Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #61   Report Post  
Old 03-06-2003, 08:32 PM
paghat
 
Posts: n/a
Default garden police gone wild?

In article ,
wrote:

"Charlie" wrote:

I've never heard of restrictions on this sort of thing. America really
puzzles me sometimes.


I'm sure other countries have some communities like this. A variety of
planned communities have sprung up over the last 20-30. This is where
a small twon is virtually planned. Everything matches, there are color
schemes. More afluent commuities try to do similar things. Trust me
this only happens in well-to-do areas, often within sometimes gated
communities with clearly defined property limits. People pay to live
in these manicured suburbias. They have commitees that run them. Older
natural neighborhoods don't have such extremes. While town/city
ordances might adopt certain limitations on grass height to avoid
fires it would never apply to city-owned properties especially those
in poorer parts of town since they are the ones the city will allow to
be regularly overgrown with 5 foot high wild grasses and weeds.


These communities began for racist reasons, as when the idea of Civil
Rights for more than just white people got a strong if belated foothold in
America, a few court cases settled certain issues & it became illegal to
discriminate in housing. But a loophole was built into the law, & remains
the Communities regulated by Home Owner Associations CAN define the
age, religion, social status, & race of "appropriate" members permitted to
buy houses within the housing enclave -- & no matter how agregiously
prejudiced, it's perfectly legal, nothing those gawdamn queers & darkies
or whoever's left out can do to stop it, neener neener. The loophole makes
it legal to keep grandparents from letting their kids or grandchildren
move in when a housing community outlaws anyone under the age of 60; it
keeps Jews out of Christian housing districts; it can even be "gated" with
a guard at the front gate to protect middleclass whities from "crime"
which is a code-word for "******s." It makes it legal to be upfront &
openly judgemental about why the mixed-race family is rejected from buying
into the given community, & if they think they should have the right to
sue over discrimination, tough.

If this origin has changed slightly over time, & such enclaves are no
longer fully dominated by the initial purpose to keep racism legal, it is
only different insofar as there are now Chinese housing associations here
in Washington, & lots of them in California wherein only middleclass Latin
Americans are permitted to buy homes. So we're working toward equal
opportunity appartied.

So trying to force people not to paint their house pink or have a
basketball hoop over the garage door or redefining a hunter as inherently
evil BECAUSE he's a hunter & therefore suitably harrassed by Neighbors
United, up to & including anonymous reports to the police that he's a
child molester -- all that is just the tip of an iceberg made of hate,
among unsophisticated surburbanoids for whom "Property Values" is a
scare-word disguising the real purpose, &amp is synonymous with
"Intolerance."

-paghat the ratgirl

--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
-from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers"
See the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl:
http://www.paghat.com/

  #62   Report Post  
Old 03-06-2003, 09:20 PM
Vox Humana
 
Posts: n/a
Default garden police gone wild?


"paghat" wrote in message
news
Communities regulated by Home Owner Associations CAN define the
age, religion, social status, & race of "appropriate" members permitted to
buy houses within the housing enclave -- & no matter how agregiously
prejudiced, it's perfectly legal, nothing those gawdamn queers & darkies
or whoever's left out can do to stop it, neener neener. The loophole makes
it legal to keep grandparents from letting their kids or grandchildren
move in when a housing community outlaws anyone under the age of 60; it
keeps Jews out of Christian housing districts; it can even be "gated" with
a guard at the front gate to protect middleclass whities from "crime"
which is a code-word for "******s." It makes it legal to be upfront &
openly judgemental about why the mixed-race family is rejected from buying
into the given community, & if they think they should have the right to
sue over discrimination, tough.


Most of what your wrote is a complete fabrication. Here is the applicable
federal law. The complete statue can be found at:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/housing/title8.htm
Sec. 804. [42 U.S.C. 3604] Discrimination in sale or rental of housing and
other prohibited practices


As made applicable by section 803 of this title and except as exempted by
sections 803(b) and 807 of this title, it shall be unlawful--

(a) To refuse to sell or rent after the making of a bona fide offer, or to
refuse to negotiate for the sale or rental of, or otherwise make unavailable
or deny, a dwelling to any person because of race, color, religion, sex,
familial status, or national origin.
(b) To discriminate against any person in the terms, conditions, or
privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services
or facilities in connection therewith, because of race, color, religion,
sex, familial status, or national origin.

(c) To make, print, or publish, or cause to be made, printed, or published
any notice, statement, or advertisement, with respect to the sale or rental
of a dwelling that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination
based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national
origin, or an intention to make any such preference, limitation, or
discrimination.

(d) To represent to any person because of race, color, religion, sex,
handicap, familial status, or national origin that any dwelling is not
available for inspection, sale, or rental when such dwelling is in fact so
available.

(e) For profit, to induce or attempt to induce any person to sell or rent
any dwelling by representations regarding the entry or prospective entry
into the neighborhood of a person or persons of a particular race, color,
religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin.

(f)

(1) To discriminate in the sale or rental, or to otherwise make
unavailable or deny, a dwelling to any buyer or renter because of a handicap
of--

(A) that buyer or renter,
(B) a person residing in or intending to reside in that dwelling after
it is so sold, rented, or made available; or

(C) any person associated with that buyer or renter.

