Anyone who isn’t familiar with the 8 hour work week, the labor movement, Mayday, and the Haymarket bombing should read this overview.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mnanarchists/message/672

August Spies, Albert Parsons, Adolph Fischer, and George Engel were hanged on November 11, 1887. Louis Lingg avoided execution by committing suicide the night before.

They were executed because of their political beliefs and because they were labor organizers.

“Law is on trial. Anarchy is on trial. These men have been selected, picked out by the Grand Jury, and indicted because they were leaders. They are no more guilty than the thousands who follow them. Gentlemen of the jury; convict these men, make examples of them, hang them and you save our institutions, our society.”
State Prosecuting Attorney Julius Grinnell’s 1886 summation speech to the jury.

The path to where we are now is a path paved with the bodies of many martyrs. These accomplishments that we take for granted, these rights that we let slip away were gained with sweat and blood.

Rights are never freely given, they must be claimed and then defended.

…

According to another friend, the 10 steps listed in yesterday’s post were not from Robin Williams. Some of them are allegedly from Jon Stewart, but I can’t verify that either. For that matter, I don’t know who that is.

Anyway, looking at a couple of them:

1) The US will apologize to the world for our “interference” in their affairs, past & present. We will promise never to “interfere” again.

Basically, I agree with this one. I do believe that, with approval, American armed forces should be allowed to voluntarily participate UN actions.

I do believe that individuals may choose to go fight for causes in other countries, like the Abraham Lincoln brigade did against Franco in Spain. I believe the US gov’t should stay out of these sorts of things completely. Don’t prevent them, don’t help them.

2) We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with Germany, South Korea and the Philippines. They don’t want us there. We would station troops at our borders. No more sneaking through holes in the fence.

Again, basically, I agree. I don’t know if we really need that beefed of a border guard, but that’s not the main point of the issue.

More on these later

…

And, a funny urban legend from a coworker:

Marine Corp’s General Reinwald was interviewed on the radio the other day. Regardless of how you feel about gun laws, this is one of the best comeback lines of all time. It is a portion of National Public Radio (NPR) interview between a female broadcaster and US Marine Corps General Reinwald who was about to sponsor a Boy Scout Troop visiting his military installation.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER: So, General Reinwald, what things are you going to teach these young boys when they visit your base?

GENERAL REINWALD: We’re going to teach them climbing, canoeing, archery, and shooting.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER: Shooting! That’s a bit irresponsible, isn’t it?

GENERAL REINWALD: I don’t see why, they’ll be properly supervised on the rifle range.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER: Don’t you admit that this is a terribly dangerous activity to be teaching children?

GENERAL REINWALD: I don’t see how. We will be teaching them proper rifle discipline before they even touch a firearm.

FEMALE INTERVIEWER: But you’re equipping them to become violent killers.

GENERAL REINWALD: Well, you’re equipped to be a prostitute, but you’re not one, are you?

The radio went silent and the interview ended. You gotta love the Marines.

*heh* There ya go. Here’s another version:

A couple went on vacation to a fishing resort up north. The husband liked to fish at the crack of dawn. The wife liked to read.

One morning the husband returned after several hours of fishing and decided to take a short nap. Although she wasn’t familiar with the lake, the wife decided to take the boat out.

She rowed out a short distance, anchored, and returned to reading her book. Along came the sheriff in his boat. He pulled up alongside her and said, “Good morning, Ma’am. What are you doing?”

“Reading my book” she replies as she thinks to herself, “Isn’t it obvious?”

“You’re in a restricted fishing area,” he informed her.

“But officer, I’m not fishing. Can’t you see that?”

“Yes, but you have all the equipment. I’ll have to take you in and write you up.”

“If you do that, I’ll have to charge you with rape,” snapped the irate woman.

“But, I haven’t even touched you,” groused the sheriff.

“Yes, that’s true,” she replied, “but you do have all the equipment.”

The version from snopes finished it off with a “moral”, but I found it superfluous and somewhat condescending.

Hey, I found some of my grandpa’s art on line.

I recognize “The Bird Cage”. Apparently, he was a mentor to the artist, Luana, that the website memorializes. There’s a bit on him too:

John C. Goray (1912-1990) was a graduate of the Chicago Art Institute and a member of the Art Student’s League, New York.  He worked as an art instructor, specializing in acrylics at the Charles A. Wustum Museum of Fine Arts during the early to mid-seventies. He inspired his students to express themselves, bring their own visions to life, and not to be limited to a decorative art style. He taught the dramatic use of colors and had a gruff exterior that made him quite a character.

