Bigotry by Homosexuals

Bigotry by Homosexuals

Bigotry by homosexuals toward heterosexuals is no surprise in Cambridge.
The City government encourages retaliation for historical wrongs and permits
overt unlawful discrimination -- based on gender, race and sexual preference.
The local cable access station (CCTV) funded with $850,000 in city funds
annually, refuses to hire white heterosexuals for many years. The staff
regularly harasses heterosexuals and chases them from the station facilities.
The homosexual lobby is like the pigs after the revolution in "Animal Farm." So
much for equality under law, demanded by homosexuals.

--
Roy Bercaw, Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA

Provincetown straights complain of intolerance among gays
Wednesday July 26, 2006
By LING LIU
Associated Press Writer

PROVINCETOWN, Mass. (AP) Heterosexuals in this overwhelmingly gay resort town on
the tip of Cape Cod are complaining that the oppressed have become the
oppressors.

Straight people say they have been taunted as ``breeders.'' One woman who signed
a petition against gay marriage says she was berated as a bigot by a gay man,
and another complained that dog feces were left next to her car.

``The gay community is not immune to having potential prejudices. We're all
human, including gay people,'' said Tom Lang, director of knowthyneighbor.org, a
nonprofit group that supports gay marriage.
[...]

The Right to Travel, Persons with Disabilities

The Right to Travel, Persons with Disabilities

The group with the most compelling interest in removing cobblestones
remains silent. (JENNIFER FERMINO, "BLOCK ON THE 'ROCKS,'" New York Post, July 25, 2006, Page 21) Persons with mobility impairments have a constitutional right to travel.
Cobblestone streets are a barrier to the enjoyment of that right.
Roger Byrom's comment, "If you don't like cobblestones in TriBeCa, live on
the Upper West Side," shows he is unaware of the requirement of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973 which applies to public sidewalks in New York City.
The city gets U.S. taxpayer funds. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
makes it a civil rights issue. Would Byrom as easily deny to persons of color or
homosexuals the right to use the TriBeCa sidewalks?
Why did the New York Post omit persons with disabilities from commenting on
this issue? Why do the rights of persons with disabilities seldom enter the
minds of journalists? This is a shameful display of ignorance and bigotry by
city activists and journalists.

--
Roy Bercaw, Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA

BLOCK ON THE 'ROCKS'
New York Post
By JENNIFER FERMINO

July 25, 2006 -- A downtown fight over the landmarked streets of TriBeCa has
pitted stroller-pushing moms against hardened preservationists.

Residents of 44 Laight St. - a converted factory where condo lofts go for $5
million a pop - say they're tired of traipsing along the jagged cobblestones
outside their building.
[...]

Psychiatric Drugs Causing Violence

Psychiatric Drugs Causing Violence

A NYC police officer shot up his girlfriend's apartment while on anti
depressants. (TATIANA DELIGIANNAKIS, ALEX GINSBERG and HASANI GITTENS, "'SHOOT'
COP OFF MEDS," New York Post, July 25, 2006) The New York Post reports that he
stopped taking his medication. Journalists and police officers remain unaware of
the causal connection between this family of drugs and violence.

--
Roy Bercaw, Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA

'SHOOT' COP OFF MEDS
New York Post
By TATIANA DELIGIANNAKIS, ALEX GINSBERG and HASANI GITTENS

July 25, 2006 -- A depressed cop who, while off his medication, pumped 11
bullets into his girlfriend's apartment door in Brooklyn told arresting officers
that he did it because he caught her cheating on him, sources said yesterday.

Joel Rodriguez, who has worked as a cop for two years at the 90th Precinct in
Williamsburg, had just recently stopped taking an antidepressant drug when he
went to Elizabeth Ortiz's Kent Avenue apartment in a jealous rage Sunday,
sources said.
[...]

