Public Service Announcement

My keen observation skills have led to an advantageous discovery about the enemy: Po-Po. When they are not parading around in their decked-out cars and terrorrizing the paranoid people with their mere presense they are up to something more sinister: undercover. But they are not so smart, no they aren't mister. A fatal flaw in their designs.

AUM

The undercover police cars all (well I have seen three now) have license plates that start with these three letters. So if you think you're being narked just take a looksy at the plates.

Robin that sucks!!! about the bike. Now you and lilho have something else in common-her bike was stolen from right outside my house last year. And, feel free to come over and sit in the garden whenever you please. Rachel, look into my eyes and count backwards from twenty...you are not being brainwashed, you are not being brainwashed, sing like a rooster, cock-a-doodle-dooo!

not the other way around.

As a fellow civil servant I respond to Jessbob [inlink]jessbob,10[/inlink]. I feel it would be way more important for the president to fly his flag at half mast everytime his actions result in the death of an American (actually anyone, but that may be stretching patriotism). Reagan is the figurehead of modern conservatism. He created the "trickle-down" economic theory (I don't really give him personal credit, but it was instituted under his watch) which has been the root substantiation of the corporate plundering of America, too many people are getting less and less trickle. He is George Bush's idol (isn't that enough to hate him). He perpetrated mass war-crimes against an entire continent (heard of Iran-Contra?). Under guise of the cold war he continued to stockpile massive amounts of armaments against an already defeated (if unacknowledged) foe (we have over 10,000 active nuclear warheads thanks in large part to Reagan). Personally the one good thing I've got from him is Friday off becasue he died.

And on the fact that I should lower my flag because the president died in regards to our current leader, I would at the least expect the courtesy that he visit a couple soldiers' funerals or send personal condolences to the families of the victims of his war (Bush has done neither of these things). Respect is earned, it is not a condition of office.

Attorney General John Ashcroft took the stand today in front of the Senate DOJ oversight committee trying to defend the issue of American using torture as an interrogation technique. Much of the questioning swirled around recently leaked memos pertaining to the power of the president to protect individuals accused of committing torture in the name of the war or terror. Here is one of the actual memos . Check out page 31 (28 of the pdf file), it says:

"If a government defendant were to harm an enemy combatant during an interrogation in a manner that might arguably violate criminal prohibition, he would be doing so in order to prevent further attacks on the United States by the Al Qauda terrorist network. In that case, DOJ believes that he could argue that the executive branch's constitutional authority to protect the nation from attack justified his actions."

Basically, the President will protect anyone accused of torture using convoluted logic equating torture to self-defense. First it was preventive/pre-emptive war as self defense and now it's torture as self defense, these guys are so fucking nuts! What isn't self-defense? This is scary, they are using 9/11 as justification for just about anything and everything they want to do. Anyways, the Committee asked Ashcroft to release the memos for review and he refused. They asked him under what authority and he said that it wasn't any particular executive order but that he was just explaining to them that he wasn't releasing them. He, of course, doens't have the authority to explain away his decisions, if he is going to withhold info from Congress he needs to have a reson and the authority to withhold that info. Several members of the congressional panel charged with Justice Department oversight saif Ashcroft's refusal bordered on contempt of Congress, which if prosecuted and convicted can result in punishment of up to one year imprisonment and/or a $1,000 fine.
"Y'all better come up with a good rationale [not to release the memos] or otherwise it's contempt of Congress," Senator Biden warned Ashcroft.

sidenote: does anyone have any opinions one way or the other on the county takeover of park service in Buffalo. It's being planned right now as an effort to balance the city's book and an effort to further consolidate city/county relations. Sounds like a good idea to me as long as it actually happens, many suburbs (like Cheektowaga) are complaining that they shouldn't have to pick up the cost. I think that since they use the economic support of the city (ie: jobs, infrastructure) they shouldn't complain about giving a little back. Here's a couple BuffNews articles: .

