Ian's Account: The Occupy Seattle Port Shutdown, Part 2

This post is a continuation of my account of the December 12th Port shutdown and ensuing events. The original post can be found here.


After we left Terminal 18 in order to take and shut down Terminal 5, a large group of people, around 200 or so, marched over the bridge dividing the two Terminals. We streamed during the entirety of that march and were able to get footage of the scene below at Terminal 18, which can be found in the archives our our Livestream channel (click here to go to the main page). Night had fallen and the temperature dropped. My finger-less gloves were no longer keeping my hands warm.

We head over the bridge toward Terminal 5.

We saw no police presence as we headed up the bridge, something we would come to sorely regret. One motorist, angry at our presence, decided instead of waiting for us to pass that he would put on the gas and speed through our march. We watched in horror as a member of our bike swarm was hit. In order to avoid being dragged under the car, he jumped on the hood and was catapulted over the roof of the vehicle to fall to the side of the road. The car sped away.

In the night, one motorist didn't care to wait for us to pass.  Photo by Joseph H.

The car speeds away. Ian ran to try and get the license plate number, but others were successful.  Photo by Joseph H.

One Occupier, Joseph H., approached a police car that had arrived on scene with lights flashing. He attempted to give the license plate number to the authorities, but the officer rebuffed him until he threatened to take his picture and report him for his failure to act. Information has not yet been forthcoming regarding the hit and run, but the victim miraculously sustained only minor injuries.

At this time, six to seven police cars tore onto the bridge, lights flashing and sirens wailing. Many of us assumed the police cars were headed to apprehend the murderous motorist, however we seem to have been proven wrong. I believe they were headed to Terminal 18, as about 20 minutes later we received phone calls announcing that our friends still blockading the east side of the Port had been attacked. 

Many of us had completed the crossing over the bridge and at this dismaying news, turned around to hurry back to assist in defending our friends. However, organizers who were on the phone with personnel on-site at the blockade reported that Occupy Seattle's wall at Terminal 18 had been successfully removed by police. Somewhat disheartened, we turned back once again and continued on to Terminal 5.

We entered the parking lot to Terminal 5 and immediately set up a picket line there. The parking lot had two entrances, and some activists stayed at those entrances to provide a first line of defense should police move in. Many of us argued with each other as to the best tactics, having been shaken up by the reports of violence used at Terminal 18, but in the end Occupy Seattle set up a circling picket line with people linking arms to block the entrance. 

We blocked the entrance and we waited.

Terminal 5 is Occupied.  Photo by Rendao Liliang

As we milled about in the parking lot, our friends who had been attacked by police joined us. Many puffy faced from pepper spray and all outraged at the assault, they showed us their injuries and we shook our heads in anger.

Injuries sustained during the scuffle with the police.  Photo by Rendao Liliang

Finally police cars pulled into a parking lot across the street and got out of their vehicles. They monitored the situation from afar and we eyed them with suspicion. Our picket went on.

Finally we received a phone call from the union hall: the arbitrator had declared the Port unsafe due to our presence, work was canceled, and we had successfully shut down the Port. Applause erupted, and before police could act against us victory was declared and we marched away, pleased at a successful action.

We were dismayed, however, to learn that the Longshoremen sent home by the union arbitrator were being denied payment for time lost during our picket. Far from usual, this constituted a breach of contract on the part of the Terminal and we swore we would not let this unjust action go without Occupy Seattle's say.

We went to bed, got some rest, and some of us woke up the next morning, ready to return. A 6:30 AM picket was scheduled at Terminal 5, and around 20 of us showed up to express solidarity with longshore workers.

Early morning picket. Longshoremen are looking on, respecting our picket line.

Some workers crossed our picket line, though we thanked them for their work as they entered the Terminal. We later found out that they were machinists, non-ILWU workers who were not obligated to respect our picket. However, about 8 out of 10 of them expressed their support and thanks as they entered the port, with one woman relating to us that the Terminal authorities had denied her health benefits for an injury sustained on the job.

Longshoremen gathered in the parking lot and watched us. They are contractually forbidden for causing a work disruption, but as they huddled up to discuss us one casually sauntered by us. "You would need more people if you wanted to shut down the port," he said. I took a step toward him to ask him a question and he hurried away.

