June 30, 2005

Paint

20050630.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

No Credible link between Saddam and Osama bin Laden

Due to the continued linking of 9/11 with Iraq by the President and his media flaks, I think it is important to bring up (again), that exactly zero report has been issued linking Saddam Hussein or Iraq with Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda, the Taliban, or state-sponsored terrorism in any credible, meaningful way.

The following documents (in chronological order) prove that 1.) Iraq did not have WMD, and 2.) There was no credible link between Iraq and Osama bin Laden.

Furthermore, there has been ample evidence that numerous intelligence assessments contradicted any involvement between Iraq and Terrorism. Furthermore, some Iraq analysts felt pressure from Cheney visits to cherry-pick intelligence which was then presented to both the public and to Congress. "The case" seen by Congress could very well have contained numerous falsehoods, which are the direct result of Vice President Cheney's interference with intelligence gathering.

This is why it is quite understandable for members of Congress who voted for the Iraq resolution authorizing force to now criticize the President for invading Iraq. The literally fixed intelligence around the cause - or in simpler terms - they lied.

» x « · comments (0)

June 29, 2005

Yellow Flower

20050629.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

This was a B-side shot I took during the 120 Challenge and were shot on Saturday June 4th, 2005 in Broad Channel, Queens, New York City.

Check out the rest of my Broad Channel shots and my other 120 Challenge photographs.

Respect Rights of All

We have discussed the notion of "spheres of individual liberty" before, and how it is the government's duty to protect and extend that sphere. We support gay marriage because consenting adults must have universal rights so that their spheres of liberty are not encroached on by government, other citizens, or religion.

So it is quite refreshing to read this snippet of a speech by Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin in support of legislation that legalizes gay marriage:

For gays and lesbians, evolving social attitudes have, over the years, prompted a number of important changes in the law. Recall that, until the late 1960s, the state believed it had the right to peek into our bedrooms. Until 1977, homosexuality was still sufficient grounds for deportation. Until 1992, gay people were prohibited from serving in the military. In many parts of the country, gays and lesbians could not designate their partners as beneficiaries under employee medical and dental benefits, insurance policies or private pensions. Until very recently, people were being fired merely for being gay.

Today, we rightly see discrimination based on sexual orientation as arbitrary, inappropriate and unfair. Looking back, we can hardly believe that such rights were ever a matter for debate. It is my hope that we will ultimately see the current debate in a similar light; realizing that nothing has been lost or sacrificed by the majority in extending full rights to the minority...

To those who would oppose this bill, I urge you to consider that the core of the issue before us today is whether the rights of all Canadians are to be respected. I believe they must be. Justice demands it. Fairness demands it. The Canada we love demands it.

Ask yourself if those against marriage equality hold the moral high ground, or in fact, any morals at all.

» x « · comments (0)

Iraq - 9/11

This kind of crap has to stop - now:

As for the content, the president’s frequent allusions to September 11 is driving Democrats and commentators batty. I suspect that was the intention. The case for the war has to be made repeatedly and pointedly, and it has to center on the threat of Islamofascist terrorism and the desirability to kill them over there rather than trying to catch them over here. That’s a message that average voters, unnerved by casualty reports and high gas prices and distracted by summertime, can and will respond to.

Look, the President's conflation of September 11th and Iraq is "driving us batty" because it is clearly a lie and a deception aimed at the American people. Regardless of what Andrew McCarthy says, Iraq is not linked to September 11th - just ask US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Or perhaps every single report concerning September 11th - including September 11th Commission Final Report. Islamofascist terrorist groups very well might be operating in the Iraq theatre, but it is only because the President's foolhardy invasion of Iraq.

The case for war was not "Islamofascist terrorism," but rather a mixture of reasons from WMD's to "Saddam's a bad man." Later on, as the WMD, Yellowcake, et al rationale was proving thin, the reason switched to some mixture of WMD's and Saddam's harboring terrorists - when absolutely no one outside of the President's political appointees believed that Saddam actually was harboring anything. As the war continued, the reasoning changed to "Democracy on the March." You have to be seriously deluded or actively lying to say that invading Iraq was about defeating Islamofascist terrorism.

So what is happening in Iraq, now? Well, because the President decided to invade Iraq when there was no clear or present danger, Iraq has replaced Afghanistan as the training ground for the next generation of "professionalized" terrorists according to the CIA. Good job there.

So, now what do we do? The President has created a giant terrorist training camp, and it is obvious that we need to fight them. But not everyone fighting in Iraq are Al Qaeda type fighters, and to label everyone fighting in Iraq a "terrorist" is both a lie and deceiving the public. So tactics must change to deal with classical insurgents-type fighters and Al Qaeda-type fighters. But the President's speech last night contained no hints or calls for a change of tactics.

Not altering tactics when the battleground is altered is a profoundly bad, and the result is actively growing Al Qaeda, and Al Qaeda-like terrorists. This is directly the President's fault - and why we are batty. The crap about fighting terrorists "over there," or participating in a "forward war" - my newest favorite talking point - is pure crap. We've already dealt with why this notion is preposterous.

» x « · comments (0)

Freedom Bunker

freedom towerFreedom Tower, courtesy LMDC

So Larry Silverstein and David Childs (of SOM) have unveiled the newest design for the Freedom Tower, and well, there really isn't much to say. The best headline so far goes to Curbed, with "Freedom Tower, Now With 34% More Freedom!" But I think, "Freedom Tower, Now With 100% less Libeskind" would be more appropriate.

Here are some stats on the new design:

  1. Tower sits on an "almost impermeable and impregnable" 200-foot concrete and steel pedestal, clad in "ornamental metalwork"
  2. Above that, 69 office floors topped with a restaurant, and two observation decks (at 1362’ and 1368’)
  3. Antenna brings total height to 1,776 feet

Here's LMDC's description of the design via their fact sheet: (pdf)

Freedom Tower is a bold and simple icon in the sky that acknowledges the memorial below. While the memorial, carved out of the earth, speaks of the past and of remembrance, Freedom Tower speaks about the future and hope as it rises into the sky in a faceted, crystalline form filled with, and reflecting light. This tall, point tower, in the tradition of great New York City icons such as the Chrysler Building and Empire State Building, evokes the slender, tapering triangular forms of these two great landmarks of midtown and replaces more than one quarter of all the office space that was lost on September 11, 2001.

