Not perfect, but at least justice will be served

A lot of people are fuming at the President and the Attorney General that the conspirators and planners of the September 11, 2001 attacks, including Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, are being tried in New York City as if they were mere criminals who forgot to pay their parking tickets.  Bill O'Reilly suggests that these terrorists will not be on trial, but the methods of getting information through coercive means.  In other words, trying these terrorists in a federal court will paint a gigantic bullseye on New York and invite more terror attacks, etc.

I honestly don't think so.  It's not perfect what President Obama and Attorney General Holder are doing, and quite frankly the less media coverage these terrorists get, the better, but I have the feeling the justice meted out by the judges will be equal to that proferred by a military tribunal.  KSM and others have admitted as much and are awaiting death - the twisted reward they've been waiting for.
 I also have the feeling KSM and others will be shocked and dismayed on how we actually mete out justice.  It's doesn't have the imprimatur of Allah, and executions aren't carried out immediately.  Even by admitting guilt, the punishment doesn't include cutting off body parts, shooting your female relatives for infidelities, or stoning your enemies for being in the wrong tribe.

Twelve people - including women - will debate their fate.  The vagaries of hard-line Islam, which treat women as lower than animals, will be destroyed as it could be that one singular woman who decides to send you to your death - something that should shake KSH and his friends to the very core.

Even if they are acquitted - probability as close to zero as possible - they will likely not receive the fame and adulation as other politically-minded criminals have received.  KSH will never be Mumia Abu Jamal or a Joanne Chesmiard - he'll be a nobody that fades off the screen as soon as the cameras turn off.

If the jurors choose to send them to jail, it certainly won't be the same as Gitmo - it will be far tougher.  Their home will be a maximum security federal prison, in solitary confinement 24 hours a day, with no contact with the outside world, no fresh air lest one hour per day for exercise, and no mixing with the general population.  If their sentences are life in prison, it will certainly deny them the immediate death they desire.  They will rot there until their natural deaths, not at the end of a shotgun, a rock, or an IV bag.  The federal prisons won't be as politically correct or accomodating as Gitmo was, and after a few days the terrorists will wish they never left Gitmo.

The flip side to this will be that our own criminal justice system will be on trial.  For many years, victims of crimes have railed against the courts' leniency, letting hardened criminals walk on technicalities and "no snitching" laws.  Others have complained that the laws jail the innocent on hearsay, trumped up evidence, and other things so the accused don't get a fair trial.  The impetus behind putting terrorists on trial in a regular court and its appropriate stage in determining guilt or innocence comes from fear that, if the terrorists were put into a military tribunal, they would not get the benefit of a trial by an American jury.  The impetus against putting terrorists on trial in a regular court is the fear that, if the terrorists are declared not guilty, it would send a strong signal to other terrorists that not only are the Americans weak in fighting, they're weak in defending themselves in their own courts, and any terrorist can commit Armageddon without consequence.

So how will this experiment work out?

It will be an ultimate success, if there are fair-minded judges who want to see justice served; if there are jurors who, even if they had family killed or injured in the 9/11 attacks to give the terrorists justice through lengthy jail terms or death, or the media trades the rank infotainment level to zero and simply reports the proceedings.  End result: terrorists would rather face a military tribunal than an American judge (ironically a female Jewish judge), an American jury, and reside in an American jail for committing or planning attacks on American soil.

If there are ultra-liberal judges with an axe to grind with previous policy, or wish to make a self-righteous statement and release the terrorists; if there are jurors with feverish conspiracy theories that 9/11 was executed by the government or other foreign agencies; or if a ratings-and-exploitation thirsty media begs questions more than Fagin, then this won't merely be a failure - it will be a very dangerous failure, with the potential for even more and far bolder and destructive terror attacks on American soil.  Those who persisted on criminal trials will regret their decision, and demand the government make no hesitation to place these terrorists in military tribunals in the future.

City Council to yuppies: you'll hear cannon blasts and like it

For once, the City Councillors do something right: they tell the Charlestown condo yuppies to get used to tradtion.  Snobbery doesn't pay, folks!

Treating the "silent addiction" doesn't necessarily have to come from the government

I play the lottery frequently, but I don't go crazy buying $100 worth of tickets at a time.  I usually buy the $1 and $2 scratch tickets, maybe with a smattering of $5 and $10 tickets if I win more than $20 and the occasional $20 ticket if I win more than $50. 