Eventually, the arbitrator arrived and asked us to move out of the parking lot so that the Longshoremen could go to work. We agreed, as we didn't have enough people to hold the line. 

To our shock and delight, he then led a round of applause from the port workers. As they filed into the Terminal, they shook our hands, thanked us, and hugged us. Footage of the applause can be found here, at the end of the video. We have since heard that they will be getting paid for their time on stand-by from the December 13th picket.

In the end, did we change anything? I don't know. Goldman Sachs and EGT, the companies that are the financial beneficiaries of the revenue generated on the backs of longshore workers, will most likely continue their corruption and union-busting tactics. We may very well have to return. But we have definitely sent a message to those who would exploit the working class:

We are the 99%. We are determined, we are focused, and we are angry. If you trample on our workers we will shut down your ports. If you use the police to brutalize us we will take to the streets. We are the ones who are too big to fail, and you would do well to remember that.

Oh, and you know what? I'll be there, filming every minute of it. Smile!

Ian's Account: The Occupy Seattle Port Shutdown, Part 1

Yesterday's controversial Port action swept the West Coast with Port closures, with varying degrees of police action taken against Occupy movements, to include at solidarity actions in cities outside of the region. Vancouver BC, Portland, Seattle, Tacoma, San Diego, Los Angeles, Oakland, and others joined the port shutdown with other Occupations obstructing other facilities in a move to send a message to Goldman Sachs and other shipping giants: "We are the 99%."

I attended one such shutdown as the Livestream reporter for the action at the Port of Seattle. It started with a rally put on by Hip Hop Occupies at approximately 12:30 PM, with a march directly after which took to the streets of Seattle for the long walk to the Port from Westlake Park. Laptop in hand, I followed the march, streaming the procession as it made its way down 4th Avenue to the Port fishing area on Spokane Street. Fellow team members Dan J. and Jenny D. accompanied me.

Some estimate 700-800 people in attendance, but I guessed closer to 1000. At one point the march stretched across two city blocks, yet we saw a very minimal police presence, excepting a helicopter hovering overhead with the Sheriff's department. When we turned down Spokane St. and marched into the Port, our chants were echoed back to us as we passed under overpasses.

During organizational meetings, the planned terminal to be shutdown had not yet been decided. If we had 1000 people or more, we would have the numbers to block every entrance of Terminal 18, but if we had less we would cross a bridge and close the smaller Terminal 5.

We chose to close Terminal 18.

A blockade was hastily erected at the main entrance of Terminal 18 at roughly 3:30 PM, constructed out of signs, scrap wood, and corrugated metal. Eli Sanders of the Slog has pictures here.

The blockade was constructed in minutes, with the exit lane left clear so that port workers attempting to go home would be able to leave the Terminal. However, two lanes were reduced to one, and traffic began to back up. The demonstrators quickly began to direct traffic, allow three cars at a time from each line to pass the blockade unhindered.  The entrance was blocked, however. We had shut down the Terminal 18.

Photo by Katia R.

Our action had not gone unnoticed. I lit a cigarette, content to observe the protesters building the blockade, until I turned around and saw a huge line of police officers on bicycles approaching the barricaded entrance.

Photo by Katia R.

Ian points out the approaching police to the Livestream audience while Dan holds the laptop.

The police acted quickly, setting up a bicycle barricade to prevent protesters from moving forward of the blockade and then, to our surprise, extending their barricade to block the exit lane. The crowd of protesters erupted into outraged shouts of "Let them leave!" This continued for approximately ten minutes as traffic piled up in the port, workers already late getting home now inexplicably detained.

While I am willing to admit that the Seattle Police Department may have shut down the exit lane in confusion, part of me is very much tempted to characterize this as an attempt on the part of the SPD to create a stressful situation that would make Occupy Seattle appear to be transgressors against Port workers. As the foremost trucker in the blocked traffic leaned out his window to see what was going on, he struck up a conversation with Occupiers sympathetic to his plight. 

"I know why you're doing this. I barely make enough to feed myself."

Photo by Katia R.