Snap Critique: Well, it appears that Danny has been pushed right out of the picture - looks like some people will be looking for jobs soon. That little year-plus diversion of pretending that design competitions matter or that master plans matter, sure was fun. Yes, yes - parts of the plan still exist, but it fairly obvious that no one is really paying attention to the master plan.

Could Mr. Childs have made a less graceful building? Are they even trying anymore at SOM? Maybe that separate, locked, floor of architects and interns at SOM really is degredating their design skills. (see update) I doubt the lack of skill at SOM is the primary cause, but the external forces at work bear a majority of the blame for this design.

With all of the innovative and elegant skyscraper design occurring throughout the world, one would think that New York City - cradle of the skyscraper - would advance the genre. Yet the design by Mr. Childs - whether by bureaucratic limitations, safety concerns, lack of client resolve, or lack of design skills - reflects a complete lack of imagination by the design team as whole. It also reflects the lack of imagination or political will of Governor Pataki, who rather than take the time to actually design a truly great building, was (and is) more concerned about photo-op timetables for his 2008 Presidential ambitions.

This design might as well have been the massing studies by Beyer, Blinder, Belle for its lack of grace or substance.

Update
Wow, go Internets. The Hive mind over at Wired New York dredged this up: The new (NEW!!!) Freedom Tower looks nothing at all like the New York Stock Exchange building which was scrapped due to (ba, dum...) September 11th. (via Curbed)

Update on the Update - SOM worker bee emails Curbed to set the record straight that this was an earlier version of NYSE. The final design which was cancelled can seen here.

So this explains how Childs and his worker bees on Wall Street could pump out the design for a 69+ story building in such short notice.

freedom towerFrom left: NYSE tower; right, Freedom Tower (courtesy LMDC)

I'm with V-2: it is better to build nothing at this moment in order to preserve the site, than to build something so God-awful that it disgraces the hallowed site. I doubt Pataki et al have the foresight or will to acknowledge this reality.

More photos after the jump:

Continue reading "Freedom Bunker"

» x « · comments (10)

June 28, 2005

Petals

20050628.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

Fallen petals at Storm King Art Center after a hard rain.

See all other photos from Storm King.

I'd Rather Fight Terrorists

Here is a simple response to the President and his supporter when they trot out the silly phrase, I'd rather be fighting terrorists in Iraq than [location x] (insert any location), made over two years ago for you to use:

IT'S SIMPLE REALLY, to know where you'd rather fight the terrorists. It's considerably harder to fight them. Which is why this hoary cliché needs to be retired once and for all. For there's two things to keep in mind when declaring where in Iraq you'd rather fight the terrorists.

The first, is that we're not altogether sure we are fighting terrorists, in the al-Qaeda sense of the word. As Newsweek recently reported in a piece entitled "War In the Dark," "what the Americans don't know is who, exactly, they're fighting." In a week in which four suicide-bombing attacks in Baghdad killed more than 30 people, one general told reporters "that the attacks were the work of 'foreign fighters.' Yet just 24 hours earlier his division commander . . . told a news conference that he had not seen 'any infusion of foreign fighters in Baghdad.'" A recent Washington Post story reported that at one Baghdad briefing, the commander of the 82nd Airborne Division, in the dark himself as to the identity of the guerillas, said that 90 percent of the fighters the U.S. had killed or captured were Hussein loyalists or Iraqi religious militants--and only 10 percent were freelancers from abroad. Meaning that, according to his calculations, there's a decent chance that if we weren't fighting these particular terrorists in Babylon, we wouldn't be fighting them in Bakersfield.

Frankly, I'd rather be fighting terrorists. But we invaded Iraq instead. Funny.

» x « · comments (0)

Bush Address

For those who are watching Yankees Bseball, here is the full text of the President's Address.

Please note the following:

The troops here and across the world are fighting a global war on terror. This war reached our shores on September 11, 2001. The terrorists who attacked us - and the terrorists we face - murder in the name of a totalitarian ideology that hates freedom, rejects tolerance, and despises all dissent. Their aim is to remake the Middle East in their own grim image of tyranny and oppression - by toppling governments, driving us out of the region, and exporting terror.
...
After September 11, 2001, I told the American people that the road ahead would be difficult - and that we would prevail. Well, it has been difficult. And we are prevailing. Our enemies are brutal - but they are no match for the United States of America - and they are no match for the men and women of the United States military.

Too bad Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with terrorism, Osama bin Laden, or September 11th.

Too bad the President and his backers decided to wage a war that has put America in more danger.

Nice job.

And what is up with this sentence:

Our mission in Iraq is clear. We are hunting down the terrorists.

There weren't any terrorists in Iraq, and right now conflating insurgents and terrorists gives a great disservice to all.

Later (after speech)
What exactly new has been said? Nothing. Conflation of Iraq with 9/11. Schools and Electrical working. The US will leave when the Iraqi army can stand up.

Everything he said he has said before. The networks had no reason to show this. This was nothing but pure bread and circus meant to feed the Beltway crowd. Right, Tim Russet - the uber-insider - now is jabbering about how great this speech was.

What was said tonight was lipstick on a pig. If the President says that Iraq is a haven for terrorists, then it is his fault. He chose to invade Iraq when there was exactly no connection to terrorism.

If Iraq is a haven for terrorists, it is his fault. Pure and simple.

» x « · comments (1)

Post-It Note Elvis

DSC00204, originally uploaded by ih8gates

See more images of the Post-It Note Elvis.

Here is the explanation and how-to guide chronicling how the giant Post-it Note Elvis was created.

» x « · comments (0)

70 Washington: Is That Legal?

orange, originally uploaded by overunder

From the how-long-until-Curbed-links-to-this-post Dept

Tired of Landmark Preservation Commission gossip? Well, here is one last tidbit. Everyone knows about 70 Washington in DUMBO - check out Curbed's extensive coverage. It is the Walentas huge condo conversion which is currently under construction.

Last week construction began on the Penthouse apartments, which to my knowledge, consist of a single floor vertical extension (that's roof addition to outsiders) set back approximately 11'-0" from the edge of the building. The set back was most likely done to satisfy the LPC mandate that any roof addition is minimally visible from public thoroughfares.