Psychiatrist Indicted

Psychiatrist Indicted

This is a case of a doctor prescribing a psychiatric drug for off-label
uses, and accepting payments from drug companies for speeches promoting such
uses. According to the article the practice is illegal. (Alex Berenson,
"Indictment of Doctor Tests Drug Marketing Rules," New York Times, July 22,
2006)
Harvey Silverglate a prominent Boston civil liberties lawyer says "What
they are doing is criminalizing conduct that is not clearly criminal." That the
doctor is being charged criminally, for protected speech.
Promoting the off-label use may be protected speech, but when the drug is
prescribed, are the patients being given informed consent?
There are many arrogant abuses of psychiatrists, the FDA, and the
pharmaceutical industry. FDA approved drugs sometimes kill unsuspecting persons.
Most abuses are legal through drug industry control of the FDA
and the legislative process. Being legal or protected speech does not make the
drugs safe.
Silverglate may be right about protected speech. One can argue as well that
there is a compelling state interest in curbing his speech, which promotes
off-label uses which are harmful. Due to corruption of the FDA it is no longer
possible to know what is safe.
"Dr. Gleason acknowledges that he received more than $100,000 last year
alone from Jazz Pharmaceuticals, which makes Xyrem, the narcolepsy drug he has
promoted." I find it outrageous is that he "continues to practice medicine," and
"a public defender [. . .] took over the case after Dr. Gleason determined he
could not afford a private lawyer."
Here is one more example of how wealthy politically connected persons get
taxpayer funded lawyers while persons with no connections get brutalized by
police and private individuals because they lack access to competent attorneys.
What are the standards for taxpayer funded lawyers?
Will this criminal investigation lead to some curbs of the abuses of the
psychiatric industry and their enablers, the drug companies? The FDA and the
Congress appear to be unable to stop the abuses.

--
Roy Bercaw, Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA

New York Times
Indictment of Doctor Tests Drug Marketing Rules
Alex Berenson
July 22, 2006

At first, Dr. Peter Gleason thought his arrest was a joke.
In the early afternoon of Monday, March 6, half a dozen men in suits surrounded
Dr. Gleason, a Maryland psychiatrist, at a train station on Long Island and
handcuffed him.
"I said, 'Well, this is a gag,' " Dr. Gleason recalled in a recent interview.
"They said, 'No, this isn't.' "

Dr. Gleason, 53, was taken aback because he was arrested, and later charged, for
doing something that has become common among doctors: promoting a drug for
purposes other than those approved by the federal government.
[...]

Big Money Campaigns

Big Money Campaigns

The argument that "money follows the the message of the candidate and his
or her prospects for winning" is flawed. (JOHN SAMPLES, "'08: BIG TICKET," New
York Post, April 9, 2007) Suggesting that "voters were better informed about
candidates in the most expensive races" is also specious.
How many candidates reveal how their campaigns work? Listen to the
silence about the public relations industry and its influence on journalism.
What politicians speak unscripted truth?
It is deceptive to say that "Americans are free to support the candidates
and ideas of their choice." Samples himself says "party activists" didn't like
the weak candidate's message. Why should party activists decide what messages
will be heard? If messages remain censored how can voters decide on all of the
potential candidates and their messages?
Samples argues for a return to back room "party activist" deals. Why waste
the money if candidates can appear before the "party activists" and they can
tell us for whom we can vote?

--
Roy Bercaw, Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA

'08: BIG TICKET
WHY A $1B PREZ RACE IS GOOD FOR DEMOCRACY
New York Post
By JOHN SAMPLES

April 9, 2007 -- PRESIDENTIAL hopefuls made headlines last week when Hillary
Clinton and Barack Obama both announced they'd raised record sums. On the
Republican side, Mitt Romney also raised more than $20 million in the first
quarter of 2007.

Shortly after the numbers became public, predictable laments began. The
presidential candidates supposedly had been bought by the highest bidder - they
were, in the words of a Washington Post editorial, "beholden to well-connected
financiers." But the truth is exactly the opposite.
[...]

Unequal Addressing of Unequal Fears?

Unequal Addressing of Unequal Fears?