Finally the police changed their tactics and began to allow the truckers and other employers to leave the Port. What would they do next? They eyed the crowd uneasily.

At this point, organizers assessed the amount of people we had and declared that we could take Terminal 5 in addition to Terminal 18. A large contingent of people left to cross the bridge across the water and occupy that section of the port. In what some are calling a tactical error, around 100 protesters were left to hold Terminal 18, left to the mercies of the police. I joined the moving march in order to stream the erection of blockades at Terminal 5.

According to on-the-ground sources, the SPD escalated their tactics as the exit lane cleared. Seeing a possible entrance, they attempted to guide a truck laden with goods to be shipped through the exit. Occupiers then moved their bodies and the blockade to close that space as well.  The briefly empty exit lane then filled up again, and tensions mounted.

Seattle Police Department alleges that items were thrown at them during this time, while Occupiers I've spoken to deny this and state that the police were the first to use violence. The alleged weapons flung at police were lit flares, a pointed rebar, bags of paint, and bricks. Wendy Leigh, a writer for the Huffington Post, was on the scene and indicated that she saw no such thing. Whatever the case, it is confirmed that at this time Seattle Police Department used horses (one person was stepped on by a horse), flash bang grenades, and pepper spray in order to attack and disperse the crowd.  11 were arrested.

Seattle Police Department rode horses into the crowd to disperse the demonstration.

The remains of a flash bang grenade.  Photo by Joseph H.

Protesters indicate to police, among the wreckage of the blockade, that we are a peaceful demonstration.

Photos have been captured of an SPD officer punching a protester in the face, resulting in his fellow officers restraining him in his fury. KIRO TV's account of the police tactics can be found here.

This is the first of a two-part series. The second is posted here.

Newt Gingrich Is SUPER Dumb When It Comes To Palestine

Newt Gingrich is basically an unspeakable horror of a person who should just go home and think about what he's done.

The presidential hopeful remarked today, in a statement which has sparked outrage among Palestinian leaders, that the Palestinian people were "invented," citing their former inclusion in the Ottoman Empire as proof that the region has never been a country and didn't really need to be: 

"Remember, there was no Palestine as a state – (it was) part of the Ottoman Empire. I think we have an invented Palestinian people who are in fact Arabs and historically part of the Arab community and they had the chance to go many places," Gingrich said, according to a video excerpt posted online. 

The Palestinian prime minister, Salam Fayyad, demanded Gingrich "review history." 

"From the beginning, our people have been determined to stay on their land," Fayyad said in comments carried by the Palestinian news agency Wafa. "This, certainly, is denying historical truths."

You go, Salam! Because Newt Gingrich does need to review history. While the boundaries of the region known has Palestine have shifted over the centuries, the region was defined as "Palestine" in 1920 by the British Mandate for Palestine and has since declared independence officially from Israel in 1988. Two-thirds of the world's nations recognize the Palestinian people's right to govern themselves. You know how I bothered to learn this? By looking on the fucking Wikipedia page. It's that easy.

Maybe Newt should recall a certain other invented people: Americans. Before 1776, we didn't exist either. We became independent because we chose the path of self-determination. So have the Palestinians.

Also, Newt Gingrich can suck it.

Tragedy: Man Dies Waiting For Marriage Equality

The one thing Ed Watson wanted to do was marry his partner, Derence Kernek, before he died. Unfortunately, due to the machinations of anti-gay groups that mired California in the legal nightmare that is Proposition 8, he was unable to fulfill his dream and passed away Wednesday. In a sad ironic twist, he died the day before hearings on the controversial "Prop H8" began.

Gay rights activists lamented Watson's death as a reminder of the harm inflicted on same-sex couples throughout the state because they are denied the right to marry. 

"It's ironic that he died on the eve of appeals about peripheral issues around a case that should have been settled more than a year ago," said Richard Jacobs, chairman and founder of the gay rights advocacy group Courage Campaign, as he was en route to San Francisco for a hearing before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. "None of this will matter to Ed or Derence." 

