Protesting Illegal Immigrants, Unaware of Mexican Immigration Laws

[From article]
On Friday night, we saw Sanders placards and a few communist flags at that anti-Trump rally. I guess you'd expect that at a leftist rally with Bill Ayers in attendance.
It was the Mexican flags that caught my attention.
I don't know for sure who was holding the flags but my reaction was the same. In other words, do these kids understand how Mexico treats illegal immigrants or even legal foreigners engaged in politics?
Let's take a look at Mexico's immigration laws:
What would Mexico do? The answer is easy: deport them on the spot. In 2002, a dozen American college students, in Mexico legally, participated peacefully in an environmental protest against a planned airport outside of Mexico City. They swiftly found themselves deported as law-breakers for interfering in Mexico’s internal affairs.
Another person had a sign that read: "Liberation not deportation".
What in the world does that mean? Does the young woman understand that every country has immigration laws and deports people violating them?

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/03/do_mexican_flagwavers_know_what_happens_to_illegals_in_mexico.html

March 15, 2016
Do Mexican flag-wavers know what happens to illegals in Mexico?
By Silvio Canto, Jr.

Cambridge, MA Disability Commission Discusses Congressional Mental Health Bill

As noted by Kate Thurman in the below essay, the focus of a proposed bill (link below) in the US Congress, is on police and crime, as if disability itself is a crime. It is important to distinguish between disability and crime. Police,  politicians and journalists do not do that. They like to believe that mental illness, a psychiatric diagnosis causes crime. It is nonsense. But seldom are politicians, police and journalists logical these days. Politicians are focused on getting re-elected. Journalists want to get published, and invited to dinner by politicians. The psychiatric industry has wealth and a lot of influence to help them. It is supported by the pharmaceutical industry. Police want to get home safe and do not like to have to make accommodations for people who have been diagnosed as crazy. The simplest solution is to arrest if not to kill a suspect. The counter argument is just as illogical, i.e., that if a person has a disability he or she should not be held accountable for their crime. 

Journalists, police, prosecutors, lawyers, judges, and politicians subscribe to the history of mental illness doctrine, whereby anyone with a history is guilty of violence because of the history. Again crime is equated to a psychiatric diagnosis. 

This essay argues that the bill is limited to addressing severe mental illness without defining it. That is true, but also there is no pathology for psychiatric illnesses. They are made up by consensus (see Boston University Psychology Professor, Margaret Hagan's book, Whores of the Court.) These illnesses are defined as speech and behavior, usually protected by the constitution, which psychiatrists do not like or do not understand. It is a system of social control with no due process protections. Personal opinion masquerading as science. 

Politically, liberals blame guns for violence. Conservatives blame psychiatric diagnoses. Neither makes sense. People are violent. It is extremely difficult to determine who will be violent, and when. Nonetheless psychiatrists with the encouragement of judges testify in court making predictions of people's future behavior. Politicians don't want to be bogged down. They have television interviews to do.  It takes up too much time and requires critical thought.  It is easier to blame a defenseless target. 

The bill weakens privacy protections for psychiatric diagnoses. One more instance of government bias, unequal protection of the laws for people with disabilities by the elected criminal class. Psychiatric treatment can be used against a person in a court of law. Lawyers and judges do not tell patients that downside of this business. 

The focus of this essay is on getting more taxpayer funded treatment by psychiatrists. But the psychiatrists do not cure their illnesses. They sell treatment. Once a patient always a patient. It is a good business model. But it is not science or medicine. 

In theory the protection and advocacy agencies (P&A) protect the rights of persons accused of mental illness. But there is little actual protection and advocacy. They refer petitioners elsewhere because it is too much trouble. There are so many people with physical  disabilities that they are prioritized over the crazy people. 

There are restrictions on what the P&A agencies can do. Unlike immigrants, illegal aliens who get free legal, health care, tuition and housing. Law abiding citizens with disabilities get bupkis.

This essay says  providing funds for police training and for research are good provisions. But police get billions and there are billions for research aside from this bill. The name of the bill suggests it is what NAMI is, i.e., a lobbyist for more taxpayer funded drug treatment. NAMI is a lobbyist for the drug companies. They allege they advocate for families. The individual with a disability has no advocate.  The bill does not protect persons with disabilities. It deprives them of rights enjoyed by others some who are not even citizens. The problem is that there is no strong disability lobby. There are academic research lobbyists. Harvard University has three full time lobbyists based in Washington DC. The police have hundreds of organizations actively lobbying state and federal legislatures. Disability advocates, not so much.  