Alright, enough with the back story, you say, what is this so-called gossip you are about to dish? Well, it seems that some members of certain Community Boards are questioning the legality of the addition. Namely, questioning LPC whether or not the roof addition was included in the LPC-approved design. For those on the edge of your seats, yes, the addition was included in the approved design.

This just illustrates what lengths community boards (and their constituents) in New York City go through when protecting their historic districts. And what happens when people don't have the opportunity to go to School Board meetings or join the PTA.

Update - 30 June 2005
From reader nudge:
the picture shown in the 70 Washington commentary is NOT of 70 Washington - it's of 55 Washington

We stand corrected - we just like Keith's work and jumped the gun.

» x « · comments (2)

June 27, 2005

PS1 Warm Up 2005

photosSur by Xefirotarch. Top photo by Xefirotarch, bottom photo by Architect

You would think that with PS1's dance party event, Warm Up 2005 quickly approaching, they would be (at the very least) advertising the 2 July opening night. But they aren't. You would think that they would host a few images of the design, some background, or the like; but they aren't.

In fact, it is nigh impossible to even find who designed this year's installation - the result of a yearly invited competition of young talent - on PS1's website. You have to go to Architect to dig out the information and while there, you have to go to the slander boards noting the thread, Xefirotarch @ P.S. 1, to learn that LA-based designer Hernan Diaz Alonso, principle of Xefirotarch, won the competition.

Tired yet?

DSCN8973, originally uploaded by scisar

For those who like archiporn, here are renderings of the competition entry, photos on Archinect, and a construction photo set.

» x « · comments (6)

Today's Supreme Court Rulings

Quick hits from today's Supreme Court rulings - both interestingly enhance power of already powerful institutions (government and corporations) at the expense of the individual.

In MGM Studios v. Grokster (No. 04-480), the Court reversed 9-0 the lower court, in an opinion by Justice Souter. Justice Ginsburg concurred, joined by the Chief Justice and Justice Kennedy; and Justice Breyer concurred, joined by Justices Stevens and O'Connor.

Here is how it is being reported in the media: Court: File-Sharing Services May Be Sued:

Internet file-sharing services will be held responsible if they intend for their customers to use software primarily to swap songs and movies illegally, the Supreme Court ruled Monday, rejecting warnings that the lawsuits will stunt growth of cool tech gadgets such as the next iPod.

The unanimous decision sends the case back to lower court, which had ruled in favor of file-sharing services Grokster Ltd. and StreamCast Networks Inc. on the grounds that the companies couldn't be sued. The justices said there was enough evidence of unlawful intent for the case to go to trial.

The other interesting case is the Court denied review in Miller v. U.S., 04-1507, Cooper and Time Magazine v. U.S., 04-1508 - the case involving the reporters protecting the felon who outed Valerie Plame. Here's how the media is reporting that, Supreme Court Won't Hear CIA Leak Case:

The Supreme Court rejected appeals Monday from two journalists who have refused to testify before a grand jury about the leak of an undercover CIA officer's identity.

The cases asked the court to revisit an issue that it last dealt with more than 30 years ago — whether reporters can be jailed or fined for refusing to identify their sources.

The justices' intervention had been sought by 34 states and many news groups, all arguing that confidentiality is important in news gathering.

Also decided today were two Ten Commandments cases - the Texas case, Van Orden v. Perry (03-1500), was affirmed as constitutional, while the Kentucky case, McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky (03-1693) was deemed unconstitutional because the displays were motivated by a religious purpose.

Check out SCOTUS Blog for the Full overview of today's cases and generally excellent commentary from lawyers who have argued extensively before the court.

» x « · comments (0)

Republican Congressman Needs to Read his Constitution

Besides creating a massive patronage shop, Republicans recently have turned to trying to control all facets of life. Case in point: Republicans are actively warning Major League Baseball not to sell the Washington Nationals to a group which includes George Soros, or else!

Read this blurb from Roll Call entitled, Republicans Warn MLB on Soros' Nats Bid:

"I think Major League Baseball understands the stakes," said Government Reform Chairman Tom Davis (R), the Northern Virginia lawmaker who recently convened high-profile steroid hearings. "I don't think they want to get involved in a political fight."

Davis, whose panel also oversees District of Columbia issues, said that if a Soros sale went through, "I don't think it's the Nats that get hurt. I think it's Major League Baseball that gets hurt. They enjoy all sorts of exemptions" from anti-trust laws.

I'm pretty sure Article I, Section 9, paragraph 3 of the Constitution of the United States still prohibits Bill of Attainders stating, No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law will be passed.

Maybe the good congressman should read up on his Constitution more often.

» x « · comments (3)

June 26, 2005

Richard Koppe: 15 Drawings

7: Flipping Fish, originally uploaded by juggernautco

For Bauhaus lovers: Check out this Flickr set of scans of a limited edition piece by underappreciated Bauhaus guy Richard Koppe entitled "Richard Koppe: 15 Drawings."

I admit that I know very little of Richard Koppe, besides the fact that he immigrated to Illinois Institute of Technology along with most of the Bauhaus crowd including Mies, Breuer, et al. But this booklet looks very much like the work of Josef and Anni Albers I checked out last year at Cooper-Hewitt, National Design Museum.

» x « · comments (0)

More on Kelo

For those who are interested in more commentary on Kelo v. New London, 04-108 (the eminent domain seizure case) from actual lawyers and law professors - instead of our laymen's reaction - feel free to peruse the SCOTUSblog Kelo Archives.

» x « · comments (0)

June 24, 2005

Aerial Photo of Guggenheim Bilbao

Aerial Photo of Guggenheim Bilbao, originally uploaded by plemeljr

Becauce Google Maps quietly added international satellite maps, you can find cool images such as the Guggenheim Bilbao or the Cathedral in Sevilla, Spain

» x « · comments (3)

Karl Rove: McCarthy 2.0

So we know we are jumping on the bandwagon, but what Karl Rove - Deputy Chief of Staff and Head Rasputin at the White House - said two days ago is the most partisan statement we've ever heard:

"Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers."