U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker ruled on Aug. 4, 2010, that Proposition 8 violated the constitutional rights of gays and lesbians to due process and equal protection under the law. Sponsors of the initiative passed by 52% of Californians who voted in November 2008 have appealed Walker's ruling and won a suspension of it pending the 9th Circuit's ruling.

This is sad. How many more LGBTs have to die disappointed before people just admit, like Hillary Clinton did before the UN, that gay rights are human rights?

Governor Goodhair Attacks Gays, Is Still Stupid

The gay blogosphere is all abuzz with Rick Perry's latest attempt to find relevancy after multiple gaffes which have derailed his candidacy for the Republican nomination for President, as yesterday he released a video attacking the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell and "the war on religion."  Watch:



Oh, Rick... if only you had a better wardrobe consultant. AMERICAblog and others have pointed out in glee that the jacket he's wearing has a gay significance of its own:

Poor Rick. He just can't get ahead! Word to the wise: don't dress like a gay cowboy when you're attacking... uh, gay people.


Not everyone in Camp Perry are pleased with the ad, with top pollster (and, as reported by JoeMyGod, big-time homo) Tony Fabrizio calling it "nuts":

But not everyone was comfortable with the script. When the ad was being crafted several weeks ago, Perry's top pollster, Tony Fabrizio, called it "nuts," according to an email sent from Fabrizio to the ad's main creator, longtime GOP operative Nelson Warfield. In a separate email to The Huffington Post, Warfield confirmed that the ad was made over Fabrizio's objections. 

"Tony was against it from the get-go," Warfield wrote. "It was the source of some extended conversation in the campaign. To be very clear: That spot was mine from writing the poll question to test[ing] it to drafting the script to overseeing production."

Hint to gay strategists: if you don't want to work for a CRAZY PERSON don't sign on with a governor from Texas.  They're ALL nutty.

Mars Hill Attacks

According to a recent post (by recent I mean, nearly a week old) on the Seattle Weekly blog, local megachurch pastor Mark Driscoll has gone on record as saying that practicing yoga and reading Harry Potter are Satanic:

"Practicing yoga is Satanic, it leads to evil just like reading Harry Potter," he told a film festival in Umbria this week, where he was invited to introduce The Rite, a film about exorcism starring Sir Anthony Hopkins as a Jesuit priest. "

My response - well, only if you're doing it right.

Honestly, I just wanted a reason to post the above picture. That is all.

Port Shutdown: Why It Matters

Occupy Seattle has voted to stand with Occupy Oakland's call for action at West Coast ports in a controversial and visible action to send a message to multiple corporations who have acted against port workers:

"We're shutting down these ports because of the union busting and attacks on the working class by the 1%: the firing of Port truckers organizing at SSA terminals in LA; the attempt to rupture ILWU union jurisdiction in Longview, WA by EGT. EGT includes Bunge LTD, a company which reported 2.5 billion dollars in profit last year and has economically devastated poor people in Argentina and Brazil. SSA is responsible for inhumane working conditions and gross exploitation of port truckers and is owned by Goldman Sachs. EGT and Goldman Sachs is Wallstreet on the Waterfront" stated Barucha Peller of the West Coast Port Blockade Assembly of Occupy Oakland.   

Meetings have been occurring weekly since Occupy Seattle's General Assembly vote to support the port shutdown.  Held in West Seattle, the meetings were open to the public and organizers heard community concerns about the action in order to conduct the action in an efficient and community-friendly manner.  Continuing outreach has been staged at the Port of Seattle in order to talk to workers as they end their shifts about the impending shutdown.

Reportedly, Port workers who must remain anonymous due to their contracts, have attended the meetings in West Seattle and voiced their support for the move.

The Stranger's online blog, the Slog, posted today that the International Longshoreman and Warehouse Union (ILWU) has now stated that they do not support this action:

“Local 19 and the ILWU as a whole has taken a position against shutting down the ports on Dec. 12," Williams told me. "Obviously we support the Occupy movement as a whole and the causes they’re fighting for. But as far as shutting down the Port of Seattle, we’re not in favor of that. There’s a lot of jobs—union jobs and other jobs as well—associated with shutting down commerce, and we can’t support that.”

