Racketeering Law Suits Revisited.
Due to the current traffic to this topic I have brought it to the top of the discussion.
"RACKETEERING LAWSUITS"
21 Comments to date-
I have added links to the RICO lawsuits against the City of St. Paul.
The links are located on the right side of the screen below my profile.
Please take the time to sort through the legal boredom and get to the meat of these stories. It's a sad drama of personal grief suffered by many.
posted by Bob at 11:08 AM on Sep 10 2006
"RACKETEERING LAWSUITS"
21 Comments to date-
I have added links to the RICO lawsuits against the City of St. Paul.
The links are located on the right side of the screen below my profile.
Please take the time to sort through the legal boredom and get to the meat of these stories. It's a sad drama of personal grief suffered by many.
posted by Bob at 11:08 AM on Sep 10 2006
posted by Bob at Friday, September 15, 2006
19 Comments:
Anonymous said...
There would be many more lawsuits if everyone could afford to be represented by an attorney. Also there are people out there that have been so intimidated and threatened by the St.Paul housing officials that they probaly feel they have no rights, would you feel like you have rights of any kind after being kicked out of your own private home with 24 hours to do so? A landlord can't kick someone out even if the tenant doesn't pay the rent and destroys the house. But once again we have no chose but to blame the landlord; why? Because thats what you get for buying property and paying your taxes in St.Paul.
6:27 PM
Anonymous said...
These kind of law suits cost the plaintiffs big money. Anyone have any idea how much has been spent already?
9:52 PM
Anonymous said...
My divorce cost me $20,000.00 for just a few months. Apparantly this has been going on for years. It has to cost a bundle.
10:49 PM
Anonymous said...
I Heard a figure of about 300,000 plus for just the plantiffs so far.I don't know exactly how much the city has spent yet.
10:07 AM
Anonymous said...
THEY DON'T KNOW WHO THEY ARE FIGHTING WITH. THEY WOULD BE MILES AHEAD TO JUST SETTLE THE DAMN THING AND SHUT IT UP WHILE THEY STILL CAN.
3:36 PM
Anonymous said...
When have you ever known the city to admit fault and pay up? They would rather wait to be humiliated completely then pay much,much more in punitive damages. Then they can scratch their heads and say what did we do wrong! Duh!
4:38 PM
Anonymous said...
A fiend of mine was on a jury a few years ago when someone from the fire department sued the city. the city did him worng and originaly, all he wanted was an apology, but no they could not do that so they went to trial. The city was so obviously wrong in just the first day, that they settled it and the guy got his apology and a bunch of money.
And then there was Phil Krinke. The city's housing inspectors screwed with him and they paid a bunch of money out when he sued them. You would think they would learn at some point.
9:33 PM
Anonymous said...
After reading the complaints, I see that they were not subtle in any of their actions. The city just didn't go after a few properties, they went after whole portfolios of many business owners. It doesn't matter that they are separate houses, it was their "business". And they want a jury to decide on this one. Oh I'd love to be a jury on this case. Maybe I will, last time I was called for duty I had family issue and was tossed back into the pot for a later time.
I'm just waiting to see if any more will join the suits as this looks like it could get really ugly. I'm sure most of the detective/leg work, as I'll name it, will have been done now and the cost to pursue this thing will have gone down in retainer fees.
This is something to watch and has the potential to really heat up.
8:19 AM
Anonymous said...
You bet it's going to heat up. How come we don't have the other RICO suits posted here?
8:59 AM
Bob said...
Hi All,
I posted a invitation at SPIF. Don't count on any of them commenting here. The regular posters of SPIF like the security of the class room. It's a little rough out here on the playground. :-)
I know some would like more opposition. When I pass out invitations October thru December I don't think you will get much opposition then either. Tough to find people in bed with the City in the general population.
10:07 AM
Mad hatter said...
It seems like we live in an age when if someone wants some quick cash they just sue.
Personally I don't think you's will get a dime.
What are you going to tell the judge, your honor I had a dope house rental and the City took it away from me and the neighborhood is now a nice place and the neighbors like it there now.
10:42 PM
Anonymous said...
Nope, I think they will tell the judge they had a dope house rental and the city took it away and the way they did it violated their civil rights.
1:03 AM
Anonymous said...
Hatter's got it wrong. It will be the city telling the judge that they took away the dope house rental and the neighbors like it fine.....and then they'll see if the jury shares your opinions Hatter.
9:55 AM
Anonymous said...