"I don't know about you, but moderation and restraint is not what I felt when I watched the twin towers crumble to the ground, a side of the Pentagon destroyed, and almost 3,000 of our fellow citizens perish in flames and rubble."

"Has there ever been a more revealing moment this year? Let me just put this in fairly simple terms: Al Jazeera now broadcasts the words of Senator Durbin to the Mideast, certainly putting our troops in greater danger. No more needs to be said about the motives of liberals."

Mr. Rove: Go to hell. How dare you accuse Democrats and liberals of giving aid and comfort to the enemy? How dare you even try to politicise again September 11th - our country came together after that horrible, horrible event. This isn't about Pholosophical differences - you blatantly insinuated that half of Americans are traitors.

All of us supported action in Afghanistan, because that is where Osama was. That's right, Osama, you might think his name is spelled S-A-D-D-A-M, but we remember. We remember how you and the President squandered out country's unity by invading a country which had absolutely nothing to do with Terrorism or Osama bin Laden, and posed exactly zero threat to our nation.

When commentators talk about the coarsening of politics, we have you to blame. You choose to divide the country with "wedge issues." You choose to denigrate half the country as unpatriotic. You choose to attack war veterans as unpatriotic. You choose to accuse Senators of fathering illegitimate black children on the eve of South Carolina primaries. You are to blame for the coarsening of politics and DC - no one else.

This is about right:

Democrats
Believe capturing the person primarily responsible for the attack should be a top priority.

Republicans
It's been four years, and Osama bin Laden is still free, even though Bush's CIA chief says he knows where he is.

Democrats
Investigate the intelligence failures that led to 9/11.

Republicans
Do everything in their power to block the 9/11 Commission from doing its work.

Democrats
Propose creating the Department of Homeland Security.

Republicans
Push tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.

Democrats
Believe we should have stayed the course in Afghanistan, not allowing the Taliban to resurge, the warlords to take power, and the opium trade to skyrocket.

Republicans
Ignore Afghanistan as the situation worsens.

Democrats
Believe that we should be honest with our troops about the reasons we go to war, give them everything they need to be safe, and make sure we go in with an exit plan.

Republicans
Manipulate intelligence to trump up reasons to go to war, don't give our troops the support they need, constantly mislead the public about the direction the war is going, and fail to make an exit plan. And turn Iraq into the ultimate terrorist training ground.

Why hasn't Rove resigned yet?

Why hasn't Pataki repudiated his vile words?

Why hasn't New Jersey Governor candidate Doug Forrester repudiated his vile words?

» x « · comments (3)

CPB & PBS under Bushism Rules: Extreme Patronage Positions

Best Buddies, originally uploaded by Beezy.

There has been a criticism of this site that we do not post enough "positive" news. So to rectify that, I was all set to praise the House today that they beat back the drive to kill Big Bird in H.R.3010 (Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2006) and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting's funding was restored. But nothing is what it seems wit this Congress.

The House voted 284 to 140 to add back $100 million to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting's fiscal 2006 budget that had been cut in a committee, and to reverse a committee decision to eliminate all funding for the CPB within two years. The vote, which drew the support of 87 Republicans, followed a public relations blitz by public radio and TV stations, which fomented a widespread protest campaign by broadcasting ads that urged viewers and listeners to call their congressional offices.

But in fact, the broadly popular broadcasting service has still been cut:

But Elmo and Big Bird remain at risk. The House did not restore all of the public broadcasting funding cuts proposed for 2006. Although yesterday's amendment -- sponsored by Reps. David R. Obey (D-Wis.), Nita M. Lowey (D-N.Y.) and Jim Leach (R-Iowa) -- would bump CPB's general budget back to $400 million, the 2005 funding level, an additional $102.4 million that had been shorn from separate public broadcasting programs was not restored. That money underwrites the production of such PBS children's programs as "Sesame Street," "Arthur" and "Postcards From Buster." [...]The House funding is lower than the president's proposed budget of $410 million and down from last year's total of $400 million, plus $102.4 million in related programs.

But that isn't the worst news. Remember when we posted about Corporation for Public Broadcasting stooge Tomlinson's consultation with the White House? Let us all remember that the CPB was set up precisely so that politics wouldn't interfere with Public Broadcasting. So what does Tomlinson do? He hires a former Republican Party chairman to run PBS:

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, whose chairman is under fire for complaining about what he considered liberal bias at PBS, chose a former Republican Party co-chairman Thursday as its president and chief executive.

Patricia S. Harrison, the assistant secretary of state for educational and cultural affairs, was selected after three days of closed meetings by the corporation’s board of directors. She was co-chair of the Republican National Committee from 1997 to 2001.

Is anyone else outraged about the patronage factory the Bush Administration has turned the government into? From stacking the CPA with Republican campaign operatives (more here), to the use of "contractor employees" in government, to giving $20,000 cash bonuses to political appointees, to creating a revolving door between government and lobbyists" - which has brought the American people such hits as the Medicare Prescription Drug bill (which the total cost was concealed), the bankruptcy bill and the pending Energy Bill - and that is just off the top of our heads. The level of graft and pure patronage seen in this administration is astounding.

You would think that people sent to administer a fragile country (Iraq) would at least know Arabic (They didn't). You would think that having lobbyists directly write bills would be bad. You would think that the head of public television would be someone who is nonpartisan and actually has experience in television.

But not in the Bush Administration. If you have the (R) after your name, and if you are part of the Party, you're in.

I thought party litmus tests were only found in the Soviet Union. I thought wrong.

» x « · comments (0)

June 23, 2005

Silhouette

20050623.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

Looking up the hill at Storm King Art Center after a hard rain.

See all other photos from Storm King.

Supreme Court upholds property seizure in New London

Wow - is this a horrible ruling by the US Supreme Court. Today the Court ruled in Kelo v. New London, 04-108 that local governments may seize citizen's property - even against their will - for private economic development.

A divided Supreme Court ruled Thursday that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses against their will for private development in a decision anxiously awaited in communities where economic growth often is at war with individual property rights.

The 5-4 ruling - assailed by dissenting Justice Sandra Day O'Connor as handing "disproportionate influence and power" to the well-heeled in America - was a defeat for Connecticut residents whose homes are slated for destruction to make room for an office complex. They had argued that cities have no right to take their land except for projects with a clear public use, such as roads or schools, or to revitalize blighted areas.