[From the Cambridge, MA Disability Commission. January 27, 2016]



Mental Health Advocates Express Concerns over Murphy Bill

There is no doubt that our nation’s mental health system leaves much to be desired. Many people with psychiatric disabilities experience difficulty accessing treatment for a variety of reasons. These reasons include lack of funding and resources, low reimbursement rates for mental health services, a shortage of culturally competent care, and stigma perpetuated by inaccurate portrayals of mental illness in media, particularly following acts of violence, among other things.

To this end, it is admirable that the U.S. House Energy & Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight & Investigations, led by Representative Tim Murphy of Pennsylvania, conducted a review of the system beginning in early 2013, just after – and in response to – the Newtown shooting tragedy. The Subcommittee indeed found many systemic problems in our mental health system and made numerous recommendations that culminated in the Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Act (H.R. 2646), more widely known as the Murphy Bill.

However, many advocates argue that from the get go, this bill was informed by and written from a public safety standpoint, and while our nation certainly has a lot of work to do to curb violence, our broken mental health care system is one of the foremost public health crises of our time, and it must be addressed as such.

Rather than overhaul the system from the ground up, this bill calls for diverting attention and funding away from prevention and health maintenance care to late-stage crisis intervention for individuals with the most severe psychiatric disabilities. Creating a system to address violence rather than healthcare needs inevitably removes the focus from the very people it purports to help – people with psychiatric disabilities – and creates concerns for civil rights.

If the Murphy Bill were to pass as it is currently written, many people with psychiatric disabilities could be turned away from help if their levels of illness are not determined to be severe enough; there is no clear standard as to what constitutes severity. Additionally, like many so-called physical illnesses, mental illnesses tend to operate on a spectrum; there are times when people are stabilized and doing well and there are other times when they may have more acute symptoms. In no other medical specialty would anyone consider cutting access to care at any point along the spectrum; think of medical centers removing resources for outpatient care and investing in just intensive care units.

Also, generally speaking, the earlier someone receives treatment, the better her or his outcome. This bill calls for cutting funding for community-based supports that have a proven record for being effective. Funding would be increased for assisted outpatient treatment (AOT), which is court-mandated treatment that patients must follow or face punitive action, and for long-term involuntary inpatient hospitalizations, also known as institutionalization.

“We already know what works,” said Jennifer Mathis, Deputy Legal Director of the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law. “Proven programs such as supportive housing, Assertive Community Treatment (ACT), peer support, mobile crisis services, and supported employment have extremely successful outcomes, including for people with the most significant mental health needs. The problem is that these services are not widely available to people who need them. This bill would make it even more difficult to take these services to scale, as it would invest mental health dollars elsewhere,” Mathis said.

The Murphy Bill also proposes changing portions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) by easing current privacy protection for patients with psychiatric disabilities, and allowing family members to access to portions of their mental health records. The protection of healthcare information is an important civil right currently afforded to all patients in the United States. This change would affect only those with mental health needs. This disparate treatment of one segment of the population is arguably discriminatory. Additionally, knowing that their families could access treatment information would likely deter many people from getting the help they need.

Each state has a federally funded protection and advocacy (P&A) agency that is charged with protecting the legal rights of individuals with disabilities (the Disability Law Center, a private non-profit in Boston, is the P&A for Massachusetts). The country’s Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness (PAIMI) program provides a vital resource for individuals who experience discrimination due to having a mental illness. The Murphy Bill proposes cutting PAIMI funding from its current annual level of $36.1 million to $5 million; this greater than 87% cut in funding would drastically reduce the ability of P&A legal service agencies to protect the rights of this population.

In addition, the bill significantly reduces the authority of P&A agencies. According to the Bazelon Center, “the bill would prohibit the PAIMI program from providing advocacy and legal representation to help people with mental illness with a host of important issues, including housing, employment, education, community living, Medicaid benefits. Advocacy concerning anything other than abuse and neglect would be barred.” 1

Some provisions of the Murphy Bill could result in positive change. For example, it would provide funding for mental health awareness training for first responders. It also calls for increasing funding for brain research. But, while this bill may be well intended and include some provisions that may result in some improvements, many advocates feel that this bill fails to actually reform the mental health system and instead makes treatment more difficult to access for many, infringes upon the civil rights of people with psychiatric disabilities and removes key protections of a vulnerable population.