And that the cops and courts don't keep the dealers off the streets. Remember the brilliance of "every one deserves a roof over their head, either it's a house or jail". And that landlord's have the right to conduct their business is a reasonably safe environment just as any one else has. And that the city isn't doing their job keeping the dealers locked up so that they don't corrupt the single mom out their with kids looking for companionship, and let's the guy, who should be in jail for previous offenses, crash at her place and then start up his so-called business again and in which case she agrees because it's slim pickins out there, just look at the crud who keeps posting here with all his blarney sailor talk "you's won't get a dime" I bet he even has a cackle to his voice in doing this. But all the auditions are over and you're nobody's idol, so get a clue.
10:44 AM
Anonymous said...
I happen to know 2 of the people in those lawsuits and I have seen the evidence. I think you are misquoting the thing about these guys not getting a dime. I think when the jury speaks, the city is not going to have dime left.
11:43 AM
Dave T. said...
I read the lawsuits in the Watchdog newspaper-- Now I have something to line my catbox with. This is good humor. I personally know most of these inspectors. They are stand up guys, they would never do what these stories say they did. I bet if you check each and every inspectors background, they aren't slobs like you slum lords are! Besides, they are not allowed to own investment properties in St Paul if they are inspectors.
9:18 PM
andrew said...
These are not real lawsuits. The inspectors were just doing what they were told to do. How can they be sued for doing their job. The city should be indemnified against things like this. Who has been hurt in this? Only the wealthy landlords!!! Lets focus on lowering property taxes or something that someone cares about.
9:27 PM
Anonymous said...
Andrew, Andrew, Andrew.
9:28 PM
Jim/St Paul said...
Kudos Anonymous! Is Andrew for real??? WoW if he is!!
9:29 PM
Anonymous said...
I got some news for ya Dave T. If you really believe the things you are saying, you are a fool. A lot of the inspectors are stand up guys, but some are not, and some of those inspectors not only did do the things that you read in the lawsuits, they also did some things that are not in the lawsuits and when it finally comes out, I think you are going to be pretty suprised. You just keep on talking buddy. They need the morale boost downtown.
11:32 PM
Anonymous said...
As for you Andrew my boy....I cannot believe someone could be as ignorant as you appear to be. Do you have to be work real hard at being this stupid or does it jsut kinda come naturally fro you?
By taking the position you have, you are gambling with your property tax that you are right.
Have you ever wondered just for a minute about "what if" you are wrong?
Your correct with your thought that "the city should be idemnified against things like this" and when it is all over they are going to wish they were.....so will you because you are going to be paying the bill when all those so called wealthy landlords get lot wealthier.
The fact that the inspectors were just doing their jobs means nothing as far as protecting them goes. You cannot just go and do what someone tells you to do and then have immunity afterwards.
When you talk about "focusing on lowering property taxes or something that someone cares about" I think you and your brain dead friends should be focusing on how you can prevent your prperty taxes from going up any more than they have to. Maybe you should be downtown asking why the city is continuing to carry out the same actions day after day that got them sued in the first place. Every day the city comes to work, they are creating another pool of potential litigants down the road, and when the city finally loses in court, the people wanting to sue will comming out of the woodwork and there will be a ton of lawyers willing to represent them for free because they will then know that it is easy money.
And finally, your remark and the flavor it was in about only the wealthy landlords have been hurt kind of makes me wonder if you have a problem with people that have worked hard, been sucessfull and have something to show for it. Is that a problem with you or is it just landlords in general that you think don't deserve to have the same rights as everyne else?
11:55 PM
WHERE ARE YOU MAD HATTER?
I have been waiting for you.
signed
Score Keeper
If you think its only the wealthy landlords that have been cause damage by these city officials, think again. There have been many innocent families torn apart and displaced because of the acts of some out of control, greedy inspectors working together with there friends to snatch up properties. Enjoy it while you can because when you get greedy as some officials and associates have done guess what, you get caught. You know what happens next? You pay the consequences. So you can keep trying to justify what the city is doing or get a reality check. Where do you think the city will get the money to pay restitution for all theses cases? The good ol taxpayers is my guess.
Nancy (formerly of St.Paul)
The city had a private contracter copy discovery evidence. The copies for the suits filled a pick up truck. At 50 cents a copy that comes to a big bundle of money the tax payers already dibbied up.