Far from concerned about the statement, organizers I spoke with were confident that this action was appropriate.  Longshoremen have been secretly meeting with Occupy Seattle on a regular basis and do support shutdown, and it's not hard to see why.  One only needs to look to the recent conflict between local unions and multinational conglomerate EGT in Longview to understand why a strong statement needs to be made to companies that represent the 1%'s interests to the detriment of union workers.

Why use a shutdown to get our point across?  At its most basic concept, we're sending a message by fucking with the 1%'s money.  Frankly, the impact to workers (who already support the action) is minimal.  They're still going to get paid.


On a broader scope, however, we only need to look as far as the iconic Letter from Birmingham Jail, written by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., to see why shutting down the Port of Seattle for a day will benefit union workers:

Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored.

In the end, ILWU's statement that they do not support port shutdown is an effort on the part of the union to cover their proverbial asses.  It would be a breach of contract to support our action, so they cannot speak positively for it.  They have no option.

Luckily, we do have options, and we're going to use them.  One of those is shutdown, and on the 12th of December we will be doing just that.

See you at the Port!

Occupy Seattle: SCCC Faculty Member Speaks Out

Occupy Seattle is bracing itself for its eviction from the grounds of Seattle Central Community College today, as the administration of SCCC, after lengthy deliberation, has discovered legal pretext to remove the protester's encampment from the south plaza. Despite Occupy Seattle's attempted injunction against the school to prevent an eviction notice from being delivered today, it appears that the camp may finally be forced to move elsewhere.

As tents come down and tactical moves are considered, a member of the faculty of SCCC has released a scathing refutation of the charges leveled against the movement, congratulating the school administration on its coup de grace:

Now, let’s be honest, our “College of the Year” drops the ball now and then. Not this time, though. Home run! Rats, trash, and needles stuck in the public imagination like pedophilia to Penn State. Big schools like UC Davis are drowning in bad press (hapless pepper-spraying cop), but Seattle Central showed commanding form. With breath-taking efficiency and a cost-effective approach, the Occupy tribe were branded half-human drug addicts and drop outs. And they brought rats, the college said. You might call it propaganda with panache. Touche. 

For sure, rats are a cherished institution at our institution. They’ve been crapping on my desk for years. Rats and the college go back a long ways, a Tom and Jerry kind of thing. Some old-timers might even remember a City Collegian article about rats in the culinary dept. kitchen, nibbling through flour sacks. (Funny, admin stamped out the 42-year-old student paper shortly after. Wonder why!)

Jeb Wyman, an English professor at Seattle Central, insists that it's not just rats that were already present on campus:

Of course, if you spend much time at Seattle Central, you’ll get cozy with needles, too. Since 1994, I’ve parked in the lower level of the garage. On most mornings I detour around a puddle of sour pee (that bracing odor wakes you up!) in the stairwell. I’ve stepped over many a hypodermic needle on those stairs. And over broken gin bottles, stolen purses, beer cans in paper bags, empty plastic baggies. My car has been broken into three times. The garage was once equipped with security cameras, but they were—you can’t make this up!—stolen years ago. 

A few years ago, the campus president locked up all first-floor bathrooms after too many homeless took sink baths and too many overdosed dope addicts were found sprawled in the stalls. 

And in mid-October—that’s, uh, a few weeks before Occupy moved in—our facilities director put out an email blast (with great accompanying pix!) bemoaning that graffiti, vandalism, trash, needles, and “cleaning up the feces, and urine, and vomit left almost daily at our doorsteps” cost the school about $200,000 a year. 

Sorry to gross you out, but I’m just quoting directly. 

The point is, facts and first-class propaganda have nothing to do with each other. Only a fool would deny that. Quite the contrary, our administration knows what they’re doing. We’re not talking amateurs. This is poetry in motion. Salute!

Click on over to the New City Collegian, Seattle Central's guerilla student-run newspaper, for more.

The Most Heartbreaking Thing I Will Ever Show You

If you're not sold yet on anti-bullying legislation, you need to watch this.