The full bill can be found online at http://murphy.house.gov/helpingfamiliesinmentalhealthcrisisact

If you would like to express an opinion regarding the Murphy Bill, contact your district’s U.S. House Representative (www.house.gov/representatives/) and the U.S. Senators for Massachusetts: Edward Markey (www.markey.senate.gov/contact) and Elizabeth Warren (www.warren.senate.gov)

--by Kate Thurman

Democratic Party Elitism Eliminates Power Of the People

[From article]
The great American experiment is based on the revolutionary idea that power flows from the people not the government; the rights of people granted by the Creator, not the Divine right of kings.
Lincoln encapsulated that when he said:
…government of the people, by the people, for the people…
The Constitution defines a government where the people exercise power by electing -- and getting rid of -- politicians.
[. . .]
America is no longer a country run by a government of the people. Decades of fascist maneuvering by Democrats has destroyed the representational nature of American government and disenfranchised the people.



The elimination of people power began with the Supreme Court’s acceptance of the idea of the “living” Constitution; i.e., the idea that the Constitution means whatever 5 judges thinks it means rather than what the people who wrote and ratified the Constitution thought it meant.
[. . .]
the Court imposed on America its personal morality. A court that decides what it thinks the Constitution should mean is no different in nature than a monarch such as King George III;
[. . .]
Recently the Court has solidified its power by declaring that citizens don’t have the right to sue when politicians don’t enforce the laws passed by the people directly. Seven million Californians passed Prop 8 that declared that marriage was between a man and a woman. The fascist Democrat politicians of California, including Jerry Brown, refused to defend the people’s law showing that Democrats do not believe that power flows from the people. But if the people don’t have standing to demand that the laws they pass be enforced clearly the people, in the eyes of the Supreme Court, have no power.
Similarly, Eric Holder and Obama declared themselves above the law by refusing to enforce DOMA -- and encouraging state attorneys-general to do the same. Clearly, if politicians can pick and choose which laws to follow, the people have no power, since even if they manage to get laws enacted, the people have no assurance that their “rulers” will follow those laws.
Of course, Obama’s imperial presidency and his refusal to act as though there are any Constitutional restraints on his personal power also work to remove the people from the decision-making process.
[. . .]



The final step in disenfranchising the American people and making them subjects of a new royal class composed of government bureaucrats, judges, and politicians has been the rise of what’s called administrative law; rules created by unelected government workers that Americans must follow.
In America today, if Democrats think that men accused of rape on college campuses should be denied due process they need not pass a law, rather they only need an unelected and essentially unfireable government bureaucrat to write a letter to colleges threatening to remove all federal funding unless men’s due process is removed.
[. . .]
The elimination of people power helps explains why the Democrat agenda advances despite electoral wins by Republicans. While many Republicans are in fact more interested in the donor class than the people, the reality is that under the government described by the Constitution, Democrats could not just stonewall. To advance their agenda Democrats would have to compromise.
Gridlock is the result not of partisanship but of the institutionalization of Democrat power through the Courts and administrative law -- and of course Obama’s executive orders.
[. . .]



If anyone doubts that Americans are now controlled by their masters in government, they only need look at the fact that not only do government workers have job security, something the people don’t have in the Obama economy, but that they earn 78% more, on average, than the people. Liberals claim that that’s because government jobs require more skills than private sector jobs.
[. . .]
In the Soviet Union, the nomenklatura, the ruling class, was marked by its special privileges and its higher pay, just like government employees and politicians in America today. Following the money tells us who are the rulers and who are the ruled in America today.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/01/returning_power_to_the_people.html

January 16, 2016
Returning Power to the People
By Tom Trinko

Columbia University, Dean Of Journalism School, and The Note In The Bedroom

[From article]
In the current issue of the New Yorker, Steve Coll, Dean of the Columbia University School of Journalism, has a brief piece on Hillary Clinton’s private email problems. He traces the current scandal to…Rush Limbaugh!
[. . .]
Hillary Clinton, in her memoir “Living History,” recounts her struggle to defend her privacy while residing in the White House. Some of her stories have a gothic tone. After Bill Clinton’s first inauguration, Harry and Linda Thomason, friends from Hollywood, found a jocular note under a pillow in the Lincoln Bedroom. It was from Rush Limbaugh, the conservative radio host. How did the note get there?
[. . .]