(2) To discriminate against any person in the terms, conditions, or
privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services
or facilities in connection with such dwelling, because of a handicap of--


(A) that person; or
(B) a person residing in or intending to reside in that dwelling after
it is so sold, rented, or made available; or

(C) any person associated with that person.

(3) For purposes of this subsection, discrimination includes--


(A) a refusal to permit, at the expense of the handicapped person,
reasonable modifications of existing premises occupied or to be occupied by
such person if such modifications may be necessary to afford such person
full enjoyment of the premises, except that, in the case of a rental, the
landlord may where it is reasonable to do so condition permission for a
modification on the renter agreeing to restore the interior of the premises
to the condition that existed before the modification, reasonable wear and
tear excepted.
(B) a refusal to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies,
practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford
such person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling; or

(C) in connection with the design and construction of covered
multifamily dwellings for first occupancy after the date that is 30 months
after the date of enactment of the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, a
failure to design and construct those dwelling in such a manner that--


(i) the public use and common use portions of such dwellings are
readily accessible to and usable by handicapped persons;
(ii) all the doors designed to allow passage into and within all
premises within such dwellings are sufficiently wide to allow passage by
handicapped persons in wheelchairs; and

(iii) all premises within such dwellings contain the following
features of adaptive design:


(I) an accessible route into and through the dwelling;
(II) light switches, electrical outlets, thermostats, and other
environmental controls in accessible locations;

(III) reinforcements in bathroom walls to allow later installation
of grab bars; and

(IV) usable kitchens and bathrooms such that an individual in a
wheelchair can maneuver about the space.

(4) Compliance with the appropriate requirements of the American
National Standard for buildings and facilities providing accessibility and
usability for physically handicapped people (commonly cited as "ANSI
A117.1") suffices to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (3)(C)(iii).

(5)


(A) If a State or unit of general local government has incorporated
into its laws the requirements set forth in paragraph (3)(C), compliance
with such laws shall be deemed to satisfy the requirements of that
paragraph.
(B) A State or unit of general local government may review and approve
newly constructed covered multifamily dwellings for the purpose of making
determinations as to whether the design and construction requirements of
paragraph (3)(C) are met.

(C) The Secretary shall encourage, but may not require, States and
units of local government to include in their existing procedures for the
review and approval of newly constructed covered multifamily dwellings,
determinations as to whether the design and construction of such dwellings
are consistent with paragraph (3)(C), and shall provide technical assistance
to States and units of local government and other persons to implement the
requirements of paragraph (3)(C).

(D) Nothing in this title shall be construed to require the Secretary
to review or approve the plans, designs or construction of all covered
multifamily dwellings, to determine whether the design and construction of
such dwellings are consistent with the requirements of paragraph 3(C).

(6)


(A) Nothing in paragraph (5) shall be construed to affect the
authority and responsibility of the Secretary or a State or local public
agency certified pursuant to section 810(f)(3) of this Act to receive and
process complaints or otherwise engage in enforcement activities under this
title.
(B) Determinations by a State or a unit of general local government
under paragraphs (5)(A) and (B) shall not be conclusive in enforcement
proceedings under this title.

(7) As used in this subsection, the term "covered multifamily dwellings"
means--


(A) buildings consisting of 4 or more units if such buildings have one
or more elevators; and
(B) ground floor units in other buildings consisting of 4 or more
units.

(8) Nothing in this title shall be construed to invalidate or limit any
law of a State or political subdivision of a State, or other jurisdiction in
which this title shall be effective, that requires dwellings to be designed
and constructed in a manner that affords handicapped persons greater access
than is required by this title.

(9) Nothing in this subsection requires that a dwelling be made
available to an individual whose tenancy would constitute a direct threat to
the health or safety of other individuals or whose tenancy would result in
substantial physical damage to the property of others.

It is legal to establish adult communities. In such cases "Adult" means
senior citizen. No one is required to buy into such a living arrangement.
If you want to have an extended family then don't move to Sun City. It is
legal to refuse to sell to gays. That said, I have never heard of a HOA
that requires that you sell to heterosexuals. If you can cite an instance
where this is true I would be interested in knowing about it. There are a
growing number of jurisdictions that include sexual orientation in their
civil rights laws. I wonder how many people of feel you should be able to
have the fence of your choice also think that gays should be the legal
targets of discrimination?


  #63   Report Post  
Old 03-06-2003, 09:56 PM
Charlie
 
Posts: n/a
Default garden police gone wild?


"paghat" wrote in message
news

I don't like trailer houses myself. I seriously believe even "po' folk"
could be more aesthetic than that & an old wooden shed, a lean-to, or a
teepee could be beautiful in a way a trailer house never can be -- so
being poor isn't excuse enough to trucking in a square tin house &
plopping it down on a fourth of a lot right next door to another
quarter-lot just like it. There are exceptions. I've seen some vintage
trailers that have none of the horror-associations of doublewides & mobile
homes; people make fun of silverstreams that look like toasters, but I
think those are beautiful. You don't see that many. What you see is
rectangle tin boxes & doublewides that just reek of ugly.


I see what a trailer is now - I thought it was a trailer that was towed by a
truck, never realised it was a caravan / mobile home. There has been a
story in the paper over here about something similar recently - a neighbour
didn't like a luxury caravan being parked on someone in his roads driveway.
His solution? Hate mail and then stealing it at night. Bearing in mine
this was middle class England. I can't believe people do stuff like this -
for christs sake, it's so petty.