Eminent Domain is a compact between the State and The People where the State will only confiscate land in order to provide needed services to the greater populace. Confiscating property to build a shitty mini-mall is not what Eminent Domain is for - this is a horrible ruling, and I will need to read the decision to better understand how and why the Justices ruled. I can stand with my more conservative friends in saying that this appears to be an abuse of power by the government, and a very bad ruling by the Supreme Court.

While I believe that many ills of society derive from property ownership, I firmly believe that our country is based around property ownership and this ruling strikes quite a blow to this right. The right to property is at the cornerstone of our democracy, and I believe that without it, America cold not have formed or operated for the last 200+ years. But, let's be frank, we are talking about local governments here, not the Federal Government.

But let's step back.

The State exists to provide a "bubble of liberty;" rulings of this nature hem in this bubble immensely. If we want the State - in whatever form - to have more control on property then we should have an open and frank discussion of this topic. However, I predict we won't be able to - many of my conservative friends are screaming about our "decay into Communism" and "central planning." I don't quite agree that we are reaching some central planning black hole, unless you believe that zoning rules are evil (instead of merely needing a big fix). This ruling appears to pertain only to local governments - the bedrock of our nation.

I think an open debate about the advantages and disadvantages of the local government regulating land use would be warranted and useful. Crying about the loss of state's rights is quite a misnomer - this case is about local governments regulating property, which I think should occur within reason. But taking land from one citizen to enrich another citizen (which is the basis of this case) is not the type of land-use policy I would advocate for any State apparatus. If the US Congress would be given this right, I would stand right next to my conservative friends in denouncing it. But (again) we are talking about local government - the most fluid of all government structures - which can be effectively fought.

That being said, let me reiterate (again) that Eminent Domain is a compact which must not be used to enrich one citizen's liberty at the cost of another. This is something I think we can all agree with; land-use policy is a tricky subject. There is definitely an element of "greater good" which must be balanced against private liberty of property ownership. It seems that the greater good was not satisfied in this instance to the detriment of personal liberty.

This article has been edited for spelling

» x « · comments (0)

GOP Kills Big Bird

Home Alone II -Starring Ernie & Big Bird, originally uploaded by Beezy.

Today the House of Representatives will be voting to cut funding to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) which funds PBS and NPR. Not only did the House GOP drop funding by $100 million, they zeroed it out in the near-future. Who owns Congress? The Republicans do - so this is their bill. Especially troubling is Corporation for Public Broadcasting stooge Tomlinson's consultation with the White House - when the CPB was set up precisely so that politics wouldn't interfere with Public Broadcasting. Tomlinson is obviously a political hack who's real fealty is to the White House, not to Public Broadcastion, and not to the people.

Why is this important? Why should the government fund media? A nice free-market trope is that we shouldn't "fund entertainment." Well, the market doesn't solve everything, or we obviously wouldn't have cases like Enron, or the like.

Don't believe that the market can bring good programming - or even programming that isn't "liberal?" How about The American Experience, perhaps the best program which showcases American people and history. History which is a profoundly (small-c) conservative issue. One of the best recent programs was Victory in the Pacific, about the US Pacific Theatre in WWII - we wrote about the Yalta Conference in the context of the Pacific Theatre before.

You can't tell me that any single corporate television station would produce any of these programs - that isn't their job according to stockholders. Corporate media's job is to make money - which is great (I like making money). They even come along and make interesting, and sometimes informative shows. But public television is distinctly different than stockholder-directed television: public television's sole purpose is to inform the American public - and they do a fantastic job of that through shows like The American Experience, NOVA, Charlie Rose, etc. If informing the public is liberal, then let us all be liberal.

But this isn't about some lofty theory about how should government interact with media. This is about muzzling an uncontrolled media outlet. If the GOP really wanted to save some money in the budget, then either raising taxes or cutting the military budget or medicaid or social security would be the place to do it. These areas comprise over 3/4 of the budget of around $2.338 trillion and CPB is around .008% of the total budget - not even a speck. Trying to cheap out by cutting $100 million out of PBS is a political play to silence uncontrolled media.

» x « · comments (2)

June 22, 2005

Wall

20050622.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

Riding the tram at Storm King Art Center. after a hard rain. I don't know why, but this batch of Velvia has quite a "vintage" feel to it.

See all other photos from Storm King.

Stick Figures in Peril

Only people like these may sit here, originally uploaded by Jill

Awesome Flickr Photo Pool: Stick Figures in Peril - photos of warning signs showing stick figures in dangerous locations and situations.

» x « · comments (0)

Gi-normous Popsicle Melts on a Hot Summer Day

Gi-normous PopsicleThe Snapple Lady and the Giant Popsicle - photo by Newsday

Well, the city is still reeling from yesterday's Giant Popsicle Stunt by Snapple. Gothamist has a roundup of local news reactions and a whole lotta photos. The Daily News yucks it up, while The Post overreacts as usual, the New York Times let's loose a bit, and Newsday keeps a stiff upper lip (but have good photos). Hopefully this doesn't signal the beginning of the "Summer Funnies" for the New York press - how many days has it been officially summer?

The question begs to be answered: What is funnier than a 20-ton popsicle melting on a hot day in the middle of New York City? Nothing, except imagining the conversation around the boardroom when Snapple dreamed this stunt up.

Here are some photos of the aftermath and a photos set of Snapple Caps photos.

» x « · comments (0)

Durbin and Guantanamo

So now that Senator Durbin has caved and given a quasi-apology for telling the truth, can we now all agree that Republicans are fully not serious about the rule of law and are fully comfortable with torture.

The strib makes a better case than I can:

The comments that were criticized came late in a long, thoughtful speech on the Senate floor in which Durbin reflected on the United States' obligation to be better than reprehensible regimes of the past. He talked at some length about mistakes American presidents made in previous wars (repealing habeas corpus during the Civil War, interning Americans of Japanese descent during World War II, taking over the steel industry during the Korean War), and he urged President Bush to recognize and rectify his mistake in prisoner treatment during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Durbin's entire speech is too long to reprint, but lengthy excerpts can be found on the page opposite.

