were perfect, she wouldn't need us to rescue her."
None of the five furry residents are perfect. But they are certainly perfect for us.
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
Huffington Post: "Did NASA Capture an Alien and Its Shadow on the Moon?"
YES. Obviously. The answer is YES. #science
PROOF.
It's either an alien, or Mitt Romney out for a stroll near his gold-plated moon mansion, in search of that flag he heard that Lance Armstrong and Buzz Lightyear left up there when they visited.
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
An appeals court has ruled that same-sex couples in Virgina can start getting married a week from today, unless the Supreme Court intervenes:
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals clarified today that same-sex couples in Virginia may get married beginning next Thursday—Aug. 21, at 8 a.m.—unless the U.S. Supreme Court intervenes and puts a hold on the ruling.
The court on Wednesday denied a motion by one of the defendants in a federal case seeking to overturn Virginia's same-sex marriage ban to stay its ruling from last month which found the ban unconstitutional.
In a 2-1 decision, the three-judge panel had agreed with a lower court to strike down the 2006 amendment to the state Constitution that defines marriage as between a man and a woman.
The appellate court's decision was to go into effect 21 days following its ruling, barring the defendant's motion to appeal.
So, it's not totally good news, because there's a chance the Supreme Court may grant the appeal to stay the ruling, choosing instead to defer marriage in Virginia until the Supreme Court takes up the issue of same-sex marriage nationally.
Which will hopefully be soon, irrespective of whether they stay this appellate ruling, because there are a lot of people in a lot of states waiting for this shit to get resolved. We are long overdue for a federal ruling that declares same-sex marriage a constitutional right, and I am desperately hoping that SCOTUS will show up and make it so ASAP.
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
[Content Note: War on agency; anti-choice harassment.]
Robin Marty: "One Doctor's Fight to Do His Job After Becoming the 'Poster Child' for Late Term Abortion." I'm not even going to excerpt it; just go read the whole thing.
In case I haven't said this enough times yet, Robin Marty is indispensable and her work invaluable on the subject of abortion access in the US.
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
"IT'S A DAY!!!"
As always, please feel welcome and encouraged to share pix of the fuzzy, feathered, or scaled members of your family in comments.
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
[Content Note: Racism; police militarization.]
"We need to demilitarize this situation—this kind of response by the police has become the problem instead of the solution. I obviously respect law enforcement's work to provide public safety, but my constituents are allowed to have peaceful protests, and the police need to respect that right and protect that right."—Democratic Senator from Missouri Claire McCaskill, after meeting with community leaders in Ferguson this morning.
Yes. The police should be in the business protecting the right to assemble, not in the business of denying it.
Similarly, Steve Moore III, the first man who speaks in this powerful video documenting what's happening in Ferguson, says, referencing a line of police in riot gear: "That's intimidation over there, to me. And that's what this is about—intimidation. Why can't we fix it and make a dialogue instead of that happening? Why don't they come and walk with us?!"
Why don't they indeed.
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
Here is some stuff in the news today...
[Content Note: Harassment; abuse] Following the gross harassment of Zelda Williams on Twitter, which prompted her to leave the social media site, Twitter has vowed to improve their policies. 1. I'll believe it when I see it. 2. I agree with my pal Andrea Grimes, who noted: "I am legit sorry that RW's daughter was harassed, but WoC in particular have been asking for this for AAAAGES." Case in point: Imani Gandy.
[CN: Violence; racism] Speaking of Imani, here she is being very smart (as always) and connecting what's happening in Ferguson to the movement for reproductive justice: "I'm going to say it again: police brutality—especially against pregnant women—is a #reprojustice issue. ...Black women are raising children and fearing that their children are going to be gunned down in the street. That affects their ability to parent freely." YES.
[CN: War] In Israel and Gaza: "Hamas and Israel have agreed five more days' truce to allow further talks after a tense final countdown to the end of the current 72-hour ceasefire on Wednesday night. ...Gamal Shobky, the Palestinian ambassador in Cairo, told the Guardian shortly before midnight there would be a five-day ceasefire to give more opportunity for negotiation. 'We are very close but there are still some things to resolve.'" Fingers crossed.
[CN: Violence; disablism] Eastsidekate pointed me to this story about the high levels of violence at the Brookdale University Hospital and Medical Center in Brooklyn, which prompted the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to issue "a citation against Brookdale in the Brownsville neighborhood for violating federal worker safety laws and failing to protect hospital employees." The whole time I was reading the article, I'm thinking, "Is this because ERs have become substitutes for mental healthcare facilities?" And then I come to the final line: "It's been a growing problem as emergency rooms have become a dumping ground for people with mental health issues." Welp.