GOOD JOB BOB!!!! If you had to tell everyone where you lived, your name, email address and had all the information verified, how much confidence would you have in giving your honest opinion on anything being discussed? I'd say being anonymous is just way to be using this board. otherwise, you get the same boring and oppresive postings as Edem.
I find it rather ironic that those who opposed or who had a really big problem with this board going anonymous, are the same one's who post here under the anonymous shield and who are in opposition of most regular posters here.
Most people don't care what you do and realize that you have rights to be anonymous, live, have a roof over your head, create wealth through real estate, breath, speak out, sue over corruption, etc. Those that don't are the same one's that let the government run their lives without ever questioning anything except the one's who speak out and demand their American rights.
By being anonymous, the truth is speaking loud and clear. As someone here posted not to long ago, they felt like they didn't dare say anything to controversial or voice their opposition of the city.
I don't see any of they that oppose taking any of the contents of the suits and disecting them or examining any contents therein to their advantage. I don't see any of them arguing over any of the evidence, practices or conduct of any of the inspectors. All that is said is that they are doing their job. That's a nice safety net. But the net has a big gapping hole in it and the bottom is about to fall out.
Bob, there's no turning back now. This site is big and is going to get bigger, more controversial and filled with taboo sujects that others don't dare touch for fear of retaliation.
Hey, Nancy. How did it feel looking into the eyes of such an evil person? How did you live day-to-day knowing that this person, Magner, is going to be in your life, for some amount of time anyway, making your life a living hell? I believe God was watching out for you. You have battle wounds but yet you won the war. You may have lost your home, but you haven't lost your human decency. How anyone can say that they city told them to do this is inconceivable.
Hi All,
I have read all the RICO suits. They are lenghty and some of it is boring legal stuff.
Does anyone have a summary of the suits they can email me? I believe more people would take the time to read a summary.
If nobody has a summary I may take the time to produce one. Big job since it takes about 6 hours to read all the suits.
Our maybe I could get help with writing summaries. Anyone interested in this idea please contact me.
Hi Bob, here is some meat to feast your teeth into. It may be a bit long but it is not boring:
2nd City of Saint Paul RICO Lawsuit
42. The City’s March 2002 Report outlined the City’s prior experience with “problem
properties”. In 2000, the City launched an initiative called “Problem Properties 2000”
Since the selection criteria were unknown
and undocumented, there could be no basis for challenge” and that although “code enforcement
officials consistently denied they were “targeting” selected owners, the fact they were selectively
targeted “seemed obvious.”
70. The new rules provided that once the Defendants initially targeted one of a
landlords properties with their discriminatory and retaliatory policy, custom and practice, the
Defendants were authorized to retaliate against all of that landlord’s properties.
'Case studied and summarized for ease of reading:'
116. Plaintiff Brisson owned his duplex located at 297 Burgess Street and lived in the
upper floor unit of this home. He had purchased the duplex on a contract for deed. Brisson
desired to rent the lower unit to help pay the contract.117. Brisson’s prospective tenant was disabled, receiving Social Security Disability
payments and was eligible to receive Section 8 housing assistance from the PI-IA.
118. As part of the prospective tenant’s application to rent from Brisson and receive
33.public assistance, housing inspectors from PHA completed a Section 8 inspection of Brisson’s
duplex on April 3,2003. The inspectors determined that four items needed correction and
attention and Brisson immediately made the repairs.
119. On April 14,2003, PHA inspectors reinspected Brisson’s duplex and issued
approval to Brisson under Section 8. The disabled tenant immediately moved in.
120. Thereafter, Dawkins, Martin and Koehnen began harassing Brisson with claimed
housing code vioIations and criminal housing citations related to his duplex. Brisson was in the
process of renovating his duplex which included repairing certain portions of the roof that had
been damaged by squirrels. As part of the renovation, debris collected on the ground. In the
summer of 2003, Defendant Martin issued Brisson two criminal citations for claimed roof, paint
and trash code violations.
121. Brisson had been a victim of identity theft and an unauthorized person ran up
electric bills in his name with the utility company. As a result, the electricity to Brisson’s
upstairs unit was suspended. However, the power was still connected and available in the lower
unit that Brisson’s disabled tenant occupied.
122. When Dawkins and Martin learned of the electricity suspension, Martin and
Dawkins prepared a written Notice of Condemnation and Order to Vacate dated July 15,2003, of
Brisson’s entire duplex, claiming the home as “Unfit For Human Habitation” and forwarded the
Notice and Order to Brisson through the mail.