Steve Coll, Dean, Columbia Journalism School

Was Rush George H.W. Bush’s last Lincoln Bedroom guest? Did he really leave a note? Or did the White House staff already detest the Clintons so much that someone left the note as a joke? I don’t know. Perhaps Rush can tell us. But the real question is, what on God’s green Earth does this have to do with Hillary Clinton’s decision to conduct official State Department business on an unsecured, off-the-books server? Mr. Coll thinks it is a matter of privacy, explained by Rush’s “haunting” of the White House:
[. . .]
See, here’s the thing: privacy was never the question. No one cares if Hillary uses a private email system to schedule her yoga lessons and plan her daughter’s wedding. On the contrary: that is what everyone does, and it would be inappropriate to use the official (and relatively secure) State Department system for this purpose.
Rather, the issue is that Hillary chose to carry on her official State Department correspondence, in which she had no legitimate expectation of privacy, through the home server that housed information on yoga lessons. Hillary is in trouble because 1) her decision to circumvent the State Department computer system for substantially all of her official communications unquestionably violated State Department policy, and 2) if she had classified information on her home server–as she evidently did–she is in violation of federal criminal statutes.
[. . .]



You might think that this is a trivial deconstruction of an unusually stupid magazine article, and you would probably be right. But note: Steve Coll currently is the dean of what used to be regarded as America’s foremost school of journalism. It may still be, for all I know. Not only that, Coll was the managing editor of the Washington Post from 1998 to 2005, has won a Pulitzer prize, has authored numerous prize-winning books and has served as president of the New America Foundation. He is a model of contemporary liberalism, and he apparently doesn’t understand that Hillary’s use of a private email system for official correspondence has nothing to do with privacy. Let alone with Rush Limbaugh’s haunting the White House. Sadly, this is the state of today’s dominant, Democratic Party news media.
[. . .]


Rush Limbaugh, Lives Rent Free in the Minds of Many

[Limbaugh replies]
Here it is 2015 and there’s a story in the New Yorker about her e-mail server, and she remembers something that happened in 1993 that’s at the top of her mind. This is why I say I live rent free in these people’s heads.
[. . .]
There were things happening in the White House she wasn’t controlling, things happening in the White House she didn’t know, and if it was that easy, if it was that easy to get that close to her, like a note under the pillow in the Lincoln Bedroom and suspiciously out of place furniture, why, I need my own e-mail server. I mean, that’s the thinking.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/09/hillarys-email-scandal-rush-limbaugh-made-her-do-it.php

POSTED ON SEPTEMBER 1, 2015

BY JOHN HINDERAKER
HILLARY’S EMAIL SCANDAL? RUSH LIMBAUGH MADE HER DO IT!

New York City Taxi Driver Gets $226 Rent Controlled Apartment Using Obscure Law

[From article]
Two cabbies used an obscure law to score sweet apartments near the High Line for as little as $226 a month — even though similar-sized digs in the neighborhood go for around $3,200.
Hamidou Guira spent just one night in his new home in the Chelsea Highline ­Hotel before he was able to game the system with the help of fellow hack Joe ­Stevens and score himself a lifelong lease, according to sources.
Guira did it by submitting a written request to become a permanent tenant under a little-known section of the Rent Stabilization and New York City ­Administrative codes.
Because the hotel at 184 11th Ave. is a former SRO, “an occupant who requests a lease of six months or more . . . shall be a permanent tenant,” the law says.
The owner must accept the lease at the regulated rate — $226 — and it can be renewed indefinitely.
In Guira’s case, the hotel manager tried “forcefully preventing” him from entering his room on July 31 after learning of his plan.
But the cabby went to Manhattan Housing Court and, acting as his own lawyer, won the case when Justice Sabrina Kraus ruled he was “unlawfully evicted” from his dirt-cheap digs.

http://nypost.com/2015/08/12/cabbie-lands-chelsea-pad-for-226-using-little-known-law/