Charlie.


  #64   Report Post  
Old 03-06-2003, 10:32 PM
Jim Carter
 
Posts: n/a
Default garden police gone wild?

On Tue, 03 Jun 2003 17:27:00 GMT, "Cereoid-UR12yo" wrote
in rec.gardens.edible:

Look in your own back yard before criticizing the country that saved your
up-tight asses in two world wars.


World War I was 1914 - 1918. The United States entered the war in 1917 and did
not save anyone's ass.

World War II was 1939 - 1945. The United States entered the war late in 1941
after Pearl Harbor was attacked. The Battle of Britain had already been fought
and won, by Britain, by the summer of 1941. Hitler had already turned the bulk
of his troops and equipment toward Russia, where he suffered such severe losses
of both men and materials that he might as well have surrendered at that time
(as an aside, this is the same mistake that Napolean made and the same
consequences). The outcome of World War II was already established when the US
entered it; although, US entry greatly expedited the end of the war.

Why is this discussion happening in the gardening groups?
--
Gardening Zones
Canada Zone 5a
United States Zone 3a
Near Ottawa, Ontario
  #65   Report Post  
Old 03-06-2003, 10:56 PM
Jim Carter
 
Posts: n/a
Default garden police gone wild?

On Tue, 3 Jun 2003 19:04:55 +0100, "Charlie"
wrote in rec.gardens.edible:

And don't bring the World Wars into it, this is niether the time or the
place. At least we don't start them.


Sure, bring the World Wars into it. We have nothing to be ashamed of and we had
the strongest ally of all: the English language in the hands of a master.
================================================== ====================
What General Weygand has called the Battle of France is over. The Battle of
Britain is about to begin. Upon this battle depends the survival of Christian
civilization. Upon it depends our own British life, and the long continuity of
our institutions and our Empire. The whole fury and might of the enemy must very
soon be turned on us. Hitler knows that he will have to break us in this Island
or lose the war. If we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free and the life
of the world may move forward into broad, sunlit uplands. But if we fail, then
the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known
and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister,
and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science. Let us
therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that, if the
British Empire and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will still
say, "This was their finest hour."

Winston Churchill
House of Commons, June18th 1940
--
Gardening Zones
Canada Zone 5a
United States Zone 3a
Near Ottawa, Ontario


  #66   Report Post  
Old 03-06-2003, 11:08 PM
Mark Anderson
 
Posts: n/a
Default garden police gone wild?

In article says...
World War II was 1939 - 1945. The United States entered the war late in 1941
after Pearl Harbor was attacked. The Battle of Britain had already been fought
and won, by Britain, by the summer of 1941. Hitler had already turned the bulk
of his troops and equipment toward Russia, where he suffered such severe losses
of both men and materials that he might as well have surrendered at that time
(as an aside, this is the same mistake that Napolean made and the same
consequences). The outcome of World War II was already established when the US
entered it; although, US entry greatly expedited the end of the war.


Read the recent Pulitzer Prize winning book by Rick Atkinson, "An Army at
Dawn," the first of a three book trilogy. The other two haven't been
written yet. The book is about the Africa campaign, the first
involvement of the US in WWII in that hemisphere. According to those
accounts, Britain had zero chance of invading Africa by herself let alone
continental Europe. Even the US with Britain learned a lot and lost a
lot of men through their adventures and mis-adventures in Africa. I'm
only halfway through the book but it's very enlightening.

ObGardening: The book tells a tale about a British Duke somewhere in
Africa admonishing a private for digging a foxhole too near a couple 100
year old olive trees claiming he was killing the tree's roots. Shortly
later, German tanks came through the area blowing the olive trees to
smithereens.



  #67   Report Post  
Old 03-06-2003, 11:56 PM
Starlord
 
Posts: n/a
Default garden police gone wild?

ratgirl, you need to take those blinders off and see what trailer living can be
like. Take my trailer I rent, it's a 2br one bath trailer that had at one time a
expando living room, which was converted into a fix room size. It's also 65ft
long, the max lenght allowed by law. My kitchen is split fromm the living room
by a short wast high shelf.

There are NO beer cans or soda cans or bottles laying around the trailer park.
We;ve got chinese elms growing by the trailers for shade and all the trailers
have swap coolers too, most ontop, mine is side mounted. Plus NONE of the
trailers have roofs that go bang when hot, as they have all be coated with
roofing paint that reflects 90% of the heat/light from the trailers roof.

I'm not going to say that everyone here is real good, we've had to boot out some
too, but there are still those in here that own their trailers too.

I've seen trailer parks where they have trailers that are just as good as any
house and they look just as good too.

As for us trailer people being trailer trash, I've seen enough people in houses
that I would call House Trash.

As it is, for the $350 in rent and the $50 for gas/elect.(park has it's own
water wells), I've not seen a house out here that I could rent for the same
amount.



--
In This Universe The Night was Falling,The Shadows were lenghtening
towards an east that would not know another dawn.
But elsewhere the Stars were still young and the light of morning lingered: and
along the path he once had followed, Man would one day go again.