Both the NY Times and the Washington Times are reporting on various memos between Pentagon officials and the White House. The memos, issued between 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq, describe how international law regarding the treatment of suspected terrorists and 'unlawful combatants' doesn't apply to US troops. The documents are very telling after the recent scandal at Abu Graihb and amidst continuing allegations or torture and abuse at Guantanamo Bay. As noted by Josh Marshall one passage in the Washington Times is particularly revealing of Administration thought on the matter:

To protect subordinates should they be charged with torture, the memo advised that Mr. Bush issue a "presidential directive or other writing" that could serve as evidence, since authority to set aside the laws is "inherent in the president."

Basically a blanket statement saying the Pres. has "got your back" to anyone accused of committing war crimes in the name of the War on Terror. It's really frightening. These are purely fictitious powers that are specifically not given to the President through the Constitution. Bushco has shown repeatedly that they have little regard to any norms of conduct or the separation of powers. According to them, the President can declare war, hold foreign troops (and in a few cases even Americans) for indefinite amounts of time, and now against all international laws (ie: Geneva Convention) decide what actions by our troops-if any-constitute war crimes.

The last point I'll make is that there was one quote describing how the detainees in Guantanamo Bay are not subject to regulations of the Geneva Convention because they are being held in a US-controlled area. Maybe true, probably not, but the problem is that they have been vociferously claiming for years that these same suspects should not be granted access to due process/lawyers/courts because they are not being held in American territory. Which one is it? Or maybe which one is more important to Bush, the ability to torture with impunity or to hold indefinitely without access to a court? The audacity to claim both "rights" under conflicting definitions is outrageous. These guys gotta go. They are the real terrorists.

A line from a story by Denis Johnson: "...the spring air hit me like a foreinger's breath." Seems apt for our Buffalo situation. Though I've not so much associated spring with garlic or kimchi. Basra the tortoise has for the last two days walked around with a string of poo trailing from his behind. It's weird cause it should be pretty disgusting, but he's so cute he can get away with just about anything. Yesterday, in the garden (we too garden Lucysmom!), we watched him drag it around for like 10 minutes, it was a real conversation stopper. No one could think of anything to say except to comment on Basra and his extension. He did it again this morning. Gross bug! I love to draw and smear with colored chalk sticks. We had four or five of us going at it last night. Trisha came, for barbecue and fun. Great to see her, we need to hang out more. Off to work now, 10 hours of excitement!

this is so totally funny.

This guy builds himself a custom steel-plated bulldozer and proceeds to bulldoze town hall the mayor's house and 5 other buildings. Police "set off three explosions and fired at least 200 rounds at the steel plates welded to the bulldozer, which looked like an upside-down Dumpster. After the third explosion failed, officials cut their way in with a blowtorch..." Crazy dude! The "bulldozer's armor plates consisted of two sheets of half-inch steel with a layer of concrete between them." Of course he then killed himself before the man could get him. Sad, but what a way to go.

• Whoah!** ms. cateyes that's grotesque! I say put his name up for all to see. You have a judgment againt him from a court of law and photo evidence of his obvious total slumlordiness. What a bastard! Like Paul said the same thing happened with the same guy to hodown a couple years ago. If she had published here maybe it needn't ever have happened to you.

Gay pride seemed to have more people than ever. I am constantly surprised to see tha amount of gay people in one day that appear in Buffalo, I wonder if there are just so many gay people here or if we're just louder than in other towns. I mean we're pent up for the winter for so long maybe everybody feels the need to just get up and out. The parade lacked creative floats but had much enthusiasm. I am very egoistic by saying this, but I had like three floats divert their entire attention to me as I was waving off my balcony. It actually made me a bit embarrased, they were the parade, I wasn't the special attraction. I pretend to complain but it was a nice ego booster in these times of post-winter fatness-depression. I need to ride my fucking bike more. I will go before work tomorrow, that's a promise to myself. Go boy go. Ride like the wind. I love riding the bike it's so great. Here we come winds of the East, bear me to Oklahoma. Or at least around town.