In many ways, he’s kind of the flagship of my family – the one we think of when we declare ourselves to be “Gorays”. One of my true regrets is not having known him better.

Thich Nhat Hanh says that all moments exist in the present and that it is never too late to tell someone you love them. I like a lot of what the Buddhists have to say, but I’ve yet to feel how that one works.

Ok, this report is lacking on details (like who the official is), but it should be interesting to see if more of these start coming out…

US: ‘Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction’
By Neil Mackay

The Bush administration has admitted that Saddam Hussein probably had no weapons of mass destruction.

Senior officials in the Bush administration have admitted that they would be ‘amazed’ if weapons of mass destruction (WMD) were found in Iraq.

According to administration sources, Saddam shut down and destroyed large parts of his WMD programmes before the invasion of Iraq.

Ironically, the claims came as US President George Bush yesterday repeatedly justified the war as necessary to remove Iraq’s chemical and biological arms which posed a direct threat to America.

Bush claimed: ‘Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. We will find them.’

The comments from within the administration will add further weight to attacks on the Blair government by Labour backbenchers that there is no ‘smoking gun’ and that the war against Iraq — which centred on claims that Saddam was a risk to Britain, America and the Middle East because of unconventional weapons — was unjustified.

The senior US official added that America never expected to find a huge arsenal, arguing that the administration was more concerned about the ability of Saddam’s scientists — which he labelled the ‘nuclear mujahidin’ — to develop WMDs when the crisis passed.

This represents a clearly dramatic shift in the definition of the Bush doctrine’s central tenet — the pre-emptive strike. Previously, according to Washington, a pre-emptive war could be waged against a hostile country with WMDs in order to protect American security.

Now, however, according to the US official, pre-emptive action is justified against a nation which simply has the ability to develop unconventional weapons.

The amazing thing is it seems like even if this turns out to be the case, most people probably won’t care.

For thought and comment, I forward an email I got from a friend outlining a plan for global peace. Some points I agree strongly with, some I disagree with, and some I need to think about. It is attributed to Robin Williams, but that hasn’t been verfied yet:

1) The US will apologize to the world for our “interference” in their affairs, past & present. We will promise never to “interfere” again.

2) We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with Germany, South Korea and the Philippines. They don’t want us there. We would station troops at our borders. No more sneaking through holes in the fence.

3) All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and leave. We’ll give them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder will be gathered up and deported immediately, regardless of who or where they are. France would welcome them.

4) All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 day visits unless given a special permit. No one from a terrorist nation would be allowed in. If you don’t like it there, change it yourself, don’t hide here. Asylum would not ever be available to anyone. We don’t need any more cab drivers.

5) No “students” over age 21. The older ones are the bombers. If they don’t attend classes, they get a “D” and it’s back home, baby.

6) The US will make a strong effort to become self sufficient energy wise. This will include developing nonpolluting sources of energy, but will require a temporary drilling of oil in the Alaskan wilderness. The caribou will have to cope for a while.

7) Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries $10 a barrel for their oil. If they don’t like it, we go someplace else.

8) If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will not “interfere.” They can pray to Allah or whomever, for seeds, rain, cement or whatever they need. Besides, most of what we give them gets”lost” or is taken by their army. The people who need it most get very little anyway.

9) Ship the UN Headquarters to an island some place. We don’t need the spies and fair weather friends here. Besides, it would make a good homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens.

9b) Use the buildings as replacement for the twin towers.

10) All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way, no one can call us “Ugly Americans” any longer.

Now, ain’t that a winner of a plan?

“The Statue of Liberty is no longer saying, ‘Give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses.’ She’s got a baseball bat and she’s yelling, ‘You want a piece of me?’”

I gotta be responsible and work and stuff, so I’ll comment on these later. I’m interested what everyone else thinks…

Anyone want to buy an island? Personally, I like the waterway between Vancouver Island and British Columbia in Canada due to proximity to BC, and the moderate climate combined with the shelter from weather provided by Vancouver Island.

Erasmus Island is perfect in many ways (54 acres, great cove, etc.), but is truly isolated. Campbell River (an hour away by boat) is about 120 miles (as the crow flies) from Vancouver. Sadly, that’s probably a bit far. Protection Island is similarly well formed, although a bit smaller, and similarly too far away.

Ring Island is better at only 110 miles from Vancouver, and is well protected, but at only 14 acres, is a bit small.