Durbin was spot on in his assessment of Guantanamo. That's why he was so roundly attacked. He told the truth. And his message is of vital importance; the United States is better than this.

The issue of whether Durbin's rhetoric crossed a line is small potatoes compared with the undeniable truth that American treatment of its prisoners has crossed many, many lines -- of morality, of international law, of practical benefit.

But instead of discussing what goes on at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib and other prison camps, the right would prefer to get into a senseless argument about whether "we" are better than the Nazis or Saddam Hussein or the Soviets or Pol Pot or whomever a critic of Guantanamo might raise as a comparison. It's a tactic the group running Washington now has used again and again: They're quite deliberately changing the subject -- from Guantanamo to words spoken on the Senate floor.

It's not too late, as Durbin said of Bush in his speech: The senator should stop apologizing and keep up the criticism of the hellhole America's military has created at Guantanamo. He has no reason to be defensive; he's telling the truth. It's a truth Americans need to hear, and its tellers must resist intimidation.

Damn right.

The issue isn't whether or not we are the same as the Tyrant-X, the issue is that we aren't different enough.

» x « · comments (0)

2 Columbus Circle News

2 Columbus Circle
photo credits: left: Richard B. Levine; right: North Elevation Rendering/Courtesy of Allied Works Architecture

For quite some time there has been a giant kerfuffle brewing at Columbus Circle not due to the Time Warner Building, but because of a Mid-Century Modern building by Edward Durell Stone. 2 Columbus Circle is at the center of the tussle between the Museum of Arts and Design (MAD) who want to renovate and use the building for a new museum, and preservation groups who want to save the facade of the idiosyncratic building. Advocacy group Landmark West! - with exclamation point (preservation is fun and exciting!!!!) - has lead the charge with their Campaign for 2 Columbus Circle. The campaign (sans exclamation point) has filed a FOIA request for all communication at the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) concerning 2 Columbus Circle.

On 27 May, 2005 Landmark West! filed an Article 78 lawsuit in conjunction with the FOIA request against LPC Chair Robert B. Tierney, MAD and its affiliates Laurie Beckelman, Holly Hotchner, and Jerome Chazen for "conspiracy to obstruct and subvert the lawful functioning of the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission." Basically an Article 78 lawsuit is used when citizens feel the agency in question's decision is wrong or has been reach by unlawful means. Their point of contention is that LPC will not even schedule a public hearing on the matter of 2 Columbus Circle to inquire on whether or not to Landmark the building, and will not hold a hearing due to wrong or unlawful means.

We have no experience to judge the merits of the Article 78 case, or the dealings between Commission Chair Tierny and Beckelman - but the insinuation which Landmark West! is pushing is that there was backroom dealing going on. Part of the FOIA request apparently has yielded emails between the Chair and Beckelman, former landmarks commission chairman.

From the New York Times via Nexis but available at wired ny:

As proof that Mr. Tierney lacked objectivity, the petition attaches examples of his frequent e-mail exchanges with Laurie Beckelman, the director of the museum's new building program and a former landmarks commission chairman.

In a message dated May 2, 2003, that accompanied a letter from someone expressing opposition to the plan for 2 Columbus Circle, Mr. Tierney asks Ms. Beckelman, "Laurie, Do you want to see some, all or any of these letters?" Ms. Beckelman responds: "I would really appreciate seeing all of them, if it is not too much trouble. Thanks, Laurie."

On May 9, 2003, the day after Community Board 5 voted on the sale of the building, Ms. Beckelman writes: "We got the vote 18-8, but I see trouble ahead. Thanks for all of your support, Laurie." Mr. Tierney replies: "Let me know how I can help on the trouble ahead. Bob."

Commission Chair Tierney always struck us as an honorable man serving his duty, so it would be a shame if he was responsible for not allowing 2 Columbus Circle a fair hearing. We're not naive enough that we don't realize that backroom deals happen all the time - a former LPC Commissioner corresponding with a current LPC Chair does raise eyebrows. To play cynical devil's advocate: this is how politics works. People in power talk to each other all the time - it isn't pretty, things happen often against public will, and favors beget favors. But mechanisms such as Article 78 and FOIA shine a light, and this matter will soon pass.

But chew on this: it has come to our attention that in no way shape or form will 2 Columbus Circle be calendared at LPC. No chance at all - and not by Chair Tierney's desire or alleged machinations.

Food for thought.

But if you want to fight City Hall, you can join the "circle of support" (we can't make this up) around the building's famous lollipop base on Thursday, 23 June, at 6 p.m.

» x « · comments (0)

June 21, 2005

Incoming

20050621.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

A storm approaches Storm King Art Center. I don't know why, but this batch of Velvia has quite a "vintage" feel to it.

See all other photos from Storm King.

June 20, 2005

Jump

20050620.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

This little guy was guarding a laundry center, and was jumping like mad. He could jump and clear 4'-0" easily.

Quite amazing.

Mockbee's Rural Studio

Mason's Bend Community Center, Alabama, originally uploaded by whileseated

Check out this photo set from Samuel Mockbee's Rural Studio in Mason's Bend, Alabama.

All of these projects were designed and built by college students under the supervision of Mockbee until his untimely death in late 2001 succumbing to leukemia. I was fortunate to hear him lecture before his passing, and he was quite a dynamic character. With the passing of Sambo, the profession of architecture lost a great moral compass.

See the Rural Studio photo set and all photos tagged with Mockbee and Rural Studio.

» x « · comments (0)

Going Under

Going Under, originally uploaded by DYFL

I'm surprised this doesn't happen more often. There has been talk about trying to update or improve taxi cabs, which is a waste of money. What the NYC Taxi & Limousine Commission needs to do is to require periodic driving tests for their licenced cabbies. And teach the cab drivers not to accelerate so quickly that they need to slam on the brakes at the next intersection, then accelerate, then brake, etc. etc. Oh - and can the TLC please teach the cab drivers how to actually drive without making the fare scared for their lives? That would be great - thanks TLC.

But with all of that complaining over with, taking the taxi is usually the easiest, safest, and quickest route in the city. But it is very much taking your life into your hands - much like Russian roulette; but with big yellow cabs and foreign drivers. Doctors even ask you here if you wear your seat belt while in the cab.