Arthur C. Clarke "The City & The Stars"

SIAR
www.starlords.org
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Bishop's Car Fund
http://www.bishopcarfund.Netfirms.com/
Starlord's Personal Page
http://starlord-personal.netfirms.com
Freelance Writers Shop
http://www.freelancewrittersshop.netfirms.com


"paghat" wrote in message
news
In article , "Charlie"
wrote:
I don't like trailer houses myself. I seriously believe even "po' folk"
could be more aesthetic than that & an old wooden shed, a lean-to, or a
teepee could be beautiful in a way a trailer house never can be -- so



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.478 / Virus Database: 275 - Release Date: 5/6/03


  #68   Report Post  
Old 03-06-2003, 11:56 PM
Starlord
 
Posts: n/a
Default garden police gone wild?

many of those so called "CLEAN WHITE gated" areas are so full of crime as to be
junkie heavens! Also the top court in the land KILLED that loop hole, it can no
longer be inforced on bases of sex,color,religon, THAT is against Fed. Law.


--
In This Universe The Night was Falling,The Shadows were lenghtening
towards an east that would not know another dawn.
But elsewhere the Stars were still young and the light of morning lingered: and
along the path he once had followed, Man would one day go again.

Arthur C. Clarke "The City & The Stars"

SIAR
www.starlords.org
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Bishop's Car Fund
http://www.bishopcarfund.Netfirms.com/
Starlord's Personal Page
http://starlord-personal.netfirms.com
Freelance Writers Shop
http://www.freelancewrittersshop.netfirms.com


"paghat" wrote in message
news
In article ,
wrote:

"Charlie" wrote:

I've never heard of restrictions on this sort of thing. America really
puzzles me sometimes.


I'm sure other countries have some communities like this. A variety of
planned communities have sprung up over the last 20-30. This is where
a small twon is virtually planned. Everything matches, there are color
schemes. More afluent commuities try to do similar things. Trust me
this only happens in well-to-do areas, often within sometimes gated
communities with clearly defined property limits. People pay to live
in these manicured suburbias. They have commitees that run them. Older
natural neighborhoods don't have such extremes. While town/city
ordances might adopt certain limitations on grass height to avoid
fires it would never apply to city-owned properties especially those
in poorer parts of town since they are the ones the city will allow to
be regularly overgrown with 5 foot high wild grasses and weeds.


These communities began for racist reasons, as when the idea of Civil
Rights for more than just white people got a strong if belated foothold in
America, a few court cases settled certain issues & it became illegal to
discriminate in housing. But a loophole was built into the law, & remains
the Communities regulated by Home Owner Associations CAN define the
age, religion, social status, & race of "appropriate" members permitted to
buy houses within the housing enclave -- & no matter how agregiously
prejudiced, it's perfectly legal, nothing those gawdamn queers & darkies
or whoever's left out can do to stop it, neener neener. The loophole makes
it legal to keep grandparents from letting their kids or grandchildren
move in when a housing community outlaws anyone under the age of 60; it
keeps Jews out of Christian housing districts; it can even be "gated" with
a guard at the front gate to protect middleclass whities from "crime"
which is a code-word for "******s." It makes it legal to be upfront &
openly judgemental about why the mixed-race family is rejected from buying
into the given community, & if they think they should have the right to
sue over discrimination, tough.

If this origin has changed slightly over time, & such enclaves are no
longer fully dominated by the initial purpose to keep racism legal, it is
only different insofar as there are now Chinese housing associations here
in Washington, & lots of them in California wherein only middleclass Latin
Americans are permitted to buy homes. So we're working toward equal
opportunity appartied.

So trying to force people not to paint their house pink or have a
basketball hoop over the garage door or redefining a hunter as inherently
evil BECAUSE he's a hunter & therefore suitably harrassed by Neighbors
United, up to & including anonymous reports to the police that he's a
child molester -- all that is just the tip of an iceberg made of hate,
among unsophisticated surburbanoids for whom "Property Values" is a
scare-word disguising the real purpose, &amp is synonymous with
"Intolerance."

-paghat the ratgirl

--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
-from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers"
See the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl:
http://www.paghat.com/


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.478 / Virus Database: 275 - Release Date: 5/6/03


  #69   Report Post  
Old 04-06-2003, 12:32 AM
paghat
 
Posts: n/a
Default garden police gone wild?


In article , "Vox Humana"
wrote:

"paghat" wrote in message
news
Communities regulated by Home Owner Associations CAN define the
age, religion, social status, & race of "appropriate" members permitted to
buy houses within the housing enclave -- & no matter how agregiously
prejudiced, it's perfectly legal, nothing those gawdamn queers & darkies
or whoever's left out can do to stop it, neener neener. The loophole makes
it legal to keep grandparents from letting their kids or grandchildren
move in when a housing community outlaws anyone under the age of 60; it
keeps Jews out of Christian housing districts; it can even be "gated" with
a guard at the front gate to protect middleclass whities from "crime"
which is a code-word for "******s." It makes it legal to be upfront &
openly judgemental about why the mixed-race family is rejected from buying
into the given community, & if they think they should have the right to
sue over discrimination, tough.


Most of what your wrote is a complete fabrication. Here is the applicable
federal law. The complete statue can be found at:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/housing/title8.htm
Sec. 804. [42 U.S.C. 3604] Discrimination in sale or rental of housing and
other prohibited practices


You're just so dead wrong. The loopholes require first that no government
funds be involved in building these private communities; incorporated
housing enclaves run by Homeowner Associations, cooperative apartment
buildings, just like private clubs, have all been dragged into court
REPEATEDLY, & their right to be bigots has always been upheld. These
communities would not exist otherwise.

