Today we caused a bit of controversy! Not one, but two of our projects were posted on Apartment Therapy today. I had submitted our little chair makeover to the folks at Ohdeedoh, thinking they may want to share it with their readers. And they did! You can see that post here. Well, the writer poked around our blog and liked our renovations so she did this post on our bathroom on the Apartment Therapy main site, as part of their bathroom month series.
And what a response it received -- to the tune of 62 people (so far) chiming in - to say how much they hate our bathroom renovation!! Okay - I exaggerate, only 90% actually hate it :) I'll admit, when you have that many people telling you they don't like what you've done, lots of thoughts run through your head... shock, anger, defensiveness, sadness, curiousity, incredulity, and ambivalence were just a few.
But now that I've had a few hours to absorb those comments, I can be a bit more objective about things. I get that our projects are rather atypical of the Apartment Therapy aesthetic. We're much more traditional and conservative in our tastes and our home reflects that. I can see how people would think our monochromatic bathroom boring. Or how they would think the hand-painted mural was lovely - without knowing it covered all four walls and ceiling and made the 5'x8' bathroom feel claustrophobic. I can even understand their appall at how we removed the jacuzzi tub and pedestal sink even though these things didn't fit our family's needs (functionally or aesthetically).
At first, I thought I would respond on the AT site and clear up misconceptions and provide more information about why we did the things we did... but then I thought, "Why do I care?" The folks who left comments likely have tastes far different from mine and there is nothing I could say to convince them that yes, we made the best decisions possible, that we considered all the alternatives, that in context of our neighbourhood/house style/lifestyle/personal needs our choices were sound, that our sweat and effort was worth it.
For those of you that did land here via Apartment Therapy - Welcome! Please poke around. I hope you stay awhile. And for those who only peeked in the door and decided this place was not for them, I hope you have your own happy place to go home to. We're crafting these rooms into a home that suits us, no matter what others may say - and as homeowners, shouldn't that all be our goal?
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Every village has an idiot
A few things:
1. Everyone in Danbury knows that the section of West Street by the railroad tracks floods whenever there is a bad rainstorm.
2. When a police places up a barrier in the road, it's usually because they want to block access to the road. In this case, the police DID NOT want motorists driving on the flooded section of the street.
With that being said, this week's village idiot award goes to the moron who, despite the police barriers that blocked access to the street, attempted to drive through the water during yesterday's rainstorm.
....did I mention that this genius had women and kids in the vehicle who had to walk in the water to safety?
Nawaz Sharif Mujra Scandal
its the season of the IPL and the season of T20. as i have argued previously, this event is a wonderful example of post-modernism, which, in the timeless words of Moe means "weird for the sake of being weird."
of course, for many T20 is an abhorrent, vile, abominable bastardisation of cricket. and many people have expressed such thoughts on twitter, missing the delectable irony of it all.
i started frequenting twitter recently after one of my regular reads migrated there. apart from the grotesque picture which adorns his page (seriously, you couldn't find a better messi picture?) it does provide an interesting insight into the evolving dynamics of this micro-blogging phenomenon.
as far as i can tell, its a bit like facebook for famous people, with the various castes defined by the level of fame.
so for example, there is a clutch of pakistani bloggers who communicate with themselves. and then there are journos, who talk to themselves, and the occasional politicians. who follow themselves, and bigger fish. and it goes on. my favourite sighting was ImranKhanPTI following Jemima on twitter. cue the laugh track.
but it was during this forage into twitterdom that i came across a certain account. the backstory for this was perhaps the greatest story to hit the news media since Nawaz Sharif remembered who butters his bread - the impending nuptials of Sania and Shoaib.
i found this page, which is Shoaib Malik's twitter page. its pretty ordinary, and quite what i expected - shoaib can be seen trying to contact yuvraj and warne, much in the vein of the upward social aspirations of all twitterati.
his recent tweets thank his fans for the goodwill surrounding his wedding, and previously he talks about trying to find a legal team for his PCB troubles. and before that he celebrates the win for Sialkot Stallions etc.
then, i found out, from his future wife, that his twitter page is fake.
WTF?
firstly, we have to believe this, since hopefully she would know better than anyone else. moreover, as someone mentioned, shoaib can never be expected to be this articulate.
having conceded that, we now must wonder - WTF?
try and understand this. there is someone out there who meticulously imagines the feelings shoaib malik goes through. more importantly, said person makes sure to write them within the time frame when they happen. so he makes sure that any important event in shoaib's life is updated asap.
what makes this even more intriguing is that there is no whiff of scandal, of aggrandizement, of mirch-masala here. all the tweets are of the typical mundanity that twitter tweets are comprised of. nothing here that makes you think, hang on, this is fake. and the internet, other than for porn, is meant for people to shout out FAKE whenever they get the chance. we are conditioned to spot fakes.
but... where is the fakeness, fake shoaib malik? what has compelled you to give up your life and your time and devote it to creating a shrine for someone not quite compelling (not until the Sania bombshell anyways) why have you not chosen your position to create mischief or abuse? how are you such a restrained fake personality, that you have actually managed to come across as more respectable than the real person you pretend to be?
perhaps the truth lies in believing in your own hype. in thinking that what you are doing is so right that you forget that your basis was baloney. perhaps when you start believing your own bullshit, you forget the lies you created and accept your own cocoon as the only bastion of reality.
and perhaps you can even make such a charade last forever.
until... until you begin believing your own batshit craziness so much that you decide to hold a grand rally where you promise to proclaim the greatness of your message. and your deluded followers decide to honor your much awaited rally with a rather slickly produced amateur video.
until the day your grand rally to end all rallies, the moment of truth, the launching of the invasion of the infidels, the realisation of existential islamic philosophy, the birth of the United States of Islam, the call of the army of Truth, the greatest moment of history in all histories arrives.
and, like, no one shows up.
of course, for many T20 is an abhorrent, vile, abominable bastardisation of cricket. and many people have expressed such thoughts on twitter, missing the delectable irony of it all.
i started frequenting twitter recently after one of my regular reads migrated there. apart from the grotesque picture which adorns his page (seriously, you couldn't find a better messi picture?) it does provide an interesting insight into the evolving dynamics of this micro-blogging phenomenon.
as far as i can tell, its a bit like facebook for famous people, with the various castes defined by the level of fame.
so for example, there is a clutch of pakistani bloggers who communicate with themselves. and then there are journos, who talk to themselves, and the occasional politicians. who follow themselves, and bigger fish. and it goes on. my favourite sighting was ImranKhanPTI following Jemima on twitter. cue the laugh track.
but it was during this forage into twitterdom that i came across a certain account. the backstory for this was perhaps the greatest story to hit the news media since Nawaz Sharif remembered who butters his bread - the impending nuptials of Sania and Shoaib.
his recent tweets thank his fans for the goodwill surrounding his wedding, and previously he talks about trying to find a legal team for his PCB troubles. and before that he celebrates the win for Sialkot Stallions etc.
then, i found out, from his future wife, that his twitter page is fake.
WTF?
firstly, we have to believe this, since hopefully she would know better than anyone else. moreover, as someone mentioned, shoaib can never be expected to be this articulate.
having conceded that, we now must wonder - WTF?
try and understand this. there is someone out there who meticulously imagines the feelings shoaib malik goes through. more importantly, said person makes sure to write them within the time frame when they happen. so he makes sure that any important event in shoaib's life is updated asap.
what makes this even more intriguing is that there is no whiff of scandal, of aggrandizement, of mirch-masala here. all the tweets are of the typical mundanity that twitter tweets are comprised of. nothing here that makes you think, hang on, this is fake. and the internet, other than for porn, is meant for people to shout out FAKE whenever they get the chance. we are conditioned to spot fakes.
but... where is the fakeness, fake shoaib malik? what has compelled you to give up your life and your time and devote it to creating a shrine for someone not quite compelling (not until the Sania bombshell anyways) why have you not chosen your position to create mischief or abuse? how are you such a restrained fake personality, that you have actually managed to come across as more respectable than the real person you pretend to be?
perhaps the truth lies in believing in your own hype. in thinking that what you are doing is so right that you forget that your basis was baloney. perhaps when you start believing your own bullshit, you forget the lies you created and accept your own cocoon as the only bastion of reality.
and perhaps you can even make such a charade last forever.
until... until you begin believing your own batshit craziness so much that you decide to hold a grand rally where you promise to proclaim the greatness of your message. and your deluded followers decide to honor your much awaited rally with a rather slickly produced amateur video.
until the day your grand rally to end all rallies, the moment of truth, the launching of the invasion of the infidels, the realisation of existential islamic philosophy, the birth of the United States of Islam, the call of the army of Truth, the greatest moment of history in all histories arrives.
and, like, no one shows up.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Debunking the Boughton defense
Attorney Peter Goselin wrote a beautiful piece that debunks comments of Mark Boughton and those who defended his invitation to last week's immigration forum at UConn.