» x « · comments (0)

June 19, 2005

Happy Father's Day

20050619.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

Torture

This has to stop.

The "Blog of the Year" is selling "We love Gitmo" T-Shirts.

Rush Limbaugh is selling What Happens in G'itmo Stays in G'itmo T-Shirts.

Newt Gingrich calls for the censure of Senator Durbin.

Dear Republican Noise Machine: Stop.

The issue isn't whether or not we are the same as the Nazis, the issue is that we aren't different enough.

If you've lost sight of that, then we are worse off than I thought.

» x « · comments (0)

June 17, 2005

Play Center

20050617.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

The Pool and "Play Center" at Highbridge Park. Check out my other High Bridge Park shots.

Dirty Baker's Dozen

Dirty Baker's Dozen, by StateDirty Baker's Dozen - those Senators refusing to go on the record against lynching, by State

Yesterday Senator Hatch (R-UT) finally signed onto Senate Resolution 39 - the anti-lynching resolution discussed first here and then here.

The title of the resolution reads, A resolution apologizing to the victims of lynching and the descendants of those victims for the failure of the Senate to enact anti-lynching legislation. The resolution passed on a voice vote on Monday night, with six Senators in the chamber. Because there was no roll-call vote for Senators to record their position on this resolution, the only way we know how a Senator sits is by who cosponsors the resolution.

Currently, there are now thirteen Senators who have not cosponsored this resolution, and tacitly support lynching. Until they cosponsor the resolution, they are on the record as pro-lynching. This is a no-brainer - Senators can cosponsor resolutions after they pass. It has been a week - what have the Dirty Baker's Dozen been waiting for?

The Dirty Baker's Dozen are as follows:

Look at the list and the map above, if your Senator is shown, please give them a call.

» x « · comments (0)

June 16, 2005

Train

20050616.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

The West Side train yards.

Kodak discontinues black and white photo paper production

I received an email from a friend pointing me to an article about Eastman Kodak will discontinue black and white photo paper production by 2006. It appears that the Kodak tailspin is in full force as they are quickly unloading any product line remotely associated with film. This announcement comes on the heels of the revelation that Kodak will be discontinuing their popular Super 8 film Kodachrome. Kodak claims that they will not discontinue their film and chemical divisions, but the whittling continues.

As an avid amateur photographer who works almost exclusively in film, this concerns me because there are already a limited amount of film, paper, and chemical choices in the market. But this announcement really won't affect me because I tend to use Ilford products for my work. This is more a result of inertia than anything else: I learned bathroom darkroom developing using Ilford products, and I feel comfortable using their product line.

There really isn't anywhere for Kodak to go: the digital field has behemoth Nikon and Canon competing for the professional photographer. Add to that Sony, HP, Fuji and whomever into the consumer market, and there is not a wide market segmentalization. The profit margins on digital products is slim already, and is rapidly turning (or has turned) into a commodity market. At some point Kodak will really have to step back and re-re-imagine itself; their time as market leaders is effectively over. Film, paper, and chemical sales compensated for the loss of camera hardware dominance to Nikon and Canon.

Do you spin off your film division to service the professional and consumers who still prefer film to digital? Slowly closing down divisions doesn't seem to be the best business plan.

Whatever happens, it is obvious that economically analog photo supplies will get more expensive. Also, this puts pressure on the other manufacturers to reevaluate their business perhaps triggering more changes to available supplies.

Troubling.

» x « · comments (0)

June 15, 2005

Tracks

20050615.jpg

» x « · comments (0) | older photos »

These series of shots were for the 120 Challenge and were shot on Saturday June 4th, 2005 in Broad Channel, Queens, New York City.

Check out the rest of my Broad Channel shots and my other 120 Challenge photographs.

I Just Play A Doctor in the Senate

Not to bring up the sad state which was the Terri Schiavo Mess (background) brought to you by the GOP, but the autopsy has surfaced which anyone can read. While there is much to this report, let's focus on a single issue for now: namely Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist's Diagnosis: Television of Schiavo's condition.

Let's return to the good doctor's diagnosis:

Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), a renowned heart surgeon before becoming Senate majority leader, went to the floor late Thursday night for the second time in 12 hours to argue that Florida doctors had erred in saying Terri Schiavo is in a "persistent vegetative state."

"I question it based on a review of the video footage which I spent an hour or so looking at last night in my office," he said in a lengthy speech in which he quoted medical texts and standards. "She certainly seems to respond to visual stimuli."

emphasis added

So that was then. Now, let's let an actual doctor who was - at the very least - actually in the same room with Schiavo. Namely, let's let Pinellas-Pasco Medical Examiner Jon Thogmartin, who was in charge of the autopsy, have the final word.

This is what he had to say about her condition:

Pinellas-Pasco Medical Examiner Jon Thogmartin concluded that…her brain was about half of normal size when she died.

Thogmartin says her brain was "profoundly atrophied" - and that the damage was "irreversible." He also says, "The vision centers of her brain were dead" - meaning she was blind.

emphasis added

What, you say? The Good Doctor was lying? No. What? I just can't believe that!?

Additionally, from the AP, the medical examiner concluded that Schiavo was indeed in a persistent vegetative state:

The medical examiner's conclusions countered a videotape released by the Schindlers of Terri Schiavo in her hospice bed. The video showed Schiavo appearing to turn toward her mother's voice and smile, moaning and laughing. Her head moved up and down and she seemed to follow the progress of a brightly colored Mickey Mouse balloon.

They believed her condition could improve with therapy.

However, doctors said her reactions were automatic responses and not evidence of thought or consciousness, and Thogmartin's report went further.

"The brain weighed 615 grams, roughly half of the expected weight of a human brain," he said. "This damage was irreversible, and no amount of therapy or treatment would have regenerated the massive loss of neurons."

emphasis added

So there you go.

» x « · comments (9)

Frist Obstructs Lynching Vote

So, after pointing out a list of Senators who would not go one record against lynching, and then looking at the statistics of lynching, let's look into the political machinations behind Monday night's vote.

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, refused repeated requests for a roll call vote that would have put senators on the record on a resolution apologizing for past failures to pass anti-lynching laws, officials involved in the negotiations said Tuesday.