Boston Police Commissioner Davis says that witness intimidation is more
perception than reality. "The fear is much more widespread than the actual
incidents." (Suzanne Smalley, "In study, teens open up about 'snitching,' fear
of reprisal," Boston Globe, April 11, 2007)
The exact same comments apply to rape and fear of rape. The difference is
that women's fears are addressed because of the enormous power of women in this
country. Whereas young poor black people have little influence over politicians,
police and journalists.
Women's distorted perceptions are treated as real, while poor black people
are ignored because of their "misperceptions." What happened to equal treatment
under law and equal access to government services?

--
Roy Bercaw, Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA

In study, teens open up about 'snitching,' fear of reprisal
By Suzanne Smalley,
Boston Globe Staff
April 11, 2007

One teenager described seeing a witness pistol-whipped for reporting a rape to
police. "His eyes were completely red; you couldn't see any white," the
unidentified youth said in an interview with researchers for a study on witness
intimidation released yesterday. "They threatened to kill him and his family."
Another said: "I'd get in trouble if I reported a violent crime. Gangs would be
mad at me."
A third teenager recalled deciding not to talk to police after witnessing a
shootout.
"If I told them, the drug dealers would come back to me and make more trouble,"
the teenager said. "I told my mom, and she was scared. She went back to the drug
dealers and told them that I didn't say nothing."
[...]

Children Need Love Not Medication

Children Need Love Not Medication

"Dr. Joseph Gold of McLean Hospital, director of Community Child Psychiatry
Services for Partners Health Care said "in recent weeks, the backups have
'dramatically increased' again." (Carey Goldberg, "Children face delays in
mental health care," Boston Globe, April 13, 2007)
"Joan Mikula, assistant commissioner of [...] the state Department of
Mental Health [said,] State officials and care providers are trying hard to
understand what is going wrong and how to fix it." What is wrong is the
arbitrary diagnoses of illness by the psychiatric industry. These licensed
professionals work on behalf of and with the support of the drug companies and
the hospital who thrive on more patients.
How many of the increased number of children diagnosed with mental illness
are really in need of hospitalization? If their parents and friends provided the
love and support is there any need for the professional friends and dispensers
of drugs?
When will this boondoggle known as psychiatry end so that taxpayer funds
can be directed to programs that provide help to vulnerable citizens instead of
the wealthy and politically connected elite psychiatric industry?

--
Roy Bercaw, Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA

Children face delays in mental health care
Shortage of beds, facilities leading to record backups
By Carey Goldberg,
Boston Globe Staff
April 13, 2007

The state's mental health system for children is clogged with some of its worst
backups in years, leading to long emergency room waits and a record number of
"stuck kids" who are deemed well enough to leave hospital units but have nowhere
to go.
The logjam tends to worsen in late winter and spring, when mental illness often
worsens. But it is particularly bad this year: in the latest count, state
monitors found 156 stuck children at the end of February, some 50 percent more
than the average number in recent years.
[...]

Cambridge City Council Rules, Unruly Enforcement

Cambridge City Council Rules, Unruly Enforcement

[Published online April 17, 2006
print edition April 19, 2007 Cambridge Chronicle.]
http://www.townonline.com/cambridge/opinions/x731193587

Letter: Council vote a little fishy
Cambridge Chronicle
Tue Apr 17, 2007, 05:41 PM EDT
Cambridge -

“City Clerk Margaret Drury said that as long as none of city councilors realized
there was not a quorum, or a majority of members present, or called for a quorum
beforehand, the vote stands.”

“Drury also [said] the City Council’s voting procedures had never been
questioned in the past.” The most cooperative city employee is wrong twice.
(Erin Smith, “City Clerk: Don’t question councilors who missed vote,” Cambridge
Chronicle, Apr 12, 2007.)

Erin Smith correctly notes more is in play here than Robert’s Rules. The City
Council’s rules require a quorum. Rule 5 states, “The Mayor shall declare all
votes. [...] The mayor shall declare the results, but no such declaration shall
be made unless a quorum of the City Council has voted.”

It is wishful thinking to say the council was never questioned in the past about
rules violations. The clerk verifies my belief that city councilors and city
employees ignore public comment. During several meetings, a few citizens openly
challenged the council about having less than a quorum present. Once the mayor
threatened to have me removed when I noted that there was no quorum.