There are two false assumptions that are being circulated as part of a “defense” of Boughton being invited to speak at the symposium. Sadly, neither are getting the rebuttal they deserve from the law school, its faculty, or the symposium organizers.
False assumption #1: For the LLSA to demand that Boughton be uninvited was an assault on free speech.
Explanation: Our right to express our opinions under the First Amendment – what we usually mean when we talk about the right to free speech – is the right to be free from government action based on that speech. In this case, the event to which Boughton had been invited was a symposium sponsored by a student-run organization, the Public Interest Law Journal. The challenge to Boughton came from another student-run organization, the Latino Law Students Association. Neither is a government institution, Neither speaks for or acts on behalf of the UConn Law School. Therefore, neither could harm Boughton’s (or anybody else’s) right to free speech. There simply is no First Amendment issue here.
False Assumption #2: Having Boughton on the morning panel would have given it “balance.”
Explanation: The symposium was not a debate and was not organized in a manner that would have permitted debate. The morning panel to which Boughton had originally been invited consisted of a facilitator and four panelists, each of whom spoke on their own work (both academic and practical) on the issue of the workplace rights of undocumented workers for about fifteen minutes each and then answered questions. The common starting point was the existence of a body of federal law that clearly and unequivocally guarantees certain rights to every worker without regard to their citizenship or immigration status. This is a body of law that has developed over a period of some 75 years, since the passage of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (requiring employers to pay a minimum wage and overtime) and the National Labor Relations Act (giving employees the right to form a union or act collectively in their own interests). Simply put: Boughton has no knowledge or expertise on any topic relating to these rights and their enforcement. The notion that he would have provided “balance” to this discussion is based in the false dichotomy of all things relating to immigration as either “pro-immigrant” or “anti-immigrant.” Is Boughton’s view of immigrants a commonly held opinion? Yes. Does it bear any relationship to the topic under discussion? No. Is Boughton’s viewpoint part of the dialogue that is going on in academic and policy circles on the topic of the enforcement of workplace rights of undocumented immigrants? No. His presence would have been a distraction from the real topic and would have conferred on his perspective a credibility that it simply does not have.
Monday, March 29, 2010
Local immigrants rights group stands in solidarity with UConn Latino Law Students Association
The Danbury Alliance played a critical role in the 2008 protest against the city's 287g partnership proposal
City Hall March 2008. Photo by CTBlogger.
City Hall March 2008. Photo by CTBlogger.
In a letter sent to the organizers of the forum on immigration and the workforce at the University of Connecticut as well as the Latino Law Students Association, the Danbury Alliance issued the following statement:
In answer to the accusation that LLSA students attempted to stifle free speech, we are writing this letter to express our solidarity with the stand taken by the LLSA students with respect to having Mayor Mark Boughton and Attorney Vincent of ICE removed as panelists for the symposium on Undocumented Workers in the Workplace hosted by Connecticut Public Interest Law Journal
We are very pleased that Mayor Boughton decided, in view of the strong opposition mounted by the LLSA students, not to take part in the symposium, but are much aggrieved that Attorney Peter S. Vincent was allowed to remain on the panel.
We hope to explain in this letter many of the reasons why we agree that Mayor Mark Boughton was an entirely inappropriate addition to your panelists, why we remain disappointed that Attorney Vincent was not removed and why we feel that the LLSA was wholly justified in seeking the removal of Mayor Boughton and Mr.Vincent
It is our opinion that Mayor Boughton’s interests in speaking on the topic of Immigration were largely influenced by his political aspirations. Mayor Boughton has built his career and name as a “tough on immigration Mayor”. To that end, he has courted the approval and the vote of the radical, anti-immigrant, xenophobic extremists in our city, repeatedly, while simultaneously ignoring the voices of those who present a more reasoned, compassionate, and experienced voice in the matter of Immigration.
We agree with Attorney Peter Goselin that Mayor Boughton was not the right person to speak to the issue of undocumented immigrants in the work force.
Mayor Boughton’s track record with immigrant workers in Danbury is overshadowed by his refusal to address the plight of day laborers in the city. Every day, Elm Street in Danbury is a gathering place of mainly Latino day laborers, many of whom may be undocumented. These laborers are left exposed to abuse, and there is almost no oversight or protections afforded to them. In earlier years, Mayor Boughton was approached about creating a possible day labor center for these workers, which would offer them basic protections. Suggestions were made that the center should offer job training, language training, legal assistance, and access by the workers to the Department of Labor, Unions, and OSHA. Mayor Boughton, after showing an initial interest and support for the idea, later, after much political pressure, withdrew from the talks and became a very active opponent of the proposal.
The much publicized case of the Danbury 11, as referenced by the LLSA students, was a further souring of his relationship with Danbury’s undocumented workers.
Many of the policies which Mayor Boughton and his administration have enacted, and which have been detrimental to our immigrant community, have been supported by members of a well known local anti immigrant hate group, whose former vice president is now facing charges of rape in an unrelated criminal case, and whose other members are regularly seen at Tea Party events, bearing signs with blatantly racist messages.
Another member of this hate group was a one time member of the Republican Common Council in our city, and lost her last election when she was discovered forwarding a series of racist emails, mostly directed towards immigrants, to another member of the Common Council, as well a member of a land-use committee who was appointed by the mayor. Instead of immediately calling for the resignation of these individuals, and despite much public outcry in the matter, Mayor Boughton held a closed door meeting with several leaders of our African American and Latino Communities, and no further action was taken. Thankfully, an aggressive public awareness campaign organized by members of the community led to her electoral defeat. This woman, Pauline Basso, still remains very active in the Republican Town Committee, which Mayor Boughton serves.
Shortly after this event, members of this same hate group brought the idea of the 287g ICE ACCESS program to the attention of Common Council President, Joseph Cavo, advocating for it’s adoption in Danbury. A coalition, including immigrants, advocates, business owners, lawyers, Democratic Council Members, and local non profit agencies, were swift to express concern over the proposed contract between ICE and the Danbury PD. Thorough research was conducted on the negative effect on towns which had adopted this policy, adding greatly to our concerns. Our research unearthed many accounts of Mayors and Police Departments and officials elsewhere who rejected the contract, as it had deteriorated racial relations in their cities, fostered distrust between immigrants and the police force (thus creating safety issues in those municipalities), and led to widespread racial profiling and civil rights abuses. Despite numerous letters of concern and opposition, numerous presentations to the common council and the Mayor, and despite a well organized, historic protest of thousands of immigrants and their supporters in front of city hall, the contract passed approval.
Mayor Boughton’s conduct in the following weeks was anything but honest. In addition to blatantly lying to the press about the number of protestors, in order to dismiss the voices of the thousands who were opposed to the program, it soon became clear that the Administration was engaging in punitive actions to those who spoke out against ICE ACCESS. Soon, non-profit agencies who had voiced concerns were threatened with loss of city funding for their programs, and ICE vehicles were frequently seen driving our streets, parked in front of immigrant restaurants which, needless to say, had a detrimental effect on their business.
Racist threats by members of the extremist groups in the area toward immigrants in our city increased. Despite this being brought to the attention of the Mayor, such events were swept under the carpet, and he failed to make any public statement denouncing the close association between members of his political team and this group (associations that continue to this day).
As far as the presence of an ICE Lawyer on this panel, we feel it necessary to point out that many of the procedures and protocols of ICE have been the subject of lawsuits throughout the country. The widespread abuses within the detention system, the corruption and mishandling of ICE raids, and more have lead to a climate of absolute terror in our immigrant community. These problems have led many to believe that the immigration issue is the civil rights and human rights struggle of the era. The terror tactics of ICE have been sharply rebuked by civil rights groups such as the ACLU, NLG, and even by members of the current federal administration.
While aspiring politicians, and fame seeking public officials such as Mayor Mark Boughton continue to exploit what is most definitely a marginalized and terrified segment of our population by coercive, forceful, manipulative and dishonest tactics in the name of political gain, human lives hang in the balance, as do the very ideas of justice and equality.
We hope that in the future, if similar symposiums are organized, a special effort will be made to heed the opinions of the Latino Student body, and that far more care is taken in the selection of participating panelists.
Our immigrant brothers and sisters have suffered much at the hands of the mutually beneficial relationship between this Mayor and ICE, and we believe that it is time that our systems of higher education take a moral and ethical stand on issues such as this.