OneAngryCultist: Love Thy Neighbor

In a recent article on the Catholic Lane, retired schoolteacher and fellow, Seattle OCCUPY activist and writer Robert “Bob” Struble, Jr. writes about the ongoing problem of institutional child abuse. In his recent articles, Paterno, Pedophiles, Homosexuals, and Cowards; and Homosexuality/Pedophilia Correlation? Struble explores the recent Penn State sex abuse scandal in which assistant coach Jerry Sandusky had been found guilty of sexually assaulting or having inappropriate contact with at least eight underage boys as indicative of the moral decline of society due to the growing acceptance of homosexuality.

In the first article, Struble writes:

“Cultural commissars in the West urge citizens to worship at the altar of a much-touted triune ethic – tolerance, diversity and choice. This secular trinity militates against the influence of righteous indignation. It demands that people who express disgust at sexual sins be reprogrammed. Teach them to reconsider their negative attitudes. Show them that a tendency to look down on homosexual sex is wrong in itself. Brow beat them with the notion that such a critical attitude is condescending and judgmental.”

Putting aside any snarky reference I could make by invoking Matthew 7:1-5, there is a tendency in our culture to censor language that is perceived to be intolerant or that doesn’t respect the current values of diversity and choice and with good reason –this kind of language kills people!

 In a free society we do have the right to speak our minds, however the point at which this language and dialogue infringes upon the lives and liberty of others, I take serious concern.

In specific regards to Catholic social teaching, of which Mr. Struble should be well aware, sexual minorities, “must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.” Quoting the controversial archbishop of the airwaves, Fulton Sheen, Mr. Struble writes in agreement:

“Tolerance is an attitude of reasoned patience toward evil…, a forbearance that restrains us from showing anger or inflicting punishment…. Architects are as intolerant about sand as foundations for skyscrapers as doctors are intolerant about germs in the laboratory. Tolerance does not apply to truth or principles.”

Immediately following, in his own words, Bob additionally calls for an end to, “the prevailing idolatry about inclusiveness. We need, rather, to exhibit the militancy and intolerance that Jesus modeled when he cleansed the temple.”

So, Bob, tell us what you really think about the teachings of Jesus who enjoins all Christians to, “love your neighbor as yourself” (Mk. 12:31). Thousands of Catholics struggle on a daily basis with deep-seated problems related to being faced with having to choose between being true to themselves or their faith – I for one think they are owed at least a modicum of tolerance.

In his second article, Bob attempts to make the case that the child abuse case at Penn state is not only a moral problem, with which I fully agree, but correlates homosexuality to pedophilia – clearly something I cannot endorse. Pedophilia cannot in any way be related to homosexuality.

Pedophilia, as defined by the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems is “a sexual preference for children, boys or girls or both, usually of prepubertal or early pubertal age” and has nothing to do whatsoever with homosexuality even in cases where the abused are of the same gender of the abused.

In essence, pedophilia is a profound psychological and emotional disorder that cannot be correlated in any way to homosexuality in which relationships formed between same-sex partners are most often consensual in nature, as with heterosexual relationships, and based on positive regard for partners and are not typified by power-dynamic disparity as in the case of pedophilia.

Continuing, Bob predicts:

“That if social mores continue their downward trajectory, and society reaches such a level that NAMBLA’s agenda gets mainlined into the culture (as was its equivalent in ancient Greece and Rome); then the social climate will be about as libertine as we read about in pagan antiquity, when there was not much about pedophilia that scandalized people… 

At that point, homosexuals and homosexualists (their heterosexual backers) will not be compelled to conjure up so much anger or indignation whenever someone associates them with pedophilia. To the extent that all sex is considered good sex, no stigmatizing of deviant sexuality will exert enough social suasion to make people feel guilty about sexual relations with children.”

With all due respect, Bob, NAMBLA represents a socially deviant organization that I can guarantee the majority of the LGBTQI community along with the rest of society views with equal disdain as you yourself hold. Also, as something of a lay-historian myself, I’m profoundly disappointed in Bob’s anachronistic reading into the fall of ancient Rome which most historians now assess as being due to extreme economic pressures brought about by territorial expansionism and not about sexual excess and moral denigration. 