Now, if we can come up with 1.5 million CAD (about 1.06 million USD), Merry and Franklin Islands sound pretty great. 29 nautical miles from Vancouver (although the provided map makes it look further), fruit trees, a pond, a lighthouse, a couple houses, and 46 acres to the larger of the two islands (the smaller island looks more or less like a 1.4 chunk of rock). Might be a good spot for a couple windmills though.

Or, for about the same price (1.55 mil CAD/1.09 mil USD), but closer to Vancouver island (about 60 miles west from Vancouver), there’s the 100 acre Ballenas Island. Only three miles from a marina on Vancouver Island!

*heh* And if we can come up with a wealthy benefactor, there’s always James Island. Great location, 780 acres, seaplane ramp, runway, dock, six cottages, golf course, etc. Unfortunately, at $50 million (USD), I don’t see it happening.

Anyway, Merry/Franklin Island or Ballenas island appear to be fairly well situated, financially doable (with enough people), and large enough to support a reasonable community.

I’m not sure how much of the area could be converted to grow crops, but if we use 30% as a desirable amount and figure that you need about 1.2 acres per person (not sure if that’s meat or veg only) to provide a complete and diverse diet (somewhat more if you want clothing and fuel as well), then Franklin Island could completely support 11 or 12 people (divided evenly, that’s $92,000 per person to purchase the property) and Ballenas could support 25 people (which would be $43,600/person to purchase). Of course, you’d need boats, maybe a plane, building materials, up link, power, and a bunch of other startup costs as well. I think it might be hard to get 25 people together (at least to start) on this, so it’d probably quite a bit more per person for the initial costs.

Personally, I’m liking Ballenas, even though it is a bit further from Vancouver. At six or seven knots in a sailboat, that’s something like an 8 hour trip. An amphibious plane would make the trip much faster, but that’s some significant additional cost. A powered boat might be more like 20 knots which would cut it down to 2.6 hours. (of course, some boats go MUCH faster, but again, that’s $$$ – both fuel and for the boat). Vancouver Island would be much closer.

Anyway, that’s enough daydreaming for today. Back to work.

Got a haircut today, just a trim and some political discusion. Anyone needing a barber in the uptown area should check out Dan Hanna at Portfolio. As a heads up, he’s not to worried about what you think of him, he’ll speak his mind. Personally, I respect that.

Still trying to catch up, story of my life. I’d rather be riding, but I’m not. I’ve been filled with angst today – I’m not entirely sure why. There are a number of things it could be, but it is hard to say which it is or isn’t. Just a sense of frustration with an underlying rumble of anger at … what? Me? Life? Someone or something else? I’m not sure. I don’t even know if it is coming from in me, being directed at me, or both.

I really should go for a ride, but I gotta work. Life feels heavy right now.

Is this America?

Patriot Raid
By Jason Halperin, AlterNet
April 29, 2003

Two weeks ago I experienced a very small taste of what hundreds of South Asian immigrants and U.S. citizens of South Asian descent have gone through since 9/11, and what thousands of others have come to fear. I was held, against my will and without warrant or cause, under the USA PATRIOT Act. While I understand the need for some measure of security and precaution in times such as these, the manner in which this detention and interrogation took place raises serious questions about police tactics and the safeguarding of civil liberties in times of war.

That night, March 20th, my roommate Asher and I were on our way to see the Broadway show “Rent.” We had an hour to spare before curtain time so we stopped into an Indian restaurant just off of Times Square in the heart of midtown. I have omitted the name of the restaurant so as not to subject the owners to any further harassment or humiliation.

We helped ourselves to the buffet and then sat down to begin eating our dinner. I was just about to tell Asher how I’d eaten there before and how delicious the vegetable curry was, but I never got a chance. All of a sudden, there was a terrible commotion and five NYPD in bulletproof vests stormed down the stairs. They had their guns drawn and were pointing them indiscriminately at the restaurant staff and at us.

“Go to the back, go to the back of the restaurant,” they yelled.

I hesitated, lost in my own panic.

“Did you not hear me, go to the back and sit down,” they demanded.

I complied and looked around at the other patrons. There were eight men including the waiter, all of South Asian descent and ranging in age from late-teens to senior citizen. One of the policemen pointed his gun point-blank in the face of the waiter and shouted: “Is there anyone else in the restaurant?” The waiter, terrified, gestured to the kitchen.

The police placed their fingers on the triggers of their guns and kicked open the kitchen doors. Shouts emanated from the kitchen and a few seconds later five Hispanic men were made to crawl out on their hands and knees, guns pointed at them.