It hasn’t been that many years since the study and practice of Eugenics was eagerly entertained at universities throughout New England and the US, leading to further atrocities here and overseas. In time, that failed and morally bankrupt study has become a seething sore upon our national conscience.
We are confident that the policies of ICE and of Mayor Mark Boughton and his administration, as well as those who share his views, will one day be viewed in the same light.
With respect,
Members of the Danbury Alliance
Formerly known as the Danbury Partnership for Unity, the members of the Danbury Alliance were instrumental in organizing local resistance against the 287g proposal back in late 2007-early 2008. Their efforts resulted in businesses and over a thousand people protesting against Boughton and the Common Council's approval of the controversial program.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
La Salle De Bain C'est Fini!
The bathroom is finished! Yes it is. The last piece of the puzzle, the door, is in. And I am so excited, I must speak en français! You see, HandyMan and my most favourite city in the world is Paris. We love the Parisian sense of style and we try to imbue a bit of that in our designs. So here is our take on a Parisian bath... touches of marble, mirror, black and white, and vintage signage.
But this door wasn't always so lovely and we had quite a bit of trouble with it. HandyMan doesn't do doors (they are troublesome creatures!), so we waited to get someone to install this one. And when I say waited, I mean we bought the door and had it sitting in our garage for the last six months ;)
Opportunity finally came knocking and we asked the folks who installed our front door (which we love by the way) to install this interior one while they were here. It would have been fine... if it was the skilled young guy who did it and not the old-and-didn't-know-what-he-was-doing, barely-spoke English, never-seen-these-type-of-hinges-or-door-lock guy. So that's how we ended up with a butchered door that didn't close properly, chopped up trim, ugly wood putty patches - and a door installed BACKWARDS with the frosting side out!!!
Argh. Goes to show that not everything runs smoothly in the world of renovations. Being the kind of people that HandyMan and I are, we knew we couldn't live with this pimple, this blight, on our pretty bathroom. Plus, the decal wouldn't stick on the frosting side - and that is one reason why we got a frosted door in the first place, so we could have a pretty decal! So we had to get it fixed. And in our moment of desperation, we told the fix-it guy something you never ever want to say to a contractor -- "I don't care how much it costs. Just make this problem go away." Lucky for us, Mr. Fix-It is a good guy and did a great job at a reasonable price.
And now it is lovely. C'est magnifique!
But this door wasn't always so lovely and we had quite a bit of trouble with it. HandyMan doesn't do doors (they are troublesome creatures!), so we waited to get someone to install this one. And when I say waited, I mean we bought the door and had it sitting in our garage for the last six months ;)
Opportunity finally came knocking and we asked the folks who installed our front door (which we love by the way) to install this interior one while they were here. It would have been fine... if it was the skilled young guy who did it and not the old-and-didn't-know-what-he-was-doing, barely-spoke English, never-seen-these-type-of-hinges-or-door-lock guy. So that's how we ended up with a butchered door that didn't close properly, chopped up trim, ugly wood putty patches - and a door installed BACKWARDS with the frosting side out!!!
Argh. Goes to show that not everything runs smoothly in the world of renovations. Being the kind of people that HandyMan and I are, we knew we couldn't live with this pimple, this blight, on our pretty bathroom. Plus, the decal wouldn't stick on the frosting side - and that is one reason why we got a frosted door in the first place, so we could have a pretty decal! So we had to get it fixed. And in our moment of desperation, we told the fix-it guy something you never ever want to say to a contractor -- "I don't care how much it costs. Just make this problem go away." Lucky for us, Mr. Fix-It is a good guy and did a great job at a reasonable price.
And now it is lovely. C'est magnifique!
That's the problem
This letter to the editor from Rose DeGraff tells the story...
NEWSFLASH: That's why Mayor Boughton, Chief Baker, and the city of Danbury are in the middle of a civil lawsuit right now. At the time of the raid at Kennedy Park, local law enforcement did not have authorization from the federal government to enforce immigration law.
Misinformed letters like this only reinforces the notion that people need to keep their local elected officials accountable for consistently misleading the public with their anti-immigrant rhetoric.
Ugh!
I read in the New Times this morning (March 25) about the Danbury 11. I wish to commend the Danbury Police for doing an outstanding job of trying to enforce the federal immigration laws keep up the good work.
NEWSFLASH: That's why Mayor Boughton, Chief Baker, and the city of Danbury are in the middle of a civil lawsuit right now. At the time of the raid at Kennedy Park, local law enforcement did not have authorization from the federal government to enforce immigration law.
Misinformed letters like this only reinforces the notion that people need to keep their local elected officials accountable for consistently misleading the public with their anti-immigrant rhetoric.
Ugh!
No love for Boughton in Torrington
I reader passed along this story regarding one Republican Town Committee's debate on endorsing Mark Boughton's gubernatorial nomination:
At the Torrington Republican Town Committee meeting, Mayor Ryan Bingham asked for an endorsement for Mark Boughton for governor and another individual stood up to second it.
A third gentleman stood up and said that the should carefully reconsider this because he was at 4% in the latest Quinnipiac poll. They took a roll call vote on endorsing him and it failed 27-3.
Ouch. I guess this is what happens when your poll numbers take a nose dive AFTER you launch your gubernatorial campaign.
I'll find out who the Torrington RTC endorsed later.
RELATED POSTS:
CT GOV: Boughton losing ground in quest for governor
Saturday, March 27, 2010
FLASHBACK: Dissent or disloyalty
In honor of the recent threat made towards me by the the member(s) of Elise Marciano's hate-group, I think this mini documentary of the state's teabagging movement from my friend Connecticut Bob is in order.
(full disclaimer: I contributed video and photo footage to this documentary)
(full disclaimer: I contributed video and photo footage to this documentary)
Bombay Talkies
(This is my latest blog over at sastimasti. I have posted it here, although the videos have not been embedded, and i'm too tired having battled with wordpress to repeat the process here. so it would be best if you just went over to http://sastimasti.wordpress.com/2010/03/27/bombay-talkies/ and read it there. thanks :)
as i have mentioned previously, i am not a film buff per se. yes i like movies, but i don't have refined taste in them. so when in class our professors say something like "ah, the pathos employed by haneke through the mis-en-scene" i am sometimes compelled to say "yes, but what about the mis-en-scene in the sex scene in the titanic?
the few occasions that i do know about a film, i tend to argue quite passionately, to make up for the intellectual shame felt otherwise. one such argument was about whether the film Amelie was exploitative or not. we both ended up arguing that the director had exoticized paris. he felt i liked that because the subject was paris, i replied that i believe films need to exoticize, because they need to be fantasies, they need to be wondrous.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oubWmUJjZPE]
there is one particular filmmaker who, among many, does this to such a unique, signatory, marvelous manner. and one of his films has come under criticism for exoticsing a country quite used to it. here is wes anderson's take on an indian funeral. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vYoCDKoK_w] (if the link is not working, try here)
the entire time, everything is in shades of white - flowers, clothes, smoke, rickshaws... now i love this film, and i love what some call it its exoticism of india. the politically correct part of me may concede that, but you have to watch a film. it mocks the western habit of coming to india to find 'themselves' and it presents india in a quirky, fantastical way that is true to those three americans' naive yet earnest take on india.
but a far better defense for this artistic liberty by the director was provided by an indian, who said that the fantastic mr. fox exoticises the forest, because animals don't talk, and they don't dress in clothes, and wes anderson was totally exploiting the forest and being all oriental about it. so i guess we can accept that exoticism is ok.
of course the liberal arts education section of our audience will ruffle their bob marley hair, and rub their che guevara beards, and log out of jstor and protest - no, it's dehumanizing, and like haven't you read Said? ok forget it then.
the beauty about wes anderson films is that even if you come across one randomly, you know its his. the look, the feel, the scale, the intricacy and the music. even though he never repeats, you hear a song and you think damn, this song is meant to be in a wes anderson film. i heard one such song in darjeeling limited, the movie posted above, and it was a completely desi song. and i thought 'wtf? how did the bastard get a song made that's totally desi and yet perfect for him?' [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkcVyNw-USA]
(if this link is not working, try here)
after some investigations, i discovered that it was from a film whose credit sequence was wes anderson's favorite sequence, evuh! without further ado, [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wMuYl_-ig8&feature=related]
now people will tell you that this film, bombay talkies by ismail merchant, is a 'realistic' movie, completely different from normal hindi movies - it even has kissing scenes! but in fact, this film retains the elements of melodrama, song and dance, bizarre sequences, action comedy romance etc in equal measures. the only thing done differently here is that while the elements of the content remain same, the form with which they are shown is either improved, satirized or both. it is a bollywood film made in a different cinematic language perhaps, but it tells the same story. IMP: this review contains spoilers. there is a link to a site where you can stream the film for free near the end of this post. so if you haven't seen it yet it might be a good idea to do so before you read on. but even if you don't it doesn't give too much away and you can still enjoy it whenever you do see.