Though communities with racist covenants go back to the late 1800s or
earlier, Homeowner Associations really only began to take hold in America
in a major way in the 1960s & early 1970s when there was no longer any
question but that Civil Rights was making it harder for bigots to have
their way, & covenants alone might no longer keep the ******s out.

The founding father of Homeowner Associations was California real estate
tycoon Ole Hanson, a racist of the first water (not the same Ole Hanson
who was Seattle's only fascist mayor early in the last century). Ole
composed charters of incorporation that were pure venom, & assisted by his
bought & paid for congressional connections, saw to the establishment of
laws that made his Whites Only idea of Utopia legal even in the post-Civil
Rights era. His charters & deeds provided that homes within a given
enclave could never (into perpetuity) be sold to any Hindu, Negro, Asian,
or other racial minority. He's THE great hero of the Homeowner
Association movement. He set the model, & that model has never changed.
He's as close to Evil as any Norwegian American ever got, yet he gets to
have a an elementary school named for him, & Richard Nixon was pleased to
live in in Ole's first no-minorities-allowed project.

Over time Ole's overt racism has become submerged; it's not likely that
any Homeowners Association still puts right in their charter "no ******s
need apply" as Ole did, because in 1966 the Supreme Court made racist
covenants illegal (though no one enforced that). The spirit is still
there, & it's still the primary reason such enclaves feel it necessary to
incorporate in the manner of private clubs but with added features of
independent village government. Without the overtly statedly racist
covenants (which were standard from about 1900 to the 1950s) a Homeowners
Association COULD make the specific choice to become an integrated
neighborhood, but the recent example in San Clemente with Ole's original
racist experiment STILL behaving like white upper class variants of
trailer trash Ku Klux Klan members, well, it's clear that the spirit
behind the invention of Homeowners Associations still runs profoundly
deep, & it is NOT a coincidence 99% of them are to this day lilywhite.

Though the Supreme Court theoretically knocked down the overtly racist
covenants in 1966, the covenants somehow managed to remain broadly in
effect until 1999! The first legislation against them in California was
that year, but it didn't actually outlaw racist covenants, rather, it
outlined a method by which homeowners who were NOT racist could ask that
the wording be removed from charters & covenants, & when the Associations
refused (they invariably refused) they could be sued for damages. This is
why the majority of the "harassment" that Homeowners Associations have
been experiencing of late (with either federal or county governments
taking actions against their standard racist policies) have been
post-1998, & nearly all the attempts to change the norm are still being
worked out in long court processes. Another tepid law was sponsored by
Senator George Nakano & got through in 2000 -- though it makes the
CONVENTS illegal (rather than their continuing spirit which is legally
kept active), even that limited illegality takes effect if there is HUD or
other government funding entering the racist enclave. If there is
government funding, even the most outrageous racist covenant is legal
right now (but subject to suit by members thanks to the 1999 legislation).


Most Homeowner Associations don't feel the need to have the strong racist
wording in order to behave the same as ever; they're satisfied to have the
continuing right to be bigots, & who needs HUD anyway.

What California starts, other states follow, & soon the same challenges
were happening in Texas, Florida, etc. Most states don't yet even have
anyone looking at covenants & older charters, let alone at "mere" policies
that "just happen" to work out in a manner that'd please the KKK.

It would be nice if I fabricated all that as you so misguidedly supposed,
but you clearly need to do some REAL research rather than cutting &
pasting an inapplicable law you found too hastily with a google search
without knowing squat beforehand.

For three years now, the Civil Rights Commission on Hate Crimes has been
attempting to get Homeowner Association standard policies defined as Hate
Crimes so they can be prosecuted successfully (since the law you cited
does not apply). So far, the Commission has failed, as in case you haven't
noticed government has tilted back toward ideals of a a pre-Civil Rights
America. But the law does now move in occasionally in the most overt cases
where an "inappropriate" race managed to buy into one of those enclaves &
Association members begin terror campaigns, such as were undertaken by the
Palacio del Mar Homeowners Association in California against one elderly
Malaysian woman.

The Association waged a ten-year campaign against the Malaysian woman -- &
that whole time the Association never had to contend with any other
"inappropriate" races as their "coincidentally" were no other successful
buyers from any minority community. Their tactics against that one woman
included arranging to have streetside watering devices left on 24 hours a
day, aimed up the hillside at the Southeast Asian woman's home, & when
that didn't annoy her sufficiently, they intentionally broke a water main
near her house creating a geyser. The when the sewer pipe mysteriously
broke near her home, the Homeowners Association informed her hell would
freeze over before it would get fixed. After TEN YEARS of the police
refusing to help this elderly Malaysian woman, some good activists got
wind of it & made her a bit of a celebrity, & that's when other immigrants
& also gays & lesbians poured out of the woodwork with their complaints
about legal housing discrimination by Homeowner Associations, & if they
managed to sneak into the housing anyway, the harassments that forced them
out. But one brave old Malaysian gal wasn't going to cave in to it!