3 4.123. The written Notice stated that the condemnation was based upon a “principal
violation” of “Lack of Electricity” in the home and that this condition constituted a “material
endangerment”. This ,was false as there was electricity to the lower unit.124. In the July 15,2003, Notice of Condemnation, Martin and Dawkins .also cited
eleven items that they stated were code violations on the exterior of Brisson’s home. They
falsely stated in their written order that the windows and screens were missing, defective or in a
state of disrepair. The windows and screens were on the home and were in fine shape except that
Brisson still needed to add window casing trim to the newly installed windows. Martin and
Dawkins also falsely stated that there were missing or defective handrails and guardrails. In fact,
only one handrail/gardrail was temporarily detached to allow building materials to be brought
into the home for improvements.
125. As a result of the wrongful condemnation of both the upper and lower units of
Brisson’s duplex, Brisson and his disabled tenant were forced from their homes.
126. Brisson filed a legislative appeal of this Condemnation Order with the City. The
City legislative hearing officer, and later the City Council, denied his appeal.
127. On August 7,2003, Martin again inspected Brisson’s home. On August 12; 2003,
Dawkins and Martin prepared and issued a Revised Notice of Condemnation that again listed the
“Lack of Electricity” and eleven other violations listed on the July 15,2003, Notice of
Condemnation. Again, Dawkins and Martin forwarded this written Notice and Order to Brisson
3 5.by mail.
128. Martin and Dawkins also listed on the Revised Notice twelve additional interior
code violations claimed to have been discovered during Martin’s interior inspection on August 7,
2003. The Revised Notice included a total of 24 items and stated that due to the amount of
violations, Code Enforcement required a Code Compliance Certificate before the condemnation
was lifted.
129. Many of the items listed by Martin and Dawkins as violations on the August 12,
2003, Revised Notice of Condemnation were false. They falsely listed the lack of electricity to
the building when in fact only the upstairs unit was disconnected. Martin and Dawkins falsely
stated that the home was “Lacking deadbolt door locks” on entry doors. Every entry door did
have deadbolt locks at the time of Martin’s inspection and at ah times before and after that
134. Through Martin’s and Dawkins’ illegal condemnation of Brisson’s entire home,
they were able to deny Brisson the rental income he needed from his tenant. to pay contract for
deed payments and repairs and to maintain his investment in his property.
135. After Brisson received the August 12,2003, Notice of Condemnation he filed another legislative appeal with,the City. On. August 26,2003, Brisson attended the legislative
i appeal hearing. Brisson informed the hearing officer that his home had passed -a PHA Section 8
inspection just months before the harassment inspections by Martin and Dawkins, and Brisson
described to the hearing officer the true condition of his duplex. The hearing offrcer issued a
decision in Brisson’s favor and reversed the condemnation on his duplex. One of the City’s
inspectors present at the hearing stated that Brisson really did not need a “code compliance” on
his home.
139. Early in the morning of October 9,2003, law enforcement officers, without
announcing their presence or authority in violation of the express terms of the search warrant,
suddenly broke down Brisson’s door with a battering ram and immediately shot Brisson and his
dogs with a tire extinguisher. Brisson,had been asleep immediately before the raid. Brisson was
informed by law enforcement offricers that he was being arrested for two outstanding housing
court warrants that had been issued by Martin in June and July 2003. Brisson was arrested and
held in jail for a day and a half, and then released from custody. He was not charged with any
crime related to the warrant.
140. Upon Brisson’s release from custody and return to his home, he discovered that
on October 9,2003, the day law enforcement officers had raided and destroyed his home, City
inspectors had inspected his upstairs unit. Brisson discovered that the law enforcement officers
had broken his entry door and had also tom out all of Brisson’s smoke detectors in his upstairs
unit; the detectors were still there, but were hanging by their wires from the ceiling. The officers
had also punched large holes in Brisson’s walls, damaged the unit’s plumbing, damaged
Brisson’s furniture and thrown furniture all around the unit, and caused other damage to the unit.
141. At no time was Brisson involved with illegal drug manufacturing that would
give the government any reason to suspect him and provide probable cause to obtain a search
warrant to raid Brisson’s home. Brisson was not arrested for illegal drugs, nor charged for drug
39.possession or illegal drug manufacturing.
'Okay this is just one thing that happened to one person, and he only owned the one house. There are many other cases out there of people who have worked their rears off to own a nicely stocked port-folio of houses that consisted of their business and they have been ruined financially.'
So the cops are in on this too?