but don't be fooled into thinking that the language is that of western cinema. in 1970, the new york times had reviewed this film, the review article adorned with the sarcastic by-line: 'Famous, Rich ... Nice Looking' the NYT enjoyed the film's whimsical scenes, but cringed at its drama. The reviewer wrote
those fears were confirmed before they were written, as the NYT felt the scene involving Lucia with the spiritual guru displayed Lucia becoming "restless, however, with the swami's little lectures about his social successes in Los Angeles, and her idea of recreation is something more than being allowed to fetch the swami's lost Ping-Pong balls"
of course, what both reviews betray are their writers political, intellectual and aesthetic bends. moreover, the tragedy is that such a gorgeous film is dissected only at the level of story and characters.
but even there, the two have missed out on something vital. if this film plays any politics, it is to denounce all strands of it. every character, every ideology is savaged in this film with equal determination. both Lucia and the swami she goes to are mocked, one for her naive assumption that somehow india would provide them some ready made spiritual answers, the other for having commercialized spiritual beliefs for misfit tourists like Lucia. and as for Filmi Geek's concerns about the attitude, here is what i have to argue - yes they are poking fun, but its not the oriental attitude of a foreigner finding the natives crude and pitiful but rather the insiders who are intimate with their own arts and culture, poking fun at what they know well. to prove my point, have a look at this
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqCjoFjIC34]
more importantly, the film retains the element of the bollywood film. there are several scenes where music being played within the scene, such as on a radio, is used to score the characters dancing and driving the story forward. stylistically, its worlds apart from the pantomime of the traditional musical, but it is serving the same purpose. and when the time does arrive for the blow-out bollywood song-and-dance, the number that comes on screen is far ahead of anything else that has ever been conceived. look at it yourself. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzC3GQn_TC0]
the film has some absolutely brilliantly shot scenes - in particular is a staircase shot that is repeated twice in the film. once its comic, the other time its tragic and both are done in such a magnificent way. what triumphs in each of these scenes, as well as the rest of the film, is the sound design. desi films rarely have such an accomplished use of sound. perhaps one of the best examples is when Lucia meets Vikram, the hero, and both of them hit it off. their eager conversation is heard as the camera shows us the face of Vikram's wife - its a superb scene, and it works because of the use of sound. another great part is the last shot, where the camera is too far to make out the actions of the servant, yet the sound of his tray shaking with his shivers conveys to us all that we need to know.
but from a pakistani perspective, the height of enjoyment is a chance to watch zia moheyuddin on screen. probably one of the most famous names in pakistan, few people under 30 have actually seen him do the thing he is famed for - acting. the word in the theater circle is that moheyuddin is an extremely demanding task-master - in french, he is an a**hole. well in this film, he is the ultimate bitch. i have rarely seen such a snide, bitter, witty character as Moheyuddin here. his looks and gait go form resentful brooding to cynical whimsy. and his obvious contrast with the pin-up looks of shashi kapoor accentuates his character even further.
*since i wrote this, my wife and i have had an almighty debate over Zia Moheyuddin's character in this film. for her, his obsessiveness and passion represents the most human characteristics of love. i argued that his love was 'fake' as his final act of vengeance was based on vikram's taunts, suggesting that his envy of vikram was greater than his love for Lucia. in response, she argued that it is illogical to separate the two feelings, or to ascribe ideals of truth and fake to love. i think we can safely say that the film's characters are great, and its tragedy is of a greek or shakespearian level. which means that people like the NYT columnist can find that to be melodramatic, but anyone well versed in the arts of the desi might not.*
you can watch the darjeeling limited online, and you can do the same for bombay talkies as well.
but before we leave, here is something i call conspiracy critiques. despite my disavowal for politics, i am pakistani and i can't run away from how i think. take a look at the following scenes (especially part two), and then ask yourself if this is not a metaphor for both india and pakistan's political history with western alliances, and how the fallout from those have affected pakistan's behaviour. remember also, that the jasmine is our national flower.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpP5fOLfcTE&feature=channel]
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hHPBg6XEzU]
as i have mentioned previously, i am not a film buff per se. yes i like movies, but i don't have refined taste in them. so when in class our professors say something like "ah, the pathos employed by haneke through the mis-en-scene" i am sometimes compelled to say "yes, but what about the mis-en-scene in the sex scene in the titanic?
the few occasions that i do know about a film, i tend to argue quite passionately, to make up for the intellectual shame felt otherwise. one such argument was about whether the film Amelie was exploitative or not. we both ended up arguing that the director had exoticized paris. he felt i liked that because the subject was paris, i replied that i believe films need to exoticize, because they need to be fantasies, they need to be wondrous.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oubWmUJjZPE]
there is one particular filmmaker who, among many, does this to such a unique, signatory, marvelous manner. and one of his films has come under criticism for exoticsing a country quite used to it. here is wes anderson's take on an indian funeral. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vYoCDKoK_w] (if the link is not working, try here)
the entire time, everything is in shades of white - flowers, clothes, smoke, rickshaws... now i love this film, and i love what some call it its exoticism of india. the politically correct part of me may concede that, but you have to watch a film. it mocks the western habit of coming to india to find 'themselves' and it presents india in a quirky, fantastical way that is true to those three americans' naive yet earnest take on india.
but a far better defense for this artistic liberty by the director was provided by an indian, who said that the fantastic mr. fox exoticises the forest, because animals don't talk, and they don't dress in clothes, and wes anderson was totally exploiting the forest and being all oriental about it. so i guess we can accept that exoticism is ok.
of course the liberal arts education section of our audience will ruffle their bob marley hair, and rub their che guevara beards, and log out of jstor and protest - no, it's dehumanizing, and like haven't you read Said? ok forget it then.
the beauty about wes anderson films is that even if you come across one randomly, you know its his. the look, the feel, the scale, the intricacy and the music. even though he never repeats, you hear a song and you think damn, this song is meant to be in a wes anderson film. i heard one such song in darjeeling limited, the movie posted above, and it was a completely desi song. and i thought 'wtf? how did the bastard get a song made that's totally desi and yet perfect for him?' [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkcVyNw-USA]
(if this link is not working, try here)
after some investigations, i discovered that it was from a film whose credit sequence was wes anderson's favorite sequence, evuh! without further ado, [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wMuYl_-ig8&feature=related]
now people will tell you that this film, bombay talkies by ismail merchant, is a 'realistic' movie, completely different from normal hindi movies - it even has kissing scenes! but in fact, this film retains the elements of melodrama, song and dance, bizarre sequences, action comedy romance etc in equal measures. the only thing done differently here is that while the elements of the content remain same, the form with which they are shown is either improved, satirized or both. it is a bollywood film made in a different cinematic language perhaps, but it tells the same story. IMP: this review contains spoilers. there is a link to a site where you can stream the film for free near the end of this post. so if you haven't seen it yet it might be a good idea to do so before you read on. but even if you don't it doesn't give too much away and you can still enjoy it whenever you do see.
but don't be fooled into thinking that the language is that of western cinema. in 1970, the new york times had reviewed this film, the review article adorned with the sarcastic by-line: 'Famous, Rich ... Nice Looking' the NYT enjoyed the film's whimsical scenes, but cringed at its drama. The reviewer wrote
"Bombay Talkie," however, persists in switching back and forth between this quite cheerful satire and the quite seriously intended, awkwardly defined emotional conflicts involving the novelist, the actor, the actor's unhappy wife and his best friend. I assume that this conflict between comedy and melodrama is meant to be its own metaphor, for contemporary India, for Indian movies, even for love. Though tactful, the metaphor is mixed.Almost 40 years later, a renowned indian critic, filmi geek panned the movie as well. the complaint was its attitude, which
seemed to treat India (and Indian films) with a certain condescension that I found both offensive and inappropriate.Filmi Geek was upset that the foreign audiences would look at the film's depiction of indian spirituality with mirth, with pity, writing that the female lead's Lucia's unease towards the religious scene is displayed not as "Look at Lucia, too inflexible to adapt to a different culture," but "look at this adorable weird little Indian spirituality, too primitive for a civilized person like Lucia."
those fears were confirmed before they were written, as the NYT felt the scene involving Lucia with the spiritual guru displayed Lucia becoming "restless, however, with the swami's little lectures about his social successes in Los Angeles, and her idea of recreation is something more than being allowed to fetch the swami's lost Ping-Pong balls"
of course, what both reviews betray are their writers political, intellectual and aesthetic bends. moreover, the tragedy is that such a gorgeous film is dissected only at the level of story and characters.