Eventually the H.A.'s mischief caused the ground under her house to move &
the house still sits 12 inches off its foundation. All this while, by
night, curse words & the command "MOVE!" were spraypainted on her house --
repeatedly. When on the television news she called the Association a pack
of racketeers, they set their lawyers on her with a baseless but for her
costly civil suit. And so at long last entered the California Attorney
General who attempted to prosecute the gang of attorneys the Association
AS racketeers, since they had indeed been hired to harass the only
non-white family in that lilywhite community by every means they could
drum up. The state attorney general's attempts to find a way to prosecute
hate crime behavior rather than just use Section 804 is because Section
804 does not apply under the laws & methods of establishing a Homeowner
Association run private enclave, which like a private club can be as
racist as it desires to be & be so legally. The commission on Hate Crimes
& the California attorney general wouldn't've had to get "creative"
attempting (unsuccessfully) to stop Homeowners Associations' racism if the
normative antidiscrimination laws applied; but they do not apply.

This is a big Homeowner Association which was historically proud of its
political pull, but by the new millennium they were at long long last
beginning at least to experience some few repercussions for their brand of
legal racism. If there were any non-racists in the whole damned community,
not a one ever came forward to even hint that the decade of harassment to
get rid of the only gook in the neighborhood served no good purpose for
anyone. TO DATE, NOTHING HAS CHANGED except that it is now better known
what Homeowners Association really means. Congressman Inouye said that
public education was necessary, as the law was just not providing the
corrections. So here I am doing what Inouye said to do -- NOT fabricating
as you so wrongly accused, but telling the truth as it stands.

Curiously, now that there ARE all-Latino Homeowner Associations in some of
the nicest areas of California, a few white people have come forward to
fight for change in laws that for the last fifty years have permitted
whites to be as racist as they please if they can orchestrate their
housing districts legally as semi-independent private governments.

There is nothing unique about the extreme & venomous racism of the Palacio
del Mar Homeowners Association. It is standard, & the government has gone
after only the most egregious cases where the policies were either written
into incorporation documents, charters, or covenants, or when the
Associations committed physical hate crimes against persons & property to
get them to leave the Association's territory. If such Associations make
even a moderate effort to keep their heads down while misbehaving, then
whatever their excuse -- that they're a Christian community therefore no
Jews, that they're an Elderly community therefore no women of childbearing
age nor even any grandchildren living in, that they're an Aryan community
therefore none of those really nice black people who if they don't like it
should start their Black Homeowners Association, which would of course be
just as legal, & in in recent years Mexican Americans have taken advantage
of that even if black folk haven't been able to.

Now you might argue (as Homeowner Associations argue) that we should all
have the RIGHT to gang together with people of our own kind & do
everything possible to make sure we don't have to live in integrated
communities. But you, instead, argue that reality doesn't exist. I know
you're smarter than that -- I've read your posts too long to believe
you're really that dumb -- & yet you posted such fantastic nonsense! What
or who ever convinced you of such nonsense?? I hope you'll now question &
look into it seriously, rather than kneejerkedly deny reality.

Obviously many people involve themselves in their Homeowner Association
never thinking about these issues, & may not be individually racist, but
by living in De Nile, & refusing to notice what is going on all around
them, they are High Fivin' participants in an ongoing racist situation.

So now & then the government is pressured to attempt to do something about
it, as in a Houston Homeowner Association lorded over by an intensely
racist conservative named Geneva Brooks. Since a Homeowners Association's
"right" to be bigoted is the reason such Associations exist, the
government couldn't go after her on the basis of housing discrimination.
George Bush when governor had signed a law into effect that permitted
Homeowner Associations to foreclose on houses over missed payments as
small as one penny --the purpose of which was to assist these Associations
in getting rid of Mexicans & Blacks on the thinnest basis. But that
hideous law leapt up to bite the Association itself in the ass, when the
county seat decided to get "clever" in attempting to make it unpleasant to
be a bigot. They began citing Kirk on dozens of minor housing infractions
& dragging her into court on any pretext (much as racketeers end up in
jail for tax evasion when the government couldn't get them on their dozens
of murders & racketeering). Then the county struck out to foreclose on her
home inside the racist housing development, on the basis of unpaid legal
bills & fines, using the same law that was supposed to make it easier for
such Associations to harass unwanted races or religions out of their
enclaves. If section 804 applied to Homeowner Associations, it would not
be necessary to go after these miscreants by such roundabout means.

The majority of Homeowner Associations aren't so overt. They are only
"coincidentally" lilywhite. The middleclass honky rednecks that buy into
such communities NEVER took into consideration the happiness they would
feel if they could be pretty sure they'd never have to live next door to
hymies or gooks or ******s.

Anyone who hasn't heard of retirement housing projects wherein
grandparents signed away any privilege to have a grandchild live with them
for longer than a month has been closing their eyes. Anyone who hasn't
noticed the lack of Jews or Blacks in the majority of these enclaves (or
of whites in the all-Latino housing associations), is playing the See No
Evil Hear No Evil game on themselves.

Case law includes a woman who bought into a "no children allowed"
community who later became pregnant, was informed she had to sell her home
now that she had a child, but WON the resultant court case. This induced
all such enclaves thereafter to discriminate (legally!) against women of
childbearing age so that this wouldn't happen again. Clubs & housing
enclaves that ban anyone they pick out, generally minoritiesm can & do
continue to maintain bigoted policies, & it is not illegal.