What's worse, is that the good Senator went out of his way to obstruct the roll-call vote - thus placing Senators on the record, for or against lynching. Read on:

As dozens of descendants of lynching victims watched from the Senate gallery, the resolution was adopted Monday evening under a voice vote procedure that did not require any senator's presence.

Eighty senators, however, had signed as co-sponsors, putting themselves on record as supporting the resolution. By the time the Senate recessed Tuesday evening, five other senators had added their names as co-sponsors, leaving 15 Republicans who had not.
...
But the group that was the driving force behind the resolution had asked Frist for a formal procedure that would have required all 100 senators to vote. And the group had asked that the debate take place during "business hours" during the week, instead of Monday evening, when most senators were traveling back to the capital.

Frist declined both requests, the group's chief counsel, Mark Planning, said Tuesday evening.

"It was very disappointing" that Frist handled the matter the way he did, Planning said. "Other groups have gotten roll call votes, so there was nothing new to this, nothing different that we were asking for."

Bob Stevenson, Frist's chief spokesman, said Tuesday evening the procedure the majority leader established was "requested by the sponsors."

The chief sponsors of the resolution, Sens. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) and George Allen (R-Va.), disputed that assertion.

I know that the Majority Leader has the right to schedule as he pleases - often in order to protect or shield votes and Senators. But on this issue, why? Who in their right mind would be afraid of being on the record against lynching? Who did he protect and why did he go to great lengths to hold the vote on a Monday night, when both the bulk of the Chamber and the Press were absent?

Protecting Senators from having the "uncomfortable" experience of voting for or against lynching is just beyond insanity. I just don't get it - is it so politically unfeasible for the Senators in these states to go on record that the vigilante killing of people is wrong and perhaps the Senate should have done something about it?

Seems pretty simple to me.

Spineless.

» x « · comments (0)

Less Heated Words

Lynchings, by: 1882-1968Lynchings, by: 1882-1968 - graphic by grubbykid.com

Alright, so after calling all twenty Senators who did not cosponsor the anti-lynching resolution/apology, Pro-lynching Senators, I got some much deserved chiding for my rhetoric. Yet, those twenty should bear a political cost for 1) not voting for this resolution, and 2) not cosponsoring this resolution when they knew political maneuvering would give them cover in the form of the voice-vote. So, what's your stance? You can't weasel your way out of this by calling it a "unanimous vote" - there were all of six Senators on the floor last night - six! I don't think six Senators speak for the whole Senate. The current vote bamboozlement which the twenty are pushing is quite amazing, if showing a complete lack of spine and morals.

What I take issue with, is the notion that this is some trivial matter. Of course there will be demagoguery because of this resolution. Who in their right mind wouldn't cosponsor this resolution or press for a roll-call vote in order to let their position stand on the record.

But enough about demagoguery, let's get into the matter.

Look at the figure above: there were 3,446 reported lynchings between 1882-1968 - and those are the ones which were reported. This isn't a trivial matter; race relations in this country are horrible, and while this resolution is not a panacea (or would accomplish much) - apologizing and taking responsibility for actions is an important first step. These twenty Senators did not take responsibility for complacency of their own actions, the actions of the State - the sins of the Father so to say. In 2003 alone there were 3,032 Hate Crimes perpetuated on Black victims (see Table 5 - 2003 Hate Crimes Statistics (pdf)), with four murders of African Americas motivated by race; again, I'm sure this statistic is slightly underreported and under-attributed.

Of all the other hate crimes by bias motivation, attacks on African Americans outnumber any other bias category three-to-one. The next highest bias motivation is Jewish, then Anti-White (because of numerical superiority), and Anti Male Homosexuality. When I looked to Table 12 (Agency Hate Crime Reporting by State, 2003) I was surprised by the location of hate crimes: Pennsylvania and California were leading the pack, but states I thought would rank higher were quite low on the list.

Then I noticed that the states I thought would lead the pack (no doubt from my "elitist" upbringing) only had a few agencies actually reporting the statistics, and in some cases only had one agency report to the federal government. The report does not crunch the per-capita frequency of hate crimes - but it should.

What this all boils down to is responsibility: just compare the above map, with the map I created showing which states Senators did not cosponsor this bill:

20 non cosponsor Senators, by State
20 non cosponsor Senators, by State

I ask, what's cause of this seemingly correlated event?

» x « · comments (0)

June 14, 2005

Henry Ford Museum

Elizabeth Parke Firestone couture, originally uploaded by Laughing Squid

Years and years ago, my mother dragged my brother and I up to Detroit to visit the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn. I have to say, it was pretty freaking awesome - there are trains, cars, furniture, old buildings - exactly the kinds of things which a teenage boy would love.

Well, Scott Beale of Laughing Squid just visited the museum, and has posted an awesome Flickr photoset of his trip:

I was in Detroit last week and while there I visited the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn, which is part of The Henry Ford, also home to Greenfield Village.

This museum is an awesome testament to the history of American innovation and automation. It is so large, 12 indoor acres, that it even contains a couple of complete trains, both engines and cars with tracks built into the museum floor as well as several full-sized planes including a Douglas DC-3. Other notable installations were several of the Lincoln Continental presidental limousines, including the one that JFK was riding in when he as assassinated in Dallas, an entire motel room from a 70’s era Holiday Inn, Lamy’s Diner, a 1940’s diner transplaned from Marlboro, Massachusetts, an Oscar Mayer Wienermobile and even the refurbished Rosa Parks bus.

Another excuse to visit the Midwest.

» x « · comments (0)

Pro-Lynching Senators

Pro-Lynching Senators, by StatePro-Lynching Senators, by State

Update: Let me preface this by saying that while this resolution may seem "trivial," it surprises me not who has not cosponsored the resolution. Who cosponsored the resolution is important because a group of Southern Senators struck a deal with the GOP leadership to have the vote take place as a voice-vote, thus no record of which Senator voted for or against is available. Senators are there in DC to cast votes on bills and resolutions, and when they fail to, or worm their way out of that vote, it is unhelpful to our system. While there has been some admirable research on why the 20 didn't cosponsor, the fact of the matter is that all 100 should have cos