WOW! That story brings me flash backs of the same type of treatment I received from the wonderful city of St.Paul!
Another noteable case to summarized should include the Steinhauser case as this involved----
"The new rules provided that once the Defendants initially targeted one of a
landlords properties with their discriminatory and retaliatory policy, custom and practice, the
Defendants were authorized to retaliate against all of that landlord’s properties."--------
That case also involved the "tenant remdey action" that Dawkins pridefully boasted upon in Duluth.
If I recall, Duluth decided not to use the method St.Paul is using because they feared that they would be held liable in lawsuits if they did. Duluth recognizes the fact that citizens do have rights to the privacy of their own home, not to be victimized by the city officals. Its bad enough when you have citizens being victimized by street crime, then you have to fear for the city officials and the crimes they are committing.
In Fear of St.Paul
For all of you that think that throwing all these people out of homes and closing them up instead of deal with the real problem, you may be interested to know that a good many of these people go to shelters where Ramsey County pays about $30.00 per day per person in the family for them to stay there. In other words, that's $30.00 per day per person out of your property taxes, and the shelters are full ALL OF THE TIME. When the shelters are full, then they start housing them in hotels at the taxpayers expense and you guys thik you are getting a good deal and effective control! Some of the SPIF'ers have even admitted knowing of the city's tactics and justifying them because it is more cost effective, but how cost effective is it really when you factor in all the things the average taxpayer does not know about?
I read the report you mention about problem properties. What your readers may be intersted in is page 2 of that report. This is what the city of St. Paul thinks of the people's comstitutional rights, and I quote from page 2 in the 2nd paragraph:
"These safegaurds, (refering to safegaurds that circumscribe how and when government power may be used agaist its citizens) such as due process of law, create unintended consequences and give vioaltors an opportunity to evade or avoid government sanctions."
Isn't it interesting to see in their own words words what the City Council of St. Paul thinks of its citizens constitutional rights...a mere unintended consequence!
11:50 It's obvious they feel they are doing whats right. How can they live wit themselves knowing how this effects families and investors in St. paul. Do they have emotional switchs they can just turn off at will.
Hello Steve Magner, city of st. paul building inspector and defendant named in the above-mentioned lawsuits. Hello, Lisa Martin, city of st.paul building code inspector and defendant named in the above-mentioned lawsuits.
Do your neighbors know what kind of people YOU are?
Morally speaking here, let's count: lying, stealing, hatred, false witnessing, cheating, inhuman treatment to your fellow man, etc.
We the jury find the above defendants GUILTY!!!!
This is not a local problem. It all started with the 'broken windows" theorey of 'law ' enforcement coming out of Harvard in the '70's, which was based upon an Italian designer who got a contract to maintain bus stops in NYC.
Upon the drop in Federal income federal funds to the cities began to dry up, that and cities' increasing corruption as college gratuates felt entitled to fat wallets, caused cash shortages. (
And then others immitated those who appeared to have higher status , cf Toynbee and mimesis, the decline of civilizations. )
At one time there was a finely balanced system that would allow for private poker games etc, as long as no one complained, as long as there was no ruckus, law enforcement respected the privacy of individuals. The drug wars made major inroads on the right to private enjoyment and broken widows convergence has created a situation where law enforcement pushed it's efforts right up to the line of constitutionality, and then stepped over it. Agencies were 'captured' by powerful constituancies. Now we have Bush's flat out flouting of USA values and the Constitution. Where will it end ? For a start with the Constitution shattered; the social contract will fail and citizens will abandon the social contract that has been broken so foolishly by the government and our myopic Sally Twoshoes, the brown nosers, yes men.
In response the gov wil step up it's powers and number of ENFORCERS ( a Mob term most apt to the bully boys ). Not every human is tempermentally or socially suited to brown nosing and the brown nosers, noting their own shallow cowerdice will loathe those who are not of the same disposition. Society will fail, the USA will fail as a society of law, raw power will be the operative principle. Magna Carta, gone; habeas corpus , gone ( and Reaguns Iran Contra is exactly the same as king James I end run around Parlement's sole discretion in raising revenue... the cause of the English civil war which had such an impact upon the foundation of the USA )
The Republican party has been corrupted by elements from the once slave society of the South who have a lust for high unemployment and serfdom. Remember the issues of the Spanish civil war, the GOD people against the Cattle people.