There are a few (damned few) Homeowner Associations around the United
States which, knowing their origin, & ashamed of that origin, actively
issue periodic statements that their private communities do not support
the racist desires that birthed these enclaves. Homeowner Associations
should not be confused with Neighborhood Associations which do not have
the same legal standing -- N.A.s tend to be good things though they can be
overzealous about what they consider tidiness, but they're more inclined
to be against racism & for integration than any Homeowners Association
which would not have gone through all the trouble to become an
semi-independent self-governed entity if their primary goal hadn't been to
circumvent certain federal laws that make life better for everyone except
racists.

My own experience with one of these Associations was was when Granny
Artemis & I were home hunting. The Association first turned us down
officially because they did not permit women of childbearing age. We
apparently looked younger than we are. We assured them we had no desire to
become lesbian mothers anyway, as we thought it was a joke. Their eyes got
big & round & they said they didn't permit homosexuals. I was ignorant of
what these Associations meant, but I spoke to an attorney, & was apprised
of the legal reality, they can be as racist as they please, incorporated
communities of that sort CAN ban faggots, dykes, ******s, jews, & anyone
they please. From then on we were careful to find out who our neighbors
were. We found a great place with great neighbors & gays, straights,
blacks, asians, indians, & whites all living happily together, with
several interracial families right here on our block, & I now count myself
lucky those racist munchmonkey Homeowners Association people rejected us
for being dykes. It would've been absolute hell if we'd accidentally ended
up in a Klan-like neighborhood of that sort!

If you want NOT to get caught up in the future claiming people are
"fabricators" when they know a heck of a lot more than you have as yet
bothered to learn, you might look into this a bit deeper. If YOUR
Neighborhood Association has managed to orchestrate a fully integrated
neighborhood, good for them. They'd be the less than one out of a hundred.
But if your neighborhood is lilywhite & the best you can do is cite
Section 804 as proof reality doesn't exist, then shame, shame, shame on
you. What you should do instead of keeping your head in the sand is invite
the NAACP to address your Homeowners Association. They have an active &
polite approach to educating what amounts to White Homeowners
Associations, attempting not to alienate on the off chance that some of
you are good people who just need your hard-won unconsciousness turned
into awakening.

-paghat the ratgirl

--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
-from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers"
See the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl: http://www.paghat.com/
  #70   Report Post  
Old 04-06-2003, 12:44 AM
paghat
 
Posts: n/a
Default garden police gone wild?

In article ,
wrote:

On Tue, 03 Jun 2003 17:27:00 GMT, "Cereoid-UR12yo" wrote
in rec.gardens.edible:

Look in your own back yard before criticizing the country that saved your
up-tight asses in two world wars.


World War I was 1914 - 1918. The United States entered the war in 1917

and did
not save anyone's ass.

World War II was 1939 - 1945. The United States entered the war late in 1941
after Pearl Harbor was attacked. The Battle of Britain had already been

fought
and won, by Britain, by the summer of 1941. Hitler had already turned

the bulk
of his troops and equipment toward Russia, where he suffered such severe

losses
of both men and materials that he might as well have surrendered at that time
(as an aside, this is the same mistake that Napolean made and the same
consequences). The outcome of World War II was already established when

the US
entered it; although, US entry greatly expedited the end of the war.

Why is this discussion happening in the gardening groups?
--
Gardening Zones


Actually, a pretty good argument could be made that without the Patten in
Africa & without the US's hard-won liberation especially of France,
Germany might still have taken Europe down, & most certainly England
couldn't've stopped them. But I'm not up to that particular argument just
now, as I have trouble drumming up much jingoism even where it might
belong.

-paghat the ratgirl

--
"Of what are you afraid, my child?" inquired the kindly teacher.
"Oh, sir! The flowers, they are wild," replied the timid creature.
-from Peter Newell's "Wild Flowers"
See the Garden of Paghat the Ratgirl:
http://www.paghat.com/


  #71   Report Post  
Old 04-06-2003, 01:44 AM
Ann
 
Posts: n/a
Default garden police gone wild?

"Charlie" expounded:

I've never heard of restrictions on this sort of thing. America really
puzzles me sometimes.


Not all of us, Charlie!

--
Ann, Gardening in zone 6a
Just south of Boston, MA
********************************
  #72   Report Post  
Old 04-06-2003, 07:56 AM
Charlie
 
Posts: n/a
Default garden police gone wild?


"Mark Anderson" wrote in message
.net...
Read the recent Pulitzer Prize winning book by Rick Atkinson, "An Army at
Dawn," the first of a three book trilogy. The other two haven't been
written yet. The book is about the Africa campaign, the first
involvement of the US in WWII in that hemisphere. According to those
accounts, Britain had zero chance of invading Africa by herself let alone
continental Europe. Even the US with Britain learned a lot and lost a
lot of men through their adventures and mis-adventures in Africa. I'm
only halfway through the book but it's very enlightening.


Let me guess. Written by an American?

Charlie.


  #73   Report Post  
Old 04-06-2003, 02:44 PM
animaux
 
Posts: n/a
Default garden police gone wild?

On Tue, 03 Jun 2003 17:27:00 GMT, "Cereoid-UR12yo" wrote:

What is you problem, Charlie?

How does her jurisdiction having the ordinance make HER pathetic?

She isn't the one that made the law, you nimrod.

Posting pictures of her neighbors transgressions on the Internet might be
interpreted as harassment by some slick lawyer.

You limies have a lot of room to be poopooing crazy laws. Your country have
far more crazy laws and hundreds of years head start making them over us
poor Yankees.