Historically speaking, same-sex attraction as understood in the ancient world was understood differently than it is today. While the cultural practice of pederastry as practiced to a small extant in Ancient Greece and Rome may be to some extant equitable with hebephilia – a related but different disorder from pedophilia and something against which Paul rails in Romans – there are cultural contexts which separate making such a drastic comparison to NAMBLA.

These two articles fail to pass biblical and intellectual standards of editorial excellence and are indicative of a small-mindedness that should not be confused with the great academic and loving religious values present in Catholicism, instead they appear to regurgitate the same old “gays are bad because the pope says so” arguments that contribute to a strong social stigmatization of the Church.

I humbly, yet frankly, ask the author to look deeper into the issues at stake as well as inform himself better on the Spirit of the Gospel as opposed to the letter of the law and enjoin him to make a sincere and loving inventory based on love of his sisters and brothers and cease depriving what he likely would not appreciate having deprived himself – the right to love their partners as themselves.

In Dedication to Ss. Sergius and Bacchus
(Aren't they cute?!)

HIV Positive Student Denied Admission To Private School

Today is World AIDS Day, and I spent a good couple hours of my time today holding signs, raising awareness, and gathering signatures for a pledge to help end HIV.  It was a positive (hehe) experience and a great way to commemorate this global day of education.

One of the reasons we have World AIDS Day is to raise awareness, which is the easiest way to dispel the stigma associated with HIV/AIDS.  Unfortunately, we still come across ample examples of why education is needed, like this troubling story coming from a Pennsylvania boarding school.

The Milton Hershey School was founded by the chocolate tycoon as a school that "nurtures and educates children in social and financial need to lead fulfilling and productive lives."

But it seems that fulfillment won’t be coming for a 13-year-old honor student from Delaware County who is infected with the virus that causes AIDS. 

"I feel no other teenager should go through this, being denied just because they have HIV," the boy said in an exclusive interview with NBC Philadelphia’s Denise Nakano.

Watch:

  

It's sad that clear cases of discrimination against innocents who live with this disease still happen.  If the school's administration was educated about the actual methods of spreading HIV, they likely would not have denied this boy a chance for an education.

Confirmed: Jennifer Fox Has Miscarried

About a week ago I broke the story that Jennifer Fox has alleged that she miscarried her child due to an attack she sustained by police on November 15th, the same night that Dorli Rainey suffered the indiscriminate pepper-spraying on Occupy Seattle's peaceful protest.

Since my initial report, numerous news outlets, to include the Stranger's online blog, have cast doubts on Jennifer's story.  She is a homeless youth, and many have used past incidents in her troubled history to indicate that she has not told the truth regarding her assault and the ensuing loss of her child.  Pair that past with her inability to provide medical records proving her assertion, and an unclear picture of her credibility has cast doubts on her story.

Since I released her initial account, a story which has now gotten international attention, I have cautioned Jennifer on multiple occasions that she has no obligation to show her medical records to anyone.  Keep in mind that, should her assertion prove true, she is in a time of both physical and emotional stress.  Issues related to reproductive health are very sensitive, and if Jennifer feels she does not want to share private information, she frankly does not have to.  Her case, ultimately, will be decided by a judge, not the Stranger, and not the public.


However, she was eager to confirm her story to me and obtained her discharge summary for my review.  After I once again reminded her that she was under no obligation to show me details of her physical well-being, she disclosed the document to me.

The paperwork she showed me was not a complete medical record.  It was a discharge summary, and it confirmed two facts to me: that she was seen at Harborview after November 15th and that she has indeed suffered what is called a retained miscarriage, meaning that the fetus has yet to be dispelled.  She will be seeking further medical treatment in order to facilitate removal of the fetus from her body.

The discharge summary, however, does not mention the reason for her miscarriage nor the time of death of the fetus.  Frankly, I don't know if that is determinable.

A lot of people have asked me if I believe her story, and now I can say for certain that I do believe two essential key points in her story.  One, she was assaulted by police.  She knows too many details and facts that can be corroborated and has given a statement to the Office of Professional Accountability regarding the incident.  Two, I definitely now have confirmed that she has miscarried since the incident.

While I cannot say for certain that the assault and her miscarriage are related, it is very likely, in my mind, that injuries sustained the night of the 15th could very well cause this tragedy in her life.  In early pregnancy it is extremely believable that a kick and strike from a bicycle to the abdomen could result in the death of a baby.