but even there, the two have missed out on something vital. if this film plays any politics, it is to denounce all strands of it. every character, every ideology is savaged in this film with equal determination. both Lucia and the swami she goes to are mocked, one for her naive assumption that somehow india would provide them some ready made spiritual answers, the other for having commercialized spiritual beliefs for misfit tourists like Lucia. and as for Filmi Geek's concerns about the attitude, here is what i have to argue - yes they are poking fun, but its not the oriental attitude of a foreigner finding the natives crude and pitiful but rather the insiders who are intimate with their own arts and culture, poking fun at what they know well. to prove my point, have a look at this
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqCjoFjIC34]
more importantly, the film retains the element of the bollywood film. there are several scenes where music being played within the scene, such as on a radio, is used to score the characters dancing and driving the story forward. stylistically, its worlds apart from the pantomime of the traditional musical, but it is serving the same purpose. and when the time does arrive for the blow-out bollywood song-and-dance, the number that comes on screen is far ahead of anything else that has ever been conceived. look at it yourself. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzC3GQn_TC0]
the film has some absolutely brilliantly shot scenes - in particular is a staircase shot that is repeated twice in the film. once its comic, the other time its tragic and both are done in such a magnificent way. what triumphs in each of these scenes, as well as the rest of the film, is the sound design. desi films rarely have such an accomplished use of sound. perhaps one of the best examples is when Lucia meets Vikram, the hero, and both of them hit it off. their eager conversation is heard as the camera shows us the face of Vikram's wife - its a superb scene, and it works because of the use of sound. another great part is the last shot, where the camera is too far to make out the actions of the servant, yet the sound of his tray shaking with his shivers conveys to us all that we need to know.
but from a pakistani perspective, the height of enjoyment is a chance to watch zia moheyuddin on screen. probably one of the most famous names in pakistan, few people under 30 have actually seen him do the thing he is famed for - acting. the word in the theater circle is that moheyuddin is an extremely demanding task-master - in french, he is an a**hole. well in this film, he is the ultimate bitch. i have rarely seen such a snide, bitter, witty character as Moheyuddin here. his looks and gait go form resentful brooding to cynical whimsy. and his obvious contrast with the pin-up looks of shashi kapoor accentuates his character even further.
*since i wrote this, my wife and i have had an almighty debate over Zia Moheyuddin's character in this film. for her, his obsessiveness and passion represents the most human characteristics of love. i argued that his love was 'fake' as his final act of vengeance was based on vikram's taunts, suggesting that his envy of vikram was greater than his love for Lucia. in response, she argued that it is illogical to separate the two feelings, or to ascribe ideals of truth and fake to love. i think we can safely say that the film's characters are great, and its tragedy is of a greek or shakespearian level. which means that people like the NYT columnist can find that to be melodramatic, but anyone well versed in the arts of the desi might not.*
you can watch the darjeeling limited online, and you can do the same for bombay talkies as well.
but before we leave, here is something i call conspiracy critiques. despite my disavowal for politics, i am pakistani and i can't run away from how i think. take a look at the following scenes (especially part two), and then ask yourself if this is not a metaphor for both india and pakistan's political history with western alliances, and how the fallout from those have affected pakistan's behaviour. remember also, that the jasmine is our national flower.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpP5fOLfcTE&feature=channel]
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hHPBg6XEzU]
Friday, March 26, 2010
Thursday, March 25, 2010
City takes another setback in Danbury 11 case
The News-Times has the details:
A federal judge has ruled that the men known as the Danbury 11 not be required to divulge their immigration status as part of their civil rights lawsuit against the city.
While attorneys for the city claimed the status was "at the heart of the case," the judge cited previous case law when she ruled that handing over the information would have a "chilling" effect on other immigrants seeking to enforce their civil rights.
"We are gratified, but not surprised, because this order follows a long line of cases saying the courts should be open to everyone," said Rebecca Heller, a law student with the Jerome N. Frank Legal Services organization at Yale Law School, which is representing the immigrants.
"People should not have to face harassment and deportation in order to vindicate their civil rights in federal court," Heller said.
The Danbury 11 is a group of day laborers who were arrested in Danbury and turned over to immigration agents in September 2006 during a sting operation involving local police officers.
The lawsuit filed by the day laborers claims that local police don't have the authority to enforce federal immigration law and that the officers used racial profiling when a local undercover officer picked them up at Kennedy Park.
[...]
"The judge has said they (the city) can't throw up a smokescreen and try to divert the jury from that reality," he said. "The judge saw through the frivolous nature of this defense and will make the defendants act like adults instead of politicians."
[...]
Local immigration attorney Michael Boyle said the city's attempts to gain access to the day laborers' immigration status amounts to a fishing expedition and a scare tactic that is often used in hope the plaintiffs will drop their case.
He added that, in general, most federal judges don't like to encourage such fishing expeditions.
"It's a very positive decision," Boyle said. "But I think for the city of Danbury it astounds me that this case continues to go on forever."
As for the gubernatorial candidate who called the Yale Law Students a bunch of "kids who have nothing better to do with their time."
Mayor Mark Boughton, a five-term Republican seeking his party's nomination in the gubernatorial race, has made national headlines in the past concerning immigration issues. He declined to comment specifically on this case because the matter remains pending.
Hark! Danbury's last honest man has no comment on the case? Sounds like he's singing a different tune compared to his dismissive comments four years ago.
Hartford Courant 12.14.06
A group of students at Yale Law School is expected to file suit today in federal court in a bid to find out how Homeland Security put together its sting on Sept. 19. The students want to know what role Danbury played in the operation and if the policies guiding the department's Immigration and Customs Enforcement arm may be unconstitutional. Their inquiry began with a request under the federal Freedom of Information Act. "We asked nicely," said Simon Moshenberg, a second-year student from Washington, D.C. "They didn't answer. We sued."
[...]
In an interview Wednesday, Boughton insisted that immigration police acted alone. They notified Danbury police this summer that they'd be making some arrests this fall but offered no other details, he said.
WVIT and WTNH 12.06:
WTNH: Boughton said the city played no part in the September 19th action...
WVIT: He [Boughton] said the city was not involved in the planing of the raid...
The residents of Danbury deserve to know once and for all whether the mayor LIED about his knowledge in this ICE raid. When pressed by state reporters, based on what I witnessed Boughton has during his press conference when the suit was filed, lets hope the city doesn't attempt to settle this case before Boughton is required to give his deposition and testify under oath.
State Rep. Bob Godfrey questions the timing of Gov Rell judicial nominees
Last night at the Danbury Democratic Town Committee meeting, Deputy Speaker and State Rep. Bob Godfrey voiced his frustration with the timing of Gov. Rell's judicial nominee announcement.
For those not in the loop, a little background is in order.
For those not in the loop, a little background is in order.
Late Wednesday afternoon, Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell nominated one Superior Court Judge to the Supreme Court to fill a vacancy and 10 lawyers to the Superior Court. However, according to lawmakers in charge of the legislature’s Judiciary Committee, the path to confirmation for the 10 Superior Court judges is “murky” at best.
Lawmakers said they will look at confirming Superior Court Judge Dennis Eveleigh to fill the vacancy left by Supreme Court Justice Christine S. Vertefeuille, but the other nominations are questionable.
Rep. Michael Lawlor, co-chairman of the legislature’s Judiciary Committee, which is responsible for vetting potential judges, said he won’t support any of the nominations until the budget crisis in the Judicial Branch is resolved.
“They have no money,” Lawlor said. “They’re closing courthouses and law libraries.”
The salary for each of the judges could cost the branch as much $150,000 per year, when its already had to scale back its operations after Rell vetoed a bill that would have exempted the Judicial Branch from cutting $7.8 million over the next two years. That decision has forced the branch to start closing courthouses, law libraries, and other programs and because of the early retirement plan there are 400 fewer court interpreters, clerical staff, as well as judicial marshals to provide security.
“Many of these people are very qualified,” but “it’s unlikely they will get confirmed,” Lawlor said Wednesday in a phone interview.
[...]
Ironically, Rell’s Budget Director Robert Genuario, who has maintained that the cuts to the Judicial Branch were necessary, was one of the 10 nominees to the Superior Court bench Wednesday.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Mini Chair Makeover!
8 months, 148 nail tacks, 7 feet of flexible tacking strip, 1.5 yards of fabric, 1 quart of paint, and 2 bloody fingers to take this:
to this 
and finally this:
It's not perfect, but its done :) This is my first reupholstery job and I learned a few things like:
- flexible tacking strip is probably well suited for regular sized furniture but is a pain in the butt for a mini chair like this one
- flexible tacking strip needs lots of foam on top of it to prevent it from poking through the fabric
- for a first time reupholstery project, don't pick fabric with stripes or plaids (strike 1 and strike 2!)