Z Code enforcement is in a unique position. If I do something you might judge as wrong in Your house, in public, on corp property the situation is one of conflict of will, but when I retreat from the evils of the world to my HOME, there should be no invasion unless I am doing something that is potentially or actually Seriously harmful to someone else, ; and the state should have to Prove that I am so doing. Those who value a pretty lawn over my rights are amoung the most contemptable frauds the poser's of humanity, they are ignorant wastlings who lack the courage to be other than conformists, they destroy man.
ANd mostly, they poeple under attack Would love pretty houses. respectable work or would otherwise conform to get along. Mostly they don't because they are poor or ill, ie Easy Pickins.
If you want them to 'beautify your neighborhoos' then Help them! Fer Christ sakes don't Destroy their lives, their children will rightfully avenge them upon the country.
This is a National Problem and should be addressed as such, the word should go forth and people should organise! Nationally! Else the Boston Tea Party and the USA revolution are Meaningless vanities.
Don't just sit there and go tit tit, tut tut. Get it together even you lazy over paid workers at immoral jobs and professions; Mere Hirelings with no real morality, opportunists, lickspittle. There has always been corruption in the USA as in all rapidly developing countries ( take the money and run ), but you 'ain't seen nothing yet'. Americans ? more like crawling snakes. Despicable. Don't ask 'why' you are assaulted. ask 'Why Not'
This is not a local problem. It all started with the 'broken windows" theorey of 'law ' enforcement coming out of Harvard in the '70's, which was based upon an Italian designer who got a contract to maintain bus stops in NYC.
Upon the drop in Federal income federal funds to the cities began to dry up, that and cities' increasing corruption as college gratuates felt entitled to fat wallets, caused cash shortages. (
And then others immitated those who appeared to have higher status , cf Toynbee and mimesis, the decline of civilizations. )
At one time there was a finely balanced system that would allow for private poker games etc, as long as no one complained, as long as there was no ruckus, law enforcement respected the privacy of individuals. The drug wars made major inroads on the right to private enjoyment and broken widows convergence has created a situation where law enforcement pushed it's efforts right up to the line of constitutionality, and then stepped over it. Agencies were 'captured' by powerful constituancies. Now we have Bush's flat out flouting of USA values and the Constitution. Where will it end ? For a start with the Constitution shattered; the social contract will fail and citizens will abandon the social contract that has been broken so foolishly by the government and our myopic Sally Twoshoes, the brown nosers, yes men.
In response the gov wil step up it's powers and number of ENFORCERS ( a Mob term most apt to the bully boys ). Not every human is tempermentally or socially suited to brown nosing and the brown nosers, noting their own shallow cowerdice will loathe those who are not of the same disposition. Society will fail, the USA will fail as a society of law, raw power will be the operative principle. Magna Carta, gone; habeas corpus , gone ( and Reaguns Iran Contra is exactly the same as king James I end run around Parlement's sole discretion in raising revenue... the cause of the English civil war which had such an impact upon the foundation of the USA )
The Republican party has been corrupted by elements from the once slave society of the South who have a lust for high unemployment and serfdom. Remember the issues of the Spanish civil war, the GOD people against the Cattle people.
Z Code enforcement is in a unique position. If I do something you might judge as wrong in Your house, in public, on corp property the situation is one of conflict of will, but when I retreat from the evils of the world to my HOME, there should be no invasion unless I am doing something that is potentially or actually Seriously harmful to someone else, ; and the state should have to Prove that I am so doing. Those who value a pretty lawn over my rights are amoung the most contemptable frauds the poser's of humanity, they are ignorant wastlings who lack the courage to be other than conformists, they destroy man.
ANd mostly, they poeple under attack Would love pretty houses. respectable work or would otherwise conform to get along. Mostly they don't because they are poor or ill, ie Easy Pickins.
If you want them to 'beautify your neighborhoos' then Help them! Fer Christ sakes don't Destroy their lives, their children will rightfully avenge them upon the country.
This is a National Problem and should be addressed as such, the word should go forth and people should organise! Nationally! Else the Boston Tea Party and the USA revolution are Meaningless vanities.
Don't just sit there and go tit tit, tut tut. Get it together even you lazy over paid workers at immoral jobs and professions; Mere Hirelings with no real morality, opportunists, lickspittle. There has always been corruption in the USA as in all rapidly developing countries ( take the money and run ), but you 'ain't seen nothing yet'. Americans ? more like crawling snakes. Despicable. Don't ask 'why' you are assaulted. ask 'Why Not'
Post a Comment
<< Home