Cabbie lands Chelsea pad for $226 using little-known law
By Julia Marsh and Jennifer Bain
New York Post
August 12, 2015 | 10:39pm

Unelected Officials Make Rules Which Carry Force of Law. Government Is Out of Control

[From article]
But currently, regulations, which effectively carry the weight of law, are meted out by individual agency directors and their subordinates, who are sometimes contractors who have no punitive accountability to the agency. Agency heads are not elected, but appointed, yet they have the freedom to enact these pseudo-laws or regulations with impunity, without allowing any notice to or comment from the public.
[. . .]
As an illustration of the insidiousness of bureaucrat behavior, in 2014, 224 laws were enacted by congressional members during the calendar year, whereas 3,554 rules were issued by agencies and the bureaucrats within. The Obama administration issued 157 regulations in the first five years of his administration costing $73 billion annually.
[. . .]



What is crystal-clear in the rhetoric of Democrats in the Congress is that they do in fact know that rules and regulations that carry the full weight of law are being implemented without allowing any notice or comment from the public, and yet they vigorously protest the American public knowing where their money is going.
And that is the fundamental problem: members of Congress have somehow lost sight of, or they never knew, or in their arrogance they just do not care that the money being spent in Washington is earned by American citizens. Government is not a business, contrary to what the agency heads pretend.
[. . .]
As long as there is an unelected shadow government making decisions and implementing rules and regulations with impunity, and the politicians are impotent to control those in the shadows, nothing will change.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/07/the_shadow_lawmakers_and_the_trilliondollar_budget.html

August 1, 2015
The Shadow Lawmakers and the Trillion-Dollar Budget
By Larry Creech

New State Laws Effective January 1st, 2015

[From article]
A look at some of the new laws taking effect Jan. 1, in alphabetical order by topic:
[. . .]
Wine connoisseurs will be popping the cork over a new law taking effect Thursday that allows out-of-state wineries to ship bottles directly to consumers in Massachusetts.
[. . .]
In California, a "yes means yes" standard for sex between college students takes effect, requiring "an affirmative, conscious and voluntary agreement to engage in sexual activity," meaning silence or a lack of resistance can no longer be deemed consent.
[. . .]
In California, drivers' licenses will be available for people in the country illegally.
[. . .]
The minimum wage goes up Thursday in several states, including Arkansas, Connecticut, Florida, Ohio, Maryland, Massachusetts and Rhode Island.

http://news.yahoo.com/laws-ok-wine-shipments-ban-tiger-selfies-065106300--finance.html

New laws OK wine shipments, ban tiger selfies
By ANDREW WELSH-HUGGINS
December 31, 2014

Sweden Tries New Law To Curb Prostitution

Photo by: Mary Altaffer
"It is critically important to look at the demand for core prostitution and the demand that fuels sex trafficking," said Taina Bien-Aime, executive director of the New York-based Coalition Against the Trafficking in Women. "Prostitution is inherently violence against women. The majority of the people exploited in the sex trade are women." (Associated Press)


[From article]
The Kvinnofrid — “protection of women” — law criminalizes paying for sex but legalizes sex work, treating prostitution as violence against women — a long-held view among feminists in progressive Sweden similar to members of the New York-based Coalition Against the Trafficking in Women.
“It is critically important to look at the demand for core prostitution and the demand that fuels sex trafficking,” said Taina Bien-Aime, the coalition’s executive director. “Prostitution is inherently violence against women. The majority of the people exploited in the sex trade are women.”
[. . .]
Ms. Jakobsson also contends that the government isn’t paying sufficient attention to forms of prostitution other than streetwalking. Prostitution is flourishing elsewhere, she said.
“The only baseline [government officials] had was the known street zones,” said Ms. Jakobsson. “But there are many different settings. Some work in casinos, opportunistically in bars or online.”

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/22/sweden-prostitution-reduction-models-success-a-myt/

Sweden prostitution reduction model’s success a myth, skeptics warn
Kvinnofrid law criminalizes paying for sex but legalizes sex work
Angela Waters
Special to The Washington Times
Monday, December 22, 2014

Harvard University Employees Harass Elder Tenant

Published October 10, 2014 3:43 PM ET; Last updated October 15, 2014 7:33 PM ET

Recall that I never requested any work from Harvard University Housing. They created a fantasy to justify an illegal entry to my premises. It was a trespass, perhaps a burglary. But with a $36 billion endowment and an army of media image makers it is easy to fool the public, the police and the politicians, who are always eager to obey wealthy powerful images.  