So it took much more effort than I anticipated but I'm pretty happy with it. Now Chloe will have a chair to sit on when she blows the candle off of her 1st birthday cake!! Not that the kid likes to sit on the chair - yet. The chair isn't the only thing that's changed:
I'm linking this post up to some blog parties: Creative Cats; Saturday Nite Special; Frugal Friday; Show and Tell; Frugalicious Friday; Transformation Thursday
to this 
and finally this:
It's not perfect, but its done :) This is my first reupholstery job and I learned a few things like:
- flexible tacking strip is probably well suited for regular sized furniture but is a pain in the butt for a mini chair like this one
- flexible tacking strip needs lots of foam on top of it to prevent it from poking through the fabric
- for a first time reupholstery project, don't pick fabric with stripes or plaids (strike 1 and strike 2!)
So it took much more effort than I anticipated but I'm pretty happy with it. Now Chloe will have a chair to sit on when she blows the candle off of her 1st birthday cake!! Not that the kid likes to sit on the chair - yet. The chair isn't the only thing that's changed:
I'm linking this post up to some blog parties: Creative Cats; Saturday Nite Special; Frugal Friday; Show and Tell; Frugalicious Friday; Transformation Thursday
"Learn the past, watch the present, and create the future"
When I think of the current state of the Danbury Democratic Town Committee, I'm reminded of an old saying that goes "learn the past, watch the present, and create the future."
Back in 2006, residents who were upset with the direction of the DTC under the leadership of then chairman Bernie Gallo held a primary Because of that primary, Gallo lost re-election to the committee, which in turn effectively ended his run as chairman.
Back in early 2006, in an interview of the local access show Community Forum, then former Common Council President Warren Levy and former State Rep Joe Walkowich expressed their concerns about the state of the DTC at the time.
Why is this important? Well, if you fast forward to 2010, you'll see that the concerns among Democrats regarding the leadership of Joe DaSilva (the person who took over the DTC after Gallo's departure) and who forced a DTC primary this year mirror the concerns expressed in 2006.
As the DTC moves forward, hopefully the committee can address these concerns and hopefully, those who expressed their concerns can work with the new leadership of the committee for the common good of the party.
THE CASE AGAINST JOHN McGOWAN DAY EIGHT: The seven trillion dollar man
When it comes to strange things, just when you think you've seen it all, John McGowan (a.k.a. Mr. Pseudolaw) takes irrational behavior to a whole new level.Litchfield Register Citizen Ronald DeRosa has the hilarious details regarding the latest chain of events in this bizarre case.
A Bethel man slated to defend himself in his own sexual assault trial is seeking in excess of $7 trillion from Litchfield Superior Court alleging libel.
John J. McGowan, also written John-Joseph:McGowan III, claims the court system has been libelous against him for carrying on his criminal case in public. He claimed he is owed over $7.4 trillion from the court system, which must be paid “in admiralty,” which is the law of the sea, through a “commercial process.”
Facing 20-years if found guilty, McGowan is slated to go to trial beginning Aug. 13 at the Litchfield court where he will have to personally convince a jury of his peers that he did not turn a 2008 consensual sex encounter into rape.
McGowan has not sought an attorney and has maintained he wants to go pro se on his case.
Assistant State’s Attorney Dawn Gallo argued there was no legal basis for his $7 trillion libel claim. Judge James P. Ginocchio agreed, saying Gallo is a prosecutor for the state whose job is to deal with criminal cases like McGowan’s.
Gallo noted that McGowan attempted to file the claim in a criminal procedure on civil court paperwork.
“There is no basis in which he can address that claim,” she said.
Wait, it gets better...
On Tuesday he filed another motion against Gallo, claiming the prosecutor did not give him a witness list within adequate time of his request for one in November.
Gallo, who then handed over the list, reminded McGowan it is procedural that the witness list must not be submitted until the day of jury selection.
McGowan, however, maintained the list is invalid because the motion he made was not answered in time.
“Therefore, the witnesses on their list should not be called,” McGowan said.
Gallo argued the state has provided “voluminous discovery,” meaning evidence and reports related to his case, in the past few months.
McGowan’s motion to exclude the witness list was a matter of him not understanding the practices of the court, Gallo said.
“If Mr. McGowan had a lawyer, his lawyer would be able to explain that,” the prosecutor said.
Gallo also argued further on the witness list, stating McGowan did obtain a copy already.
How did she know that? Because when she got a request to deny the witness list from McGowan, it listed each of the witnesses she previously wrote on the list, Gallo said.
“There’s no form in which he can address that claim,” Gallo said. “It’s improbable on its face.”
McGowan has previously tried to maintain his own personal sovereignty in court.
He reiterated this on Tuesday, when he initially refused to cross the bar that blocks off the audience section from the court itself.
“I enter strictly under threat, duress and coercion and at no way do I leave my inalienable rights I expressly reserve them,” McGowan said.
Judge Ginocchio eventually convinced him that he had to come forward because being behind the bar — and 20 feet from the microphone — does not affect his rights.
In anyone wants a ring side seat to this show, McGowan's next court date is on June 11th.
UPDATE: Just got word that McGowan's next scheduled court appearance has been changed to Jul 7 at 9:30 A.M.
RELATED POSTS:
- McGowan harass marchers, desecrates Mexican flag at 2006 immigration rally
- McGowan joins racist local access personality Tom "Big T" Bennett in inciting people to harm members of the immigrant community.
- Fairfield Weekly mocks McGowan's campaign for mayor.
- Elise Marciano anti-immigrant group members applaud while speaker advocates placing immigrants in WW-II style concentration camps.
- Court trial day seven: Jury trial
- Court trial day six: Motions denied
- Court trial day five: Endless Endless subpoenas and bizarre motions to dismiss
- LITCHFIELD REGISTER-CITIZEN: Local man accused of rape is competent for trial
- NEWS-TIMES: McGowan found competent to stand trial in New Milford rape case
- Court trial day two: Excuses, excuses
- Court trial day one: Strange behavior, disturbing arrest warrant affidavit
- McGowan arrested, charged with first-degree sexual assault
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Boughton decides not to attend immigraiton forum...
...while throwing his trademark temper tantrum we've all come to love, and taking a swipe at those who were offended by his presence on the panel.After a group of Latino law school students vehemently objected to Danbury Mayor and Republican gubernatorial candidate Mark Boughton's being invited to participate on a university panel discussion about immigration, Boughton said he will abide by their wishes.
"I haven't changed my opinion one bit," Boughton said Tuesday, but "I really wasn't interested in getting engaged in some kind of controversy where people are interested in suppressing my First Amendment right to freedom of speech."
[...]
"I would believe (these statements) are libelous, and I would expect better of law students," he said. "Their letter is so over the top there is no room for intelligent discourse. I strictly believe in the opinion that the laws of the United States of America ought to be enforced and no one is going to take that away from me."
Can someone hand Mayor Mark a tissue please...
Seriously, when it comes to why Boughton has NO business at this forum, I'll quote from Peter Gosilin.
Mayor Boughton is well known for his opinions about undocumented immigrants and law enforcement. But there is no evidence that Boughton is qualified to say anything about undocumented immigrants in the workplace from the point of view of sociological inquiry, legal analysis, or policy prescription. Boughton does not provide "balance" to discussion of rights and redress for the undocumented worker. What he provides is a distraction and a false sense that unless nativists and racists are invited to participate in every discussion that touches on immigration, somehow the discussion is one-sided. Moreover, I have to point out that since Boughton is also a Republican Party candidate for Governor of Connecticut, the Public Interest Law Journal has violated any accepted norm of "balance" by inviting him without inviting his opponents.
[...]
On the other hand, perhaps both Boughton and Attorney Vincent could contribute to a discussion of 287g programs: ICE-initiated programs in collaboration with local officials to effectively "deputize" local law enforcement to act as immigration agents in their communities. In such a discussion, perhaps some qualified speakers could ask them about the role that 287g agreements play in polarizing communities, in making victims of crime fear reporting to the police, and in giving local police further excuses to stop, harass, arrest and detain people for the crime of "breathing while brown." And while we are at it, a "balanced" panel could include officials from the cities of New Haven and Hartford, who have repudiated 287g in favor of local policies that forbid police officers from acting as immigration enforcers. And it could include people from the community: community leaders and individuals who have experienced the impact that these competing policies have effected on immigrants in Connecticut.