After patting us all down, the five officers seated us at two tables. As they continued to kick open doors to closets and bathrooms with their fingers glued to their triggers, no less than ten officers in suits emerged from the stairwell. Most of them sat in the back of the restaurant typing on their laptop computers. Two of them walked over to our table and identified themselves as officers of the INS and Homeland Security Department.

I explained that we were just eating dinner and asked why we were being held. We were told by the INS agent that we would be released once they had confirmation that we had no outstanding warrants and our immigration status was OK’d.

In pre-9/11 America, the legality of this would have been questionable. After all, the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution states: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated; and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.”

“You have no right to hold us,” Asher insisted.

“Yes, we have every right,” responded one of the agents. “You are being held under the Patriot Act following suspicion under an internal Homeland Security investigation.”

The USA PATRIOT Act was passed into law on October 26, 2001 in order to facilitate the post 9/11 crackdown on terrorism (the name is actually an acronym: “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act.”) Like most Americans, I did not recognize the extent to which this bill foregoes our civil liberties. Among the unprecedented rights it grants to the federal government are the right to wiretap without warrant, and the right to detain without warrant. As I quickly discovered, the right to an attorney has been seemingly fudged as well.

When I asked to speak to a lawyer, the INS official informed me that I do have the right to a lawyer but I would have to be brought down to the station and await security clearance before being granted one. When I asked how long that would take, he replied with a coy smile: “Maybe a day, maybe a week, maybe a month.”

We insisted that we had every right to leave and were going to do so. One of the policemen walked over with his hand on his gun and taunted: “Go ahead and leave, just go ahead.”

We remained seated. Our IDs were taken, and brought to the officers with laptops. I was questioned over the fact that my license was out of state, and asked if I had “something to hide.” The police continued to hassle the kitchen workers, demanding licenses and dates of birth. One of the kitchen workers was shaking hysterically and kept providing the day’s date – March 20, 2003, over and over.

As I continued to press for legal counsel, a female officer who had been busy typing on her laptop in the front of the restaurant, walked over and put her finger in my face. “We are at war, we are at war and this is for your safety,” she exclaimed. As she walked away from the table, she continued to repeat it to herself? “We are at war, we are at war. How can they not understand this.”

I most certainly understand that we are at war. I also understand that the freedoms afforded to all of us in the Constitution were meant specifically for times like these. Our freedoms were carved out during times of strife by people who were facing brutal injustices, and were intended specifically so that this nation would behave differently in such times. If our freedoms crumble exactly when they are needed most, then they were really never freedoms at all.

After an hour and a half the INS agent walked back over and handed Asher and me our licenses. A policeman took us by the arm and escorted us out of the building. Before stepping out to the street, the INS agent apologized. He explained, in a low voice, that they did not think the two of us were in the restaurant. Several of the other patrons, though of South Asian descent, were in fact U.S. citizens. There were four taxi drivers, two students, one newspaper salesman – unwitting customers, just like Asher and me. I doubt, though, they received any apologies from the INS or the Department of Homeland Security.

Nor have the over 600 people of South Asian descent currently being held without charge by the Federal government. Apparently, this type of treatment is acceptable. One of the taxi drivers, a U.S. citizen, spoke to me during the interrogation. “Please stop talking to them,” he urged. “I have been through this before. Please do whatever they say. Please for our sake.”

Three days later I phoned the restaurant to discover what happened. The owner was nervous and embarrassed and obviously did not want to talk about it. But I managed to ascertain that the whole thing had been one giant mistake. A mistake. Loaded guns pointed in faces, people made to crawl on their hands and knees, police officers clearly exacerbating a tense situation by kicking in doors, taunting, keeping their fingers on the trigger even after the situation was under control. A mistake. And, according to the ACLU a perfectly legal one, thanks to the Patriot Act.

The Patriot Act is just the first phase of the erosion of the Fourth Amendment. From the Justice Department has emerged a draft of the Domestic Securities Enhancement Act, also known as Patriot II. Among other things, this act would allow the Justice Department to detain anyone, anytime, secretly and indefinitely. It would also make it a crime to reveal the identity or even existence of such a detainee.

Every American citizen, whether they support the current war or not, should be alarmed by the speed and facility with which these changes to our fundamental rights are taking place. And all of those who thought that these laws would never affect them, who thought that the Patriot Act only applied to the guilty, should heed this story as a wake-up call. Please learn from my experience. We are all vulnerable so speak out and organize, our Fourth Amendment rights depend upon it.

This is a slap in the face for every person who has ever fought or died for our rights and freedoms. At what point do we stand up and stop these erosions? At what point is it too late?

Do you care?

Do you care enough to fight?

Do you care enough to die?

Do you care enough to kill?