---

Your work order has been Completed. 1 message

---

hres_yardi_prod@harvard.edu	Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 9:34 AM
To: roybercaw
Please do not Reply to this email as this account is not monitored for incoming mail.   Information is now available for the work request you submitted for: 85-02 Go check apartment temp   The status of this service request is currently:  Completed   Additional information about this request can be viewed on line.   HU Housing tenants living in affiliated housing should log in at http://www.huhousing.harvard.edu as a registered user.   Harvard University Housing

Updated October 10, 2014 4:45 PM ET

[Sent Friday October 10, 2014 at about 12:10 PM via City Inspectional Services online form.]

Unless Harvard University (my landlord) has an exception as per CMR it is my belief that heat must be provided to residential tenants beginning on Sep. 15th each year. They do provide heat continuously to other tenants. But for some reason several times per year my unit (#2) does not get heat when the rest of my building at 85 Prescott Street, Cambridge does get heat. On Friday October 10, 2014 there was heat to other units but not to mine. When I call to complain the receptionist usually asks me, "Why are you the only one?" I write and speak about Harvard University criticizing them on occasion. Perhaps that is why. The persons also tamper with electricity, cable TV service, DSL online computer services, and hot water. It is how they express their dissatisfaction. Harvard University employees (police and superintendents) regularly retaliate for my protected legal expression. I'm aware that it is a violation of the Massachusetts civil rights felony statute. But police do not respond to my complaints. If you set up an appointment to inspect the problem I suspect it will be a waste of your and my time. Whoever is tampering with the heat system will restore the heat when it is supposed to be on before you arrive. Perhaps someone from your office speaking with a responsible person at Harvard may solve the problem. Thank you for your attention.

* * *

At about 1:00 PM I went to do an errand, returning at about 2:30 PM. I saw a paper tag hanging on my door handle, from Harvard University Housing. It was a report of an entry to my apartment for "maintenance." But I have never given Harvard University permission to enter my premises without permission except for an emergency. The tag stated that "TA" was in my apartment at about "1:35" [PM?] on date "10/10." The message written is "Apt temperature is 75 degree. Check apt temperature for report of apartment being cold."

This appears to be evidence of two crimes. One is criminal trespass if not burglary. Entering my premises without permission is a crime. Checking temperature is not an emergency.



Secondly when I complain to the City of Cambridge's Inspectional Services department using their online form, or any method, it takes about 7-14 days to get a response. Unless the Harvard University criminals who harass me every day committing repeated felonies were monitoring my computer communications, which I am aware that they do, it is not possible for the city to contact Harvard and have a Harvard employee respond to my complaint in one hour. The City of Cambridge closes at noon on Fridays. That adds another layer of delay.




But also I did not complain about the apartment being cold as per the above message. In the early morning hours it was cold. But at 1 in the afternoon with the sun shining, blasting on my windows the apartment gets warm. The complaint was that there was heat in other apartments but not mine on that day.

This suggests that someone is tampering with my computer transmissions which is a felony under the US Code. It is one of several daily felonies these police criminals commit every day.

But the Inspectional Services Department has limited jurisdiction.




[According to the weather service the temperature for Boston at about 11:54 PM on Thursday October 9, 2014 was 57 fahrenheit. At 8:54 AM on Friday October 10, 2014 it was 54 fahrenheit.  At 12:54 PM Friday October 10, 2014 it was 62.

At about 12:49 PM, 39 minutes after I sent a form message to the City Inspectional Services, the below email arrived in my inbox. Thus Harvard received  a "work request" from unknown and responded within 54 minutes. But again without permission entering my premises for a non emergency.] 