In the end, we must realize that this story hasn't ended.  There are still facts that need to be confirmed, and we may have to wait until civil litigation is completed before we know those facts.  Fox, on the advice of her lawyer, has stated to me that she does not intend to show her medical information to the press at large.  However, she asked me to report my findings as generated by the discharge summary.  More updates as they come, and as Jennifer and her lawyer decide the best course of action in the development of this controversial and tragic case.

The US Constitution Responds To The Passage Of Detainment Amendment

Ian: Hi Constitution!  How do you feel about this amendment?
Constitution: No sir!  I don't like it!

Upon hearing that the US Senate has approved a defense appropriations amendment authorizing the military to detain American citizens indefinitely, a concerned United States Constitution leaped into the national debate on the issue, stating in no uncertain terms that this amendment is illegal:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

I asked a friend and fellow White House arrestee, Scott Wooledge, how he felt about the matter.

"Scott, does it give you second thoughts about handcuffing yourself to something?"

"If by second thoughts you mean considering doing it a second time, definitely."

 Hmmm.  Scott and Ian no likey.

US Senate Votes To Allow Military To Indefinitely Detain American Citizens

Fuck you, US Senate.

In a move that has many Americans stunned, the US Senate has voted to approve an amendment in the most recent Defense appropriations bill which would allow the military to detain American citizens on US soil indefinitely, a drastic expansion of powers which first were used to hold, without trial, enemy combatants in Afghanistan.

Could this be your new home?

In light of the Obama administration's failure to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility, the White House was quick to denounce the amendment and has threatened veto twice.  I assume the Republican controlled House of Representatives will pass this disgusting piece of legislation, assuring a showdown between the White House and Congress:

The measure, part of the massive National Defense Authorization Act, was also opposed by civil libertarians on the left and right. But 16 Democrats and an independent joined with Republicans to defeatan amendment by Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) that would have killed the provision, voting it down with 61 against, and 37 for it. 

"I'm very, very, concerned about having U.S. citizens sent to Guantanamo Bay for indefinite detention," said Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), one of the Senate's most conservative members.
Rand's top complaint is that a terrorism suspect would get just one hearing where the military could assert that the person is a suspected terrorist -- and then they could be locked up for life, without ever formally being charged. The only safety valve is a waiver from the secretary of defense.

The division of Senators who voted for and against the provision is a bit bewildering, with a sizable Republican contingent (to include Paul) voting against it and a significant bloc of Democrats siding for the amendment, to include Sens. Bob Casey (Pa.), Kent Conrad (N.D.), Kay Hagan (N.C.), Daniel Inouye (Hawaii), Herb Kohl (Wis.), Mary Landrieu (La.), Carl Levin (Mich.), Joe Manchin (W. Va.), Clair McCaskill (Mo.), Robert Menendez (N.J.), Ben Nelson (Neb.), Mark Pryor (Ark.), Jack Reed (R.I.), Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.), Debbie Stabenow (Mich.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.). The White House is staunch in its criticism of the amendment:

This unnecessary, untested, and legally controversial restriction of the President's authority to defend the Nation from terrorist threats would tie the hands of our intelligence and law enforcement professionals. Moreover, applying this military custody requirement to individuals inside the United States, as some Members of Congress have suggested is their intention, would raise serious and unsettled legal questions and would be inconsistent with the fundamental American principle that our military does not patrol our streets. We have spent ten years since September 11, 2001, breaking down the walls between intelligence, military, and law enforcement professionals; Congress should not now rebuild those walls and unnecessarily make the job of preventing terrorist attacks more difficult.

 I'm a bit concerned that the White House didn't include in its statement: "Also, this is unconstitutional and a gross abuse of power."

I know I might be a bit "conspiracy theorist" in supposing that this is a well-timed provision coinciding with nationally coordinated attacks on Occupy Wall Street encampments.  Who knows when some governor is going to decide that OWS protesters are terrorists and calls in the National Guard?  Should Congress overturns the President's veto, will Occupiers run the risk that they will be moved, without justification, to Gitmo?