In many letters to the council, I pointed out the frequent anomalies on voting
(most recently my letter in the April 9 agenda). On that day there was no vote
on a motion to table an item. It was tabled without a vote. There are frequent
violations of City Council rules on suspending the rules. I detailed the
violations dozens of time.

It is clear that city officials hear selectively, see selectively, speak
selectively, and worst of all, enforce rules and laws selectively. That is the
major problem resulting from nine councilors being intentionally ignorant of the
rules of running a meeting. The City Council rules mandate that the meetings be
run by Robert’s Rules. It is a recurring problem with one-party government.

The mayor admitted on April 9 he is now taking classes on how to run a meeting
after being a councilor for 18 years. It is never too late to learn.

ROY BERCAW, Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA

Boston Globe Report on TASERs is Misleading

Boston Globe Report on TASERs is Misleading

The report on Cambridge police wanting to use TASERs is misleading and
irresponsible. (Janice O'Leary, "Police will seek state OK on use of Tasers,"
Boston Globe, April 15, 2007)
"If the officer on the scene of a crime in East Cambridge in 2002, [...]
had had a TASER, [Lt. Robert] Ames said, the suspect who was shot might still be
alive."
Ames also quoted a TASER corporate document which says that persons with
disabilities have a higher tolerance level for pain. That is what police used to
say about black people.
In July 2002, the Cambridge police broke down the door on Porter Street in
East Cambridge and shot Daniel Furtado dead in his own home, with no court order
and no warrant to enter his home. He was accused of cutting a cable TV wire, a
misdemeanor. If Cambridge police had not violated state and US laws, there would
have been no death either. The police violated the US Constitution and killed a
citizen contrary to law.
Intimidating a person from the free exercise of a constitutionally
guaranteed right is a crime. Being secure in your home is one such right, the
Fourth Amendment.
If Cambridge police are negligently trained to respect the Constitution and
state laws, what is there to stop police from violating their own regulations?
The idea that "excited delirium," a non-existent PR creation is responsible
for deaths is fantasy. The Arizona Republic reported 167 deaths after being
TASEd. In March 2007 the New York Post reported another.
Canada and the United Kingdom do not permit these weapons to be used in
their countries. TASER Corp. uses the worldwide grease of money to persuade
local police to buy their weapons. Bernie Kerik, NYC Police Commissioner got $6
million in stock.
An alternative which the Cambridge police refused to consider is a net gun
which disables with no danger of of death.
Quoting Robert Winters a math instructor at Harvard, who is alleged to be
an FBI informant is like asking the Pope about religion. What do you expect he
would say? The ACLU in Massachusetts no longer criticizes the police. The ACLU
in Massachusetts works with the police. Their position on TASERs is the same as
the police's.