Can't we just start calling all people it? It's neutral. You might say it would be confusing, like you're talking to your friend and they don't know whether the stories about Shelly the checkout girl or the magazine in the rack. But it's all about context, you'd get used to it. In German it's quite noraml to call people 'the'. You say "Der ist suess" and it means "the is hot" but really it means he's hot. It's weird. Maybe it doens't work so well, we do need a word that at least means person. It has to be one-syllable for convenience and easily contractionable. Howabout "ze"? it's not already a word and can be contractioned like he/she. Ze's a hottie. I went out with zerm last night and we had an awesome time. There you go Robin, problem solved.

The dyke march was purty neat. We waved/hooted/hollered from the roof-porch and then joined the procession down to Bidwell. Then we stayed a while until Toriani started to play (who was not to bad but a litle rehashed). What's on the agenda now you might ask? I would have to say it's entirely up in the air. Rumor has it there's the triquel to the anything but clothes party tonight. I had an awesome time last year with my balloons and tortoise sweater. Didn't have a single balloon by the time I left.

Oh yeah: welcome all new peeps, I am glad to get some fresh blood in here. Even through the evil advertising mechanism. Which is probably nor evil but just over exploited nowadays. Got to start getting drunk now, toodle-ooh.

I've been thinking a lot about rent lately. I really hate it. As an institution. I can't help but think that it's a total usurious act that takes from someone and gives to another at unequal levels. Its origins must be somewhere near the time property itself was established. It couldn't have been too long before someone thought, "well, if I now own this land (which of course had at one time been ownerless or owned-by-all) I might as well let someone else live here...for a price." And so the people that first owned the land, probably some kinda tribal chiefs or respected war leaders, decided to let other people live and work it if a portion of the fruits of their labor was apportioned to the owner for the use of the land. We know where this leads of course, feudal systems-or in worst case scenarios, slavery systems-where the cost of living on a property becomes equal to the wages allotted the workers. This is where rent was invented, it doesn't have pretty origins.

So, I was trying to argue against rent and came up against pretty hard-core reasons. There was the idea that some people just don't want to own their own land (we're talkin current America here). But I don't think that's the case. Given the fact that to have some way to provide shelter and food for self and family a place to live is essential (and in America you can't just opt out-just try to find an arable bit of soil that isn't owned by someone/thing). So everyone has to have it, why not own it. The advantages are obvious. You own capital-something tangible that can be exchanged for other items/services in our society-it has appreciable value. You have control over the use of your property (if you wanna erect a shrine to Hades in the back and take out the back wall for a view, it's your choice). You can use your property as collateral in obtaining credit towards other purchases. With rent you get non-responsibility. You pay the bill and you get occasional repairs. That's the part that bites though. Rent is constantly paid to the owner. When you buy, even through mortgage, every one of your dollars (or at least some percentage) goes back into your pockets as capital. You are paying to own something. When you rent you are paying to be owned by something. You have a landlord to answer to, strict rules of conduct, and you may even get a random visit. And your money is going into their pocket.

For example in my current situation, at the end of this year we will have paid the landlord over $20,000 total for two years. We could have bought a $60,000 house with a mortgage, paid the same amount over two years and our mortgage would be down to $45,000 (interest eats $5,000 or so). Even if now we moved and only got $55,000 for whatever reasons (bad market/neighborhood or whatever). We could pay off our mortgage and have $10,000 to spare, which means our total expenditure for two years was $10,000, half as much as renting. If we imagine making improvements and such (which we did a ton to our apartment without recuperation) so that we could sell for $65,000 (just $5K more than we bought it for), our profit after paying off our mortgage would be $20,000 which is what we spent on mortgage payments. In other words, if our property appreciates less than 10% over two years than we have broken even.

This is not to say that the above process is easy. Obtaining a mortgage is not easy as pie. There're lengthy forms to fill out, incomes to substantiate, and months of finding the house itself. It's a process made much easier if you can initially afford it. So I agree that the process of renting involves a lot less stress and a lot less wherewithal in the first place. It's skewed (as is the US of A in general) to favoring those with the initial capital resources. But, I think my point remains, that it is hard to justify the practice of renting. All it does it take ownership to the next rotten capitalist level of class and caste. Some people are o
wn
ers and some not. And those that are can now make money off those that aren't. It's beautifully and brutally logical. I just can't justify preying on fellow men, even in the name of shelter.