Roy Bercaw

---

Your work order has been Scheduled. 1 message

---

hres_yardi_prod@harvard.edu	Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 12:49 PM
To: roybercaw
Please do not Reply to this email as this account is not monitored for incoming mail.   Information is now available for the work request you submitted for: 85-02 Go check apartment temp   The status of this service request is currently:  Scheduled   Additional information about this request can be viewed on line.   HU Housing tenants living in affiliated housing should log in at http://www.huhousing.harvard.edu as a registered user.   Harvard University Housing

CA Politicians Wants To Change 1988 Law To Permit Non English Public School Lessons

[From article]
On Tuesday, a few hours after Mexican president Enrique Pena Nieto said that Illegal Aliens deserve justice in the USA and Gov. Jerry Brown welcomed all illegal immigrants to California, lawmakers in Sacramento passed a proposed ballot measure seeking to dismantle the English-only mandate for public schools and increase multilingual education programs.
[. . .]
The proposal by California lawmakers is designed to jettison the 1998 law which required English-only instruction in California classrooms. Many believe that inserting Spanish into the classroom only delays and hinders learning for English as second language children.

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-California/2014/08/27/CA-Lawmakers-Aim-To-Ban-English-Only-Instruction-in-Public-Schools

CA LAWMAKERS AIM TO BAN ENGLISH ONLY INSTRUCTION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS
by ROBERT WILDE

27 Aug 2014

Respect for Constitution and Laws Essential for Democracy

[From article]
What distinguishes an institution from a flash mob is that its rules endure. They can be changed, of course. But only by significant supermajorities. That’s why constitutional changes require two-thirds of both houses plus three-quarters of the states. If we could make constitutional changes by majority vote, there would be no Constitution.
As of today, the Senate effectively has no rules. Congratulations, Harry Reid. Finally, something you will be remembered for.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-the-democrats-outbreak-of-lawlessness/2013/11/28/3184b6f2-579b-11e3-8304-caf30787c0a9_story.html?hpid=z3

An outbreak of lawlessness
By Charles Krauthammer,
Published: November 28, 2013

Vlad Putin On Russia

Vladimir Putin, Russian Kingpin



Putin's short speech!!

Putin’s Speech on Feb. 04, 2013
This is one time our elected leaders should pay attention to the advice of Vladimir Putin....
how scary is that?

On February 4th, 2013, Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, addressed the Duma, (Russian Parliament), and gave a speech about the tensions with minorities in Russia:
"In Russia live Russians. Any minority, from anywhere, if it wants to live in Russia, to work and eat in Russia, should speak Russian, and should respect the Russian laws. If they prefer Sharia Law, then we advise them to go to those places where that's the state law. Russia does not need minorities. Minorities need Russia, and we will not grant them special privileges, or try to change our laws to fit their desires, no matter how loud they yell 'discrimination'. We better learn from the suicides of America, England, Holland and France, if we are to survive as a nation. The Russian customs and traditions are not compatible with the lack of culture or the primitive ways of most minorities. When this honorable legislative body thinks of creating new laws, it should have in mind the national interest first, observing that the minorities are not Russians.
The politicians in the Duma gave Putin a five minute standing ovation.

It is a sad day when a Communist makes more sense than our President.

How Government Works, Sgt. Ernie Bilko

Eric Stevenson, New York Assemblyman
Is he really Sgt. Bilko?

[From article]
“I just need you to tell me what they want. We prepare the bill . . . You can write down the language, basically what you want,” he said on one recording.
[. . .]
One video shows Stevenson stuffing the envelope “into his front pants pocket and covering his front pocket with the bottom of his shirt,” the feds said.
“All you gotta do is tell me what you want in the bill, and the bill drafter will put it together,” Stevenson told Gonzalez in December, to which Gonzalez responded: “We get that bill passed, we’re gonna be good money, you understand?”
In one phone call with Gonzalez, Stevenson said the bill was being put together to impose a two-year moratorium on the opening of adult day-care centers that would compete with those of the businessmen.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/how_it_went_down_FxombR9XVYl6JWg8ex2nHM

Bronx pol accused of accepting bribes to introduce legislation in Albany
By Carl Campanile, Kirstan Conley and Bruce Golding
New York Post
Last Updated: 6:30 AM, April 5, 2013
Posted: 1:57 AM, April 5, 2013

Harvard University Promotes Psychiatry As Love

'Are students required to reveal their STDs in case others are exposed? Why are only psychiatric medical records denied privacy protections? Why is psychiatry the only alleged medical discipline which has diagnoses enforced by police power of the state? Does treatment at Harvard mean that the students have a history of mental illness? In case they are arrested, will police and prosecutors broadcast their medical records too?