--
Roy Bercaw, Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA

CAMBRIDGE
Police will seek state OK on use of Tasers
Stun guns save lives, officials say; critics see needless deaths
By Janice O'Leary,
Boston Globe Correspondent
April 15, 2007
The last time a Cambridge police officer fired a bullet in service was in 2002,
according to the Police Department. And some city officials have said that the
man who died as a result might still be alive if he'd instead been zapped with a
Taser.
The Cambridge police could be one of the first Boston-area forces to arm its
officers with the controversial stun guns. Chelsea police began using Tasers in
2005, soon after the Legislature unanimously voted to OK their use in the state.
In 2005, Brookline police introduced the idea but postponed it because of
reports of Taser-related deaths elsewhere nationally.
Cambridge police are considering Tasers "as an option, as a tool to help
officers do their jobs," said Lieutenant Paul Ames, commander of the Cambridge
police special response team.
"Not as an answer to a rabid crime problem. We want officers to be judicious in
their use. We may deploy these weapons and never use them, which would be fine
with me.
"A Taser might save one life," he said, "and if it does that, then it's worth
it, to me."
Not everyone agrees that Tasers are a good idea.
"I don't understand why we are doing this," said Lawrence Adkins, a Riverside
resident who attended a recent neighborhood meeting about the weapons.
He said that, with the use of pepper spray so low and the cost of Tasers so
high, he would rather see the money spent on additional manpower.
Cambridge police plan to submit their proposal for arming their special response
team with Tasers to the state's Executive Office of Public Safety in the next 30
days, Ames said.
Initially, Cambridge police want to order 30 Tasers. The $30,000 price tag
includes training costs. Ames said the department has not stated that it is
definitely getting the guns.
The state requires four hours of training for each operator of a stun gun, but
Cambridge plans to double that requirement, Ames said.
"We've had a mixed response from the public so far," Ames said. "There's a
little fear of it. There's a fear that Tasers kill people, even though a slew of
medical studies have been done to prove they do not cause death."
Amnesty International has linked 152 deaths to Taser use since 1999 . In 2003
and again in 2005, the organization issued a plea to suspend the purchase or use
of the stun guns until further studies could be conducted.
Regarding those reports, Ames said: "No one has listed Tasers as a cause of
death, but that they were used when someone died. We're following the guidelines
set forth by PERF," the Police Executive Research Forum. "That organization did
research and said Tasers do not cause death."
That report offers police 52 guidelines for the use of Tasers and similar
devices. It notes that "multiple activations," or repeated firing, of such
devices "appears to increase the risk of death."
The police group, a national organization, used recommendations published by the
American Civil Liberties Union to set its policy on Tasers, Ames said.
Tasers work by sending electric pulses to the muscles, causing them to contract
for five seconds.
"You can't move for those five seconds," Ames said, "allowing officers to
handcuff the suspect."
"If the alternative is to use bullets, then Tasers are preferable," said math
teacher Robert Winters , a local political observer.
"But, on the other hand, I hope this doesn't mean that if people get rowdy at an
event, the police will just Taser them."
The Amnesty International reports had an impact on Brookline's decision two
years ago to put the Tasers on hold.
The Amnesty report stated: "While in most cases deaths have continued to be
attributed to factors other than the Taser, such as 'excited delirium'
associated with drug intoxication or violent struggle, in 23 cases coroners have
listed the use of the Taser as a cause or a contributory factor in death.
"In three cases in 2005," the report continued, "the Taser was listed as the
primary cause of death."
Ames, who has been stunned by a Taser himself, said it feels "very
uncomfortable," but one reason he favors them is that "you're not using pain to
control a suspect, but rather muscle contraction. If a suspect is on drugs, he
can fight through the pain of being hit by a baton. But someone on drugs can't
fight through the Taser."
If the officer on the scene of a crime in East Cambridge in 2002, the last time
a bullet was fired by a cop on duty, had had a Taser, Ames said, the suspect who
was shot might still be alive.
He declined to give more specifics about the incident.
Cambridge City Councilor Michael A. Sullivan , who cochairs the council's Public
Safety Committee, agreed. "Maybe the result could have been different," he said.
"I could see a case made for appropriate use."
Cambridge Mayor Kenneth E. Reeves , who agreed with Sullivan that a life might
have been saved if a Taser had been used in that case, also urges caution.
"Just because it's not a bullet doesn't mean it can't cause other problems."
Adkins remains firmly against the guns. "Call me old-fashioned, but it's not
fitting for us. It's the wrong town and the wrong purpose."
Winters said: "In principle, I think they're a good idea. Execution will be the
issue."

60 MINUTES: Duke University Rape Case

60 MINUTES: Duke University Rape Case

Lesley Stahl April 15, 2007
60 Minutes
524 West 57th Street
New York NY 10019 Duke Rape Case