For example, your country's draconian Cities restrictions have made
importing and exporting plants from your country impossible and has
seriously hurt your country's nursery trade. If that isn't crazy, what is?
Look in your own back yard before criticizing the country that saved your
up-tight asses in two world wars.


Not to mention several years ago there was a This Old House project in the U.K.
If I recall correctly, the facade of the building they were re-designing was
five feet off and the ordinance forced them to tear down the entire thing are
move a whole steel structure five feet back. The U.K. has far more historical
district codes than we could ever dream of.
  #75   Report Post  
Old 04-06-2003, 08:56 PM
[email protected]
 
Posts: n/a
Default garden police gone wild?

there were no rules like this when she moved into an agricultural area. the fences
were barbed wire (which we found posts and remnants of as we put up the fence). in
fact the rules were you HAD to fence in livestock. and all the original inhabitants
of the area (with 2+ acres each) had high fences around their veggie gardens to keep
rabbits and deer out. they did not make provisions for those who were already here
for many years. In effect, they changed the rules (ordinances). They are
increasingly restrictive on what can and cant be done on ones own property whether or
not it can be seen by anybody. So, for example, nobody in the city can put up a
fence around their vegetables to keep the rabbits out. even wood fences must be 50%
open (careful with picket fences cause some of those wont meet specs either). and of
course, the laws are only enforced when somebody turns into a bloody Bitch.

this city has been destroyed by "developers". they had the money to buy themselves
into power and immediately started developing the abundant wetlands. they ran out of
land that passed perk tests, so they forced a sewer system onto everyone in order to
spread the cost so new construction (developers) would get a break. and everyone
pays the same no matter what the situation... elderly on fixed incomes (many had to
sell their homes of 50+ years because they couldnt afford the hookup), small house
with 1 bathroom worth 50K, huge new house with 5 bathrooms at 300K, etc. everyone
paid the same. well except for my mother with her long drive. She had to pay 40,000
to get hooked up. nobody was grand fathered in, like when the house is sold then the
sewer will be attached. the money grubbing politicians completely rewrote the zoning
laws and allowed huge homes to be built on 1/4 acres in swamps on pads. pads are
like when camping one often sees "pads" or high areas where one pitches the tent.
well these homes are built on pads that stick out into the swamps and wetlands. they
filled in other wetlands and built huge business parks... And every kind of strip
mall and chain store is there. It has become such a commercial piece of crap that
all over Wisconsin people fight development citing Brookfield of an example of
development gone totally insane. People who built on land years ago that had good
perk for their own sewers, and were forced onto city sewer have had raw sewage backed
up into their basements for the first time since the houses were built. The city
doesnt pay to have their houses decontaminated. oops. sorry. The roads are flooded
in heavy rains since the water has no where to go from all the in filling and the
acres and acres of concrete. It has become an ugly, horrible city. Of course, now
the mayor and her henchmen the developers are gone on to other places to exploit, and
in 40 years it will be a decaying mess ready for urban renewal. There are already
empty stores from over building.

And there is my mother, a peasant from Yugoslavia who came to this country at 8, went
thru school to become a social worker, who's one abiding passion has been gardening
so they moved to the "country" 60 years ago so she could raise veggies but especially
flowers and make a spot of beauty. And all the neighbors would come to look at
everything flowering and she would give plants to them so they could also make
beauty. But when she was in her 70's we found she had been falling over the little
fences she put up around the flowers to keep the rabbits out (which werent working
anyway) and thought it would be safer to put up a fence around her garden area. Well
the BITCH also made her remove part of this fence too.. never mind she would have to
be standing IN my mothers front yard to see that fence. Thankfully, the city
inspectors have not required we remove the entire fence that abuts other lot lines or
cross our own (oh yes, it is illegal to put up a wire fence ANYWHERE on ones own
property). All we could do to prevent rabbits from coming in along that wild brush
area was plant little pine trees and surround each one with circles of mesh fencing..
which just happen to touch. Because just inside that area my mother has put in a
nature walk with wild flowers under the heavy trees and between the lichen and moss
covered boulders they put there when they built the house.
Rules should make sense. They should have a very damn good purpose and they should
not be applied arbitrarily. If these "laws" were so damn important, so damned
necessary for the "general good" why not fund "fence police" to go around making sure
everyone was in compliance? Why not publish these "very important new laws" so
everyone DOES know about them. Because sure as hell having rules that no one knows
about, that people routinely break or even ignore leads to complete contempt for law.
Ingrid

"Warren" wrote:
Let me see if I get this straight. Ignorance of the law is an excuse? Or
the rules your mother broke weren't in black and white on paper? Or if
the local government doesn't have you sign a piece of paper that you've
read and understand all the applicable rules, laws and ordanences, they
shouldn't apply to you.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
garden police gone wild (revisited)? Mark Edible Gardening 4 08-04-2004 05:03 PM
Re(2): garden police gone wild? Glenna Rose Edible Gardening 2 06-04-2004 09:16 PM
Re(2):garden police gone wild? Glenna Rose Edible Gardening 0 06-04-2004 09:15 PM
Re(2): garden police gone wild? Glenna Rose Edible Gardening 0 06-04-2004 09:14 PM
garden police gone wild? Cereoid-UR12yo Gardening 345 30-03-2004 02:04 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:16 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 GardenBanter.co.uk.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Gardening"

 

Copyright © 2017