[CN: Domestic violence] A new law in Louisiana will "grant an immediate divorce in domestic violence situations. New Orleans Senator JP Morrell says before today, even if you had tons of evidence that you were a victim of domestic violence, you'd still have to wait 6 months to a year before you get a divorce. 'That's obviously problematic because until that divorce is granted, the abuser still has all the rights of a spouse,' said Morrell. Morrell says now if someone has reasonable proof that they've been abused and can show that in court, they will be able to divorce the abuser right away." That is a very good law.
[CN: Racism; classism; carcerality] Also in Louisiana: New Orleans has instituted "a radical policy stating that a criminal record will no longer trigger an automatic rejection for public housing." Because people with criminal records (or in "some instances, just a record of arrest, even without charges") have historically been banned from public-housing assistance, it can be extremely difficult, to put it mildly, for people with criminal records to secure housing after their release. (Bootstraps!) But: "Under federal law, local public-housing authorities are empowered to create their own guidelines for admission [to section 8 HUD housing], provided they adhere to the Fair Housing Act of 1968." This is a critically important move by New Orleans.
Here is Jeff Bridges, being full-tilt Jeff Bridges: "I consider myself a lazy guy, but I do a bunch of stuff, and I'm so busy that in my downtime, I like to be with my wife, who I'm just madly in love with. We've been married 37 years, and it keeps getting better and better and more fun. I don't have too much time to jam with the rest of Hollywood." I love that guy.
And finally! A cat stuck up a tree for four days (!) gets rescued by the cunning use of a treat. Huzzah!
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
Note: In a few minutes, President Obama is going to make a statement on what's happening in Ferguson. Here is one of the places where you will be able to watch it live.
I will post video and transcript here afterwards, as soon as they become available.
UPDATE: Here is video of the section of the President's address concerning the situation in Ferguson.
UPDATE 2: Here is a transcript,
care of the
Washington Post:
I want to address something that's been in the news over the last couple of days, and that's the situation in Ferguson, Missouri. I know that many Americans have been deeply disturbed by the images we've seen in the heartland of our country, as police have clashed with people protesting. Today I'd like us all to take a step back and think about how we're going to be moving forward.
This morning, I received a thorough update on the situation from Attorney General Eric Holder, who's been following and been in communication with his team. I've already tasked the Department of Justice and the FBI to independently investigate the death of Michael Brown, along with local officials on the ground. The Department of Justice is also consulting with local authorities about ways that they can maintain public safety without restricting the right of peaceful protest and while avoiding unnecessary escalation. I made clear to the Attorney General that we should do what is necessary to help determine exactly what happened and to see that justice is done.
I also just spoke with Governor Jay Nixon of Missouri. I expressed my concern over the violent turn that events have taken on the ground, and underscored that now's the time for all of us to reflect on what's happened and to find a way to come together going forward. He is going to be traveling to Ferguson. He is a good man and a fine governor, and I'm confident that, working together, he's going to be able to communicate his desire to make sure that justice is done and his desire to make sure that public safety is maintained in an appropriate way.
Of course, it's important to remember how this started. We lost a young man, Michael Brown, in heartbreaking and tragic circumstances. He was 18 years old, and his family will never hold Michael in their arms again. And when something like this happens, the local authorities, including the police, have a responsibility to be open and transparent about how they are investigating that death and how they are protecting the people in their communities.
There is never an excuse for violence against police or for those who would use this tragedy as a cover for vandalism or looting. There's also no excuse for police to use excessive force against peaceful protests, or to throw protesters in jail for lawfully exercising their First Amendment rights. And here in the United States of America, police should not be bullying or arresting journalists who are just trying to do their jobs and report to the American people on what they see on the ground.
Put simply, we all need to hold ourselves to a high standard, particularly those of us in positions of authority. I know that emotions are raw right now in Ferguson, and there are certainly passionate differences about what has happened. There are going to be different accounts of how this tragedy occurred. There are going to be differences in terms of what needs to happen going forward.
That's part of our democracy. But let's remember that we're all part of one American family. We are united in common values, and that includes belief in equality under the law, basic respect for public order and the right to peaceful public protest, a reverence for the dignity of every single man, woman, and child among us, and the need for accountability when it comes to our government.
So now is the time for healing. Now is the time for peace and calm on the streets of Ferguson. Now is the time for an open and transparent process to see that justice is done. And I've asked that the Attorney General and the U.S. Attorney on the scene continue to work with local officials to move that process forward. They will be reporting to me in the coming days about what's being done to make sure that happens.
Thanks very much, everybody.
Open Wide...
Shut Up!