Another masquerade is that psychiatric treatment is love. Revealing medical records is a violation of MA state law and US privacy laws. However, MA state, US officials and many courts, refuse to hold Harvard University employees accountable for violations of law. For Harvard University officials, laws are optional. See the state Constitution and ask any prosecutor about the psychiatric exemption from laws. If you want to hold Harvard officials accountable, you are mentally ill.

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/3/28/bmf-mental-health-panel/

Panelists Reflect on Experiences with Mental Illness
By ANTONIO COPPOLA,
Harvard CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
March 28, 2013

For Obama, Rules and Laws Are Optional

Does Obama ever "get bogged down with a lot of rules?” For Obama,
rules and laws are optional. He learned that at Harvard Law School.

[From article]
“My message to the governors as well as to the mayors is anything they
need, we will be there, and we will cut through the red tape. We are
not going to get bogged down with a lot of rules,” Obama said.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/hurricane_sandy_could_wreak_havoc_w5IxBoWqfj1F6qmzSjaMQP/0

Train and bus service suspended, schools closed, evacuation of coastal
areas ordered in advance of Hurricane Sandy
By SALLY GOLDENBERG, DAVID SEIFMAN and ANDY SOLTIS
New York Post
Last Updated: 8:09 PM, October 28, 2012
Posted: 9:19 AM, October 28, 2012

Nuremberg Laws, Beginning of The Holocaust

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3331/germany-circumcision-ban

J'Accuse: Shame on Germany for Circumcision Ban
by Alan M. Dershowitz
September 6, 2012 at 12:30 pm

* * *
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Nuremberg+Laws

Nuremberg Laws

Laws Are Not Meant For Me

Crudele says, "Paulson has already admitted to everything Bloomberg Magazine and I are alleging. But apparently he saw nothing wrong with what he was doing." Paulson joins Eric Holder and Obama who also say they did nothing wrong. The trouble with these predators in government is that they do not see breaking laws as a problem. Laws are inconvenient and optional for them. Obama said what Wall Street goniffs did is not illegal. If there is any will to clean up government the focus must begin with the FBI, and judges who refuse to hold public officials accountable for their wrongdoing.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/let_seal_dc_loose_lips_S9gPA7mJnmNcZe0FuRDsRL

Let’s seal DC’s loose lips
John Crudele
New York Post
Last Updated: 1:02 AM, December 13, 2011
Posted: 12:59 AM, December 13, 2011

Looking At Incest Laws

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/get-ready-for-legalized-incest-between-consenting-adults

Get Ready for Legalized Incest Between Consenting Adults
By Illinois Family Institute
Dec 16, 2010
Opposingviews.com

If I Do It, It Is Legal; I Didn't Do Anything Wrong

This is a remakable story. The City Council for years ignores council rules, city ordinances, state laws and the US Constitution, now wonders if it is illegal to meet with the Suprintendent of Schools. The council with the least interest in rules and laws declares it must be legal because he did it.

[From article]
"The Cambridge City Council has asked city employees to determine the legality of its members meeting privately with Superintendent of Schools Jeffrey Young.
[. . .]
Councilor Ken Reeves said that that he saw nothing wrong with a councilor meeting with Young.
“I had lunch with the superintendent this past week as his request, I didn’t ask him,” he said. “I think we both benefited from trying to understand some of the riddles in the system.”

http://www.wickedlocal.com/cambridge/news/x2068975185/City-to-look-at-councilors-meeting-with-Young

City to look at councilors’ meeting with Young
By Brian P. Nanos
Cambridge Chronicle
Posted Dec 17, 2010 @ 05:24 AM

Chicago Laws and Rahm Emanuel

"I own a home here in the city of Chicago," Emanuel told reporters. Howie Carr owns property in Somerville and Cambridge. Is he a resident? "My car is licensed here in the city of Chicago." One more violation of law. "I pay property taxes here in the city of Chicago." Paying taxes does not make one a resident. "I vote in the city of Chicago." So what. In Chicago dead people can vote. Doesn't make them residents.

http://bostonherald.com/news/national/midwest/view.bg?articleid=1298785

Lawyer: Rahm Emanuel broke Chicago mayor residency rule
By Associated Press
Boston Herald
Thursday, November 25, 2010