Dear Lesley Stahl,

I write about a recurring pattern on 60 Minutes denigrating persons with
a history of mental illness.
On Sunday April 15, 2007 Lesley Stahl interviewing Roy Cooper, North
Carolina Attorney General, reported, “After his three-month investigation
Attorney General Cooper realized that the accuser was clearly mentally
unbalanced. Records Nifong himself filed in the case show Crystal Mangaham had a
long psychological history and has taken anti psychotic medication like Depakote
and Seroquel.”
What is the connection between being “clearly mentally unbalanced,” and
committing a crime or falsely accusing another person?
Do you believe that mental illness causes crime or violence? There is no
causal connection between an accusation of mental illness and crime or violence.
But it is a pervasive stereotype among journalists, police, prosecutors and some
psychiatrists.
If anything it is the psychiatric drugs which cause people to act
irrationally. American journalists are mostly ignorant of British clinical
studies which prove that connection. I am aware that Mike Wallace is a spokesman
for the drug industry. I see the many ads from drug companies which sponsor your
show.
I write and speak to politicians, journalists, police and
prosecutors about this problem. As in your report there are frequent immediate
references to a history of mental illness to explain crime or violence. At
arraignments an inappropriate time, prosecutors regularly cite a history of
mental illness, as if it was the cause of the accused’s actions. They repeat
allegations from neighbors, relatives, lovers and police as if all of them are
psychiatrists. It shows how arbitrary psychiatry is.
On one occasion US Rep. Delahunt (D-MA) when he was a District Attorney in
Massachusetts said of a suspect that “there is no history of mental illness” as
if that would explain the crime.
I called to the headquarters of the Mass state police. I asked why
the police do not listen to a person they believe to have a mental illness. He
said “because you cannot rely on what they say."
I said, “That implies that normal people do not lie.”
With respect to discrimination, persons with disabilities have the same
legal protections as members of racial, religious, sexual orientation and gender
groups. But people, including journalists and prosecutors prioritize kinds of
discrimination.
I’m aware of how laws are written. The public discourse regarding
psychiatry is controlled by the psychiatric industry, the drug industry, the
human services corporations and the academic research industry.
The National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI) is a lobbyist for the drug
companies. They get $2-$3 million each year from drug companies to promote drug
treatment. Journalists often quote NAMI as an advocacy organization for the
rights of patients.
I want to register my objection to the portrayal of the accuser in the
Duke rape case. I do not defend her. I was skeptical of her accusations as soon
as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson arrived on the scene. I live in Cambridge, MA
the incubator for limousine liberals and the PC movement. There are few places
with public discourse as distorted as in Cambridge. The upper class liberals in
Cambridge does not tolerate criticism. They do not advocate equal opportunities
for persons with disabilities.


--
Roy Bercaw, Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA

Bigotry on NECN NewsNight with Jim Braude

Bigotry on NECN NewsNight with Jim Braude

Angus McQuilken said on Tuesday April 17, 2007, on NECN's NewsNight with
Jim Braude that we need to "keep guns out of the hands of people with a history
of mental illness." Here is one more example of civil rights activists for
homosexuals who indicate their bigoted hateful feelings toward persons with
disabilities. Upon what rational basis does McQuilken deny persons with a
history of mental illness the right to carry a gun? It appears that he shares
the NECN host's negative opinion of persons with disabilities.
McQuilken also said that mental illness needs to be considered for a gun
license. Why not consider homosexuality for a gun license? Homosexuals are more
violent than mental patients. Homosexuals are more likely to kill others than
persons with a history of mental illness. Typically we scrutinize the peaceful
citizens and ignore the violent ones.
The Constitution does not deny rights to persons with a history of mental
illness. Having a disability does not carry with it a constitutional prohibition
on exercising rights. Unlike homosexuals persons with disabilities do not have
wealthy politically connected TV and political spokesmen defending their rights
and corrupting the law and the courts. Why do homosexual leaders deny equal
rights to persons with disabilities?
Mr. Braude and NECN management continue to ignore my emails about his
bigoted views on persons with disabilities. Jim's current love object, Cadillac
Deval said he was "sick of the careless insults." But neither Deval nor Braude
believe that persons with disabilities have the same feelings as black people,
homosexuals and women. Persons with disabilities are as hurt by Braude's and
McQuilkjen's hate speech as black people are hurt by Imus' speech. This is the
dictionary definition of bigotry. When will it end?
McQuilken is a limousine liberal failed candidate for state office. He
reflects the unlawful liberal position on persons with disabilities, i.e., only
homosexuals, women and blacks are victims of discrimination. That is the
underlying assumption of their fatuous policies.

--
Roy Bercaw, Editor
ENOUGH ROOM
Cambridge MA USA