This isn't about free speech but rather students speaking out about the presence of a person who has historically used the topic of illegal immigration to further his political agenda and someone who offers ZERO input to the topic of the symposium entitled “Undocumented Immigrants in the Workplace."
As we move forward in this gubernatorial campaign, and as more people learn about Boughton's anti-immigrant policy, expect the level of outraged directed at Danbury's last honest man to continue.
RELATED POSTS:
Objection to Boughton's participation at immigration forum continues
UConn Latino law students to Boughton: You're not welcomed on campus
Mayor Boughton ignores the rise of anti-immigrant xenophobia in Danbury
Boughton misleads the public regarding city's role in Danbury 11 case
Court documents expose Danbury Police involvement in day laborer raid
HatCityBLOG FLASHBACK: The MISleader and the Danbury 11 case
In light of recent developments regarding Boughton's scheduled participation at an immigration forum at the University of Connecticut, I've received numerous requests for information on Boughton's anti-immigrant policies.
I think Boughton's dishonest role in the Danbury 11 case is a good start. For those who don't remember, back in Sept of 2006, ICE agents, disguised as contractors, went to Kennedy Park and picked up several day laborers who were looking for work. After being picked up, the workers were driven to Danbury Police Headquarters where they were subsequently arrested and detained.
REMEMBER What's important IS NOT the case. In fact, people get somewhat confused when talking about this matter as there are TWO cases...the deportation case (which is on appeal) and the MORE important CIVIL case.
In short, what is at issue is Mayor Boughton's long history and well documented history of misleading the public and overstepping his grounds as an elected official. The statements Mayor Boughton made to the media and public during the arrest and after the Yale Law Students attempted to obtain documents from City Hall are at issue here.
Boughton claimed in numerous interviews to the media back in December of 2006 that DANBURY HAD NO ROLE IN THE OPERATION THAT RESULTED IN THE ARREST OF THE DAY LABORERS ON KENNEDY PARK. It wasn't until the lawyers representing the day laborers won their FOI lawsuit against the city of Danbury was it shown that an UNDERCOVER DANBURY POLICE OFFICER drove the van that picked up the day laborers. This is a direct contradiction from the previous statements from the mayor and as of today, Boughton refuses to talk about the what he said back in December of '06.
If the civil case goes the way it should, Boughton will be forced to testify under oath about what he knew in regards to the case as well as explain his contradicting statements to the public regarding the city's role in the raid.
Originally posted in 10/07
This is serious.
This is no joke.
This is not about one's view on immigration.
This is about an over-zealous mayor who has, once again, used the topic of immigration for political purposes.
This is about the local media KNOWING that the mayor mislead the public YET won't challenge the mayor on his previous statements.
This is about residents having to read news accounts from other mainstream media outlets to get the real story.
This is about honesty.
This is about integrity.
This is about trust.
This is about competence.
FACT:
The story is Boughton misleading the public about Danbury's role in the raids.
If Boughton mislead the public about the September raid, what else did he misleading us about?
For instance, here are some quotes from the last honest man in Danbury regarding the use of local police to enforce immigration laws:
Hartford Courant, April 26 2006.
New York Times 05.25.05
Hartford Courant 05.07.05
Something to think about when Boughton, and the shameless Republican leadership, take the first steps towards local police enforcing immigration enforcement tomorrow.
Now onto more serious matters that goes to the heart of Boughton's character...the mayor's misleading statements to the public in regards to the city's role in Danbury 11 case:
Hartford Courant 12.14.06
Television reports on Danbury 11 case: 12.06
Fairfield Weekly last week (before Boughton was slapped with a lawsuit):
Interview with Simon Moshenberg, a Yale Law Student representing the "Danbury 11" in a federal court.
Video highlights of what we knew then about Danbury's role in the raid versus what we know now.
When you think of leadership, you think of an individual with certain characteristics such as honesty, integrity, trust, and competence. As more details of this case emerge and more people are informed about the Boughoton's conflicting comments, it's going to be increasingly difficult to apply these characteristics to the mayor.
I think Boughton's dishonest role in the Danbury 11 case is a good start. For those who don't remember, back in Sept of 2006, ICE agents, disguised as contractors, went to Kennedy Park and picked up several day laborers who were looking for work. After being picked up, the workers were driven to Danbury Police Headquarters where they were subsequently arrested and detained.
REMEMBER What's important IS NOT the case. In fact, people get somewhat confused when talking about this matter as there are TWO cases...the deportation case (which is on appeal) and the MORE important CIVIL case.
In short, what is at issue is Mayor Boughton's long history and well documented history of misleading the public and overstepping his grounds as an elected official. The statements Mayor Boughton made to the media and public during the arrest and after the Yale Law Students attempted to obtain documents from City Hall are at issue here.
Boughton claimed in numerous interviews to the media back in December of 2006 that DANBURY HAD NO ROLE IN THE OPERATION THAT RESULTED IN THE ARREST OF THE DAY LABORERS ON KENNEDY PARK. It wasn't until the lawyers representing the day laborers won their FOI lawsuit against the city of Danbury was it shown that an UNDERCOVER DANBURY POLICE OFFICER drove the van that picked up the day laborers. This is a direct contradiction from the previous statements from the mayor and as of today, Boughton refuses to talk about the what he said back in December of '06.
If the civil case goes the way it should, Boughton will be forced to testify under oath about what he knew in regards to the case as well as explain his contradicting statements to the public regarding the city's role in the raid.
Originally posted in 10/07
This is serious.
This is no joke.
This is not about one's view on immigration.
This is about an over-zealous mayor who has, once again, used the topic of immigration for political purposes.
This is about the local media KNOWING that the mayor mislead the public YET won't challenge the mayor on his previous statements.
This is about residents having to read news accounts from other mainstream media outlets to get the real story.
This is about honesty.
This is about integrity.
This is about trust.
This is about competence.
FACT:
• In December, Mayor Boughton (who had no problem talking about the incident) was repeatedly quoted in the media as stating that Danbury was not involved in the raid that occurred last September.
• Documents finally released in April by a FOIA request shows that a booking report lists the arresting officer as a Danbury Police official.
• A court brief by the Department of Homeland Security states that a undercover Danbury Police officer was the individual who drove the vehicle used to pick up the day-laborers.
• Also included in the FOIA release to the Yale Law students were a series of over overtime slips from Danbury Police officers.
• Until two weeks ago, the public was under the impression that Danbury played no part in the raids. NOW, one year after the raids and ten months after Mayor Boughton made his initial statement about Danbury's non-involvement in the raids, The Fairfield Weekly quotes a News-Times article that states Chief Al Baker "explaining that the arrests were initially made because of complaints about the day laborers' effects on traffic and that Danbury police did drive the van."
• Once having no problem talking about the incident (and hurling insults at the Yale Law Students), NOW Mayor Boughton refuses to comment on the details of the raid.
• Mayor Boughton's action has placed the city in a MAJOR constitutional lawsuit, which will cost the city more money than I care to think about.
The story is Boughton misleading the public about Danbury's role in the raids.
If Boughton mislead the public about the September raid, what else did he misleading us about?
For instance, here are some quotes from the last honest man in Danbury regarding the use of local police to enforce immigration laws:
Hartford Courant, April 26 2006.
Most local police departments say they have no interest in arresting illegal immigrants who have not committed crimes. Even in Danbury, when Mayor Mark Boughton last year tried unsuccessfully to have state police enforce immigration law, he said he didn't want his police doing it because it could discourage immigrants from cooperating in criminal investigations.
New York Times 05.25.05
It will begin at Kennedy Park, where the crowds of Hispanic men who gather before dawn to find work as day laborers helped prompt Mayor Mark D. Boughton to ask that the state police be deputized to enforce federal immigration laws.
[...]
Now, while members of Danbury's Common Council continue to draft a ''repetitive outdoor activity'' ordinance to restrict volleyball by cracking down on parking and noise, among other things, the mayor says deputizing the state police may not be necessary, that the police may have enough remedies without becoming immigration agents.
Hartford Courant 05.07.05
Lost in the hubbub is the political reality that having state police enforce immigration law in Connecticut is unlikely to happen anytime soon, if ever. And even Boughton acknowledges that his plan would have little effect on the number of undocumented immigrants in town.
[...]
Blumenthal responded to Boughton's request by saying it would need the approval of Gov. M. Jodi Rell, Public Safety Commissioner Leonard Boyle and the state legislature.
Blumenthal said there is no chance of that happening this year and he has "serious reservations" about the proposal.
"Deputizing local or state police is not a long term or fundamental solution to the problem," he said.
Although Boughton wants state police to enforce immigration law, he is not interested in Danbury police having the same authority, for fear it would cripple their ability to investigate other crimes.
"The same is true, to an even greater extent, for the state police," Blumenthal said.
Something to think about when Boughton, and the shameless Republican leadership, take the first steps towards local police enforcing immigration enforcement tomorrow.
Now onto more serious matters that goes to the heart of Boughton's character...the mayor's misleading statements to the public in regards to the city's role in Danbury 11 case:
Hartford Courant 12.14.06
A group of students at Yale Law School is expected to file suit today in federal court in a bid to find out how Homeland Security put together its sting on Sept. 19. The students want to know what role Danbury played in the operation and if the policies guiding the department's Immigration and Customs Enforcement arm may be unconstitutional. Their inquiry began with a request under the federal Freedom of Information Act. "We asked nicely," said Simon Moshenberg, a second-year student from Washington, D.C. "They didn't answer. We sued."
[...]
In an interview Wednesday, Boughton insisted that immigration police acted alone. They notified Danbury police this summer that they'd be making some arrests this fall but offered no other details, he said.
Television reports on Danbury 11 case: 12.06
Channel 8: Boughton said the city played no part in the September 19th action...
Channel 30: He [Boughton] said the city was not involved in the planing of the raid...
Fairfield Weekly last week (before Boughton was slapped with a lawsuit):
A year ago, eleven Ecuadorian day laborers were sneakily apprehended in Danbury's Kennedy Park by Immigration and Customs Enforcement with help from some men pretending to be contractors. They had some hard hats, a van and, according to recently uncovered information, a few Danbury police badges.
Why were the local cops assisting in a federal sting? Well, according to remarks from Danbury mayor Mark Boughton last December, they weren't. He repeatedly said the city played no role in the ICE raid.
[...]
Simon Moshenberg, a Yale Law Student representing the "Danbury 11" in a federal court case that began Monday, received the booking report for the arrests after placing a FOIA request. Under "arresting officer," was the name "Lolli," which turns out to be the name of a Danbury police officer. The Danbury News-Times quotes Chief Al Baker explaining that the arrests were initially made because of complaints about the day laborers' effects on traffic and that Danbury police did drive the van. The department chose not to further comment on their involvement when approached by the Weekly.
Boughton elaborated in an e-mail that "the city provided logistical support to ICE," which is "common" and "does not mean that the Danbury PD planned, organized or carried out the raid." He stands by his comments from December.
Interview with Simon Moshenberg, a Yale Law Student representing the "Danbury 11" in a federal court.
1.: Information obtained from the FOI request shows Danbury police officer as the arresting officer on booking report.
2. According to defense attorney Simon Moshenberg, in brief to the court, the Department of Homeland Security states that DANBURY POLICE OFFICERS were the ones disguised as contractors and driving the van used to pick up the day laborers. This is contrary to statements Boughton made to the press in December and the city of Danbury has not issued an official response in any legal proceedings regarding DHS's statement.
Video highlights of what we knew then about Danbury's role in the raid versus what we know now.
When you think of leadership, you think of an individual with certain characteristics such as honesty, integrity, trust, and competence. As more details of this case emerge and more people are informed about the Boughoton's conflicting comments, it's going to be increasingly difficult to apply these characteristics to the mayor.
THE CASE AGAINST JOHN MCGOWAN: UPDATE TO COME
The next court hearing case against former John McGowan is scheduled for today at Litchfield Court House.The 2007 mayoral candidate, former Vice President of Elise Marciano's racist hate group, anti-immigrant activist, and local access television personality was arrested and charged with first degree sexual assault, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in jail.
The police affidavit details the horrific details of McGowan's alleged crime against the victim.
…he [McGowan] pushed his penis into her anus. When he did this, Victim stated that she asked "What are you doing" and "Stop." Victim states that she arched her back as she initially struggled to to get him out of her. When she did this, McGowan put his right arm around her neck and put her in a headlock.
I'll provide details on what happened in court later today.
RELATED POSTS:
McGowan advocates residents kill day laborers at Kennedy Park
McGowan yells at immigrant right supporters, desecrates Mexican flag at immigration rally
Fairfield Weekly mocks McGowan's campaign for mayor.
Elise Marciano's anti-immigrant hate group members applaud while speaker advocates placing immigrants in WW-II style concentration camps.
Objection to Boughton's participation at immigration forum continues
The controversy surrounding Mark Boughton's participation in a forum on immigration on the campus of the University of Connecticut continues.
In a rebuttal to CT Public Interest Law journal Editor-in-Chief Patrick Linsey's response to the Latino Law Student Association's objection to Boughton's participation in the forum, Attorney Peter Goselin of the Connecticut Chapter of National Lawyers Guild wrote the following:
RELATED POSTS:
UConn Latino law students to Boughton: You're not welcomed on campus
Mayor Boughton ignores the rise of anti-immigrant xenophobia in Danbury
Boughton misleads the public regarding city's role in Danbury 11 case
Court documents expose Danbury Police involvement in day laborer raid
In a rebuttal to CT Public Interest Law journal Editor-in-Chief Patrick Linsey's response to the Latino Law Student Association's objection to Boughton's participation in the forum, Attorney Peter Goselin of the Connecticut Chapter of National Lawyers Guild wrote the following:
Dear Patrick,
I was forwarded a copy of the Public Interest Law Journal's response to the Latino Law Student Association regarding the upcoming seminar on undocumented immigrants in the workplace. As an employment attorney who spends a lot of time working on wage theft and the super-exploitation of undocumented immigrants in the workplace, I feel compelled to respond.
With all respect due to you and the other students who have worked on convening this event, I share the disappointment and the disapproval of the students of UConn LLSA with the composition of the seminar. Nor am I persuaded by your response to LLSA's concerns, though I have no doubt that your response is offered in good faith to address those concerns.
What concerns me most - first, about the presence of Mayor Boughton and the keynote speech by Attorney Vincent, and second, about your defense of the decision to invite them - is that it so totally misses the mark in terms of what this symposium is allegedly about. Mayor Boughton is well known for his opinions about undocumented immigrants and law enforcement. But there is no evidence that Boughton is qualified to say anything about undocumented immigrants in the workplace from the point of view of sociological inquiry, legal analysis, or policy prescription. Boughton does not provide "balance" to discussion of rights and redress for the undocumented worker. What he provides is a distraction and a false sense that unless nativists and racists are invited to participate in every discussion that touches on immigration, somehow the discussion is one-sided. Moreover, I have to point out that since Boughton is also a Republican Party candidate for Governor of Connecticut, the Public Interest Law Journal has violated any accepted norm of "balance" by inviting him without inviting his opponents.
Described as the principal legal advisor to ICE, Peter Vincent may have a lot to say about the administration's view of immigration and immigration reform. But if the goal were to invite a speaker from the administration who is qualified to discuss undocumented immigrants in the American workforce, why an ICE attorney instead of someone from the Department of Labor? Under the leadership of Hilda Solis, the USDOL has been very active in collaborating with local community groups and elected officials to fight wage theft and unsafe working conditions, problems that plague undocumented workers. What can Attorney Vincent contribute to that discussion? What expertise in labor policy does he possess that merits making him the keynote speaker for a symposium with the workplace rights of undocumented immigrants as its central theme?
On the other hand, perhaps both Boughton and Attorney Vincent could contribute to a discussion of 287g programs: ICE-initiated programs in collaboration with local officials to effectively "deputize" local law enforcement to act as immigration agents in their communities. In such a discussion, perhaps some qualified speakers could ask them about the role that 287g agreements play in polarizing communities, in making victims of crime fear reporting to the police, and in giving local police further excuses to stop, harass, arrest and detain people for the crime of "breathing while brown." And while we are at it, a "balanced" panel could include officials from the cities of New Haven and Hartford, who have repudiated 287g in favor of local policies that forbid police officers from acting as immigration enforcers. And it could include people from the community: community leaders and individuals who have experienced the impact that these competing policies have effected on immigrants in Connecticut.
What we have here is not balance but a terrible mismatch. Two speakers have been invited (and one a keynote at that) who have no expertise in the area that the symposium is supposed to take up. And though their views and their actions should be exposed to criticism and challenge . . . those views and actions touch most closely on matters that are not on the agenda of this symposium at all.
It is my understanding that the students of LLSA have asked you to revoke the invitations you have extended to Mayor Boughton and to Attorney Vincent. I join in and endorse that view.
Peter Goselin
National Lawyers Guild - Connecticut Chapter
RELATED POSTS:
UConn Latino law students to Boughton: You're not welcomed on campus
Mayor Boughton ignores the rise of anti-immigrant xenophobia in Danbury
Boughton misleads the public regarding city's role in Danbury 11 case
Court documents expose Danbury Police involvement in day laborer raid
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)