I know it's a voluntary tax, and people have said "the lottery is a tax on the stupid."  If the Lottery ever put the real odds of a scratch ticket at 1 in 45 (which takes into account all of the prize values, not the combination of prize values), and/or they ever cut the amount they pay out to winners from 68-85% down to a more realistic 51-60%, and/or they put on the back of the tickets the amount of taxes you will be due upon surrender of the ticket, the players who compulsively do so now won't be deterred.  The more casual and educated ones, though, will stop immediately. 

The Herald's article on slashing the The Massachusetts Council on Compulsive Gambling budget from $1 million to $500,000 details some of the stories hard-core addicts have gone through before giving it up once and for all.

One of the gamblers who went to Gamblers Anonymous has the truth:

“There are hundreds of thousands people in this state[...]who are completely lost to the habit[...] I see them in convenience stories, scratching tickets, and these people are gone. Very few are in control. They’re not going for $50 or $100. The gambler is saying, ‘There may be a million in there and it’ll change my life.’ It’s possible, but it’s stupid and it’s not likely.”

Who else is addicted?  The State Legislature, who could use a few trips to Government Overspenders Anonymous to quell their desire for lottery revenues.  And the funny thing is: if you lose on any ticket, no matter what the price, the tax rate is 100% - so it's true that if you're not aware of the implications of the lottery, then the lottery is a math tax, and that's before the regular taxes kick in!

The "silent addiction" sometimes doesn't need government intervention.  Gambler's Anonymous does a great job with that side of the equation for free, and can help people out immensely, even if they're occasional players who think $10 here and there isn't a bad idea.  For some people, that $10 quickly became their entire paycheck, a few robberies, and then their lives.

Educating players about the taxes they would pay would be a great start, or at least a way for people not to overgamble.

(Side story: I went to Maine last Friday and they have cigarette prices that are far cheaper than what Massachusetts sells - on the surface.  A pack of economy cigarettes was $3.79; Maine's tax on cigarettes, however, is $2.00, plus the federal tax of $1.01 brings each pack to $3.01.  This makes the combined state and federal tax rate an eye-popping 79.4% - and the name brand cigarettes which were $5.25 have a tax rate of 57.3%.  Maine's highest income tax bracket (which kicks in at $20,000) is 8.5% - meaning buying economy cigarettes brings in 9.3 times the revenue through the combined state and federal tax rate as the income tax - but in 2010 this will be changed to two levels - 6.5% under $250,000 and 6.85% over $250,000, which would mean cigarettes would then bring in 11.5 to 12.2 times the revenue over the income tax.  More information from the Tax Foundation here.

A cheap pack of cigarettes in Massachusetts goes for $6, but even with our total tax of $3.52, that's 58.7% in tax - much lower than Maine, but compared to our tax rate of 5.3 to 5.85%, the cigarette tax brings in 10-11 times the revenue versus the income tax.)

CF Donovans is no more...

The CF Donovan's over in Savin Hill shuttered its doors forever, which means the Hyde Park store will never open as a CF Donovans.

Hyde Park could use a good family restaurant, in between the price range of McDonald's down the street and Townsend's over on Fairmount Avenue.  Doesn't necessarily have to be a chain restaurant; doesn't have to be way-out-there ethnic either.

Why not a Bazaar?

Parents and children of Chelmsford - here's how you solve your problem on the Grinches Who Stole Your Holiday Gift Store: in the 1970's-1980's, Most Precious Blood School had a Christmas Bazaar, run by the St. Raphael's Guild.  Sure, it was geared towards Christmas (it was a Catholic school), but it was still a lot of fun.

The principal either has a problem with religion or feels the holidays are a distraction to her students.  If the latter, the "gift store" can easily be postponed to later in the year (or perhaps made into a "gift exchange," where students who didn't like their Christmas presents can exchange them).  If the former, changing the name to "bazaar" will help in two ways: it sounds mystical and fun, and no one notices the difference between religions.  Call it the "End of the Year Bazaar" and not only do you have happy kids, you fake out the parents who have too much time on their hands!

UBurger is all right...

On my way to the New Balance Factory Outlet in Brighton, I swung by the UBurger restaurant in Kenmore Square.  (Sometimes I take Route 64 from Central Square because it drops you right off at the Outlet, but on Sundays the buses run every hour.  I took the Route 57 bus to North Beacon Street and walked up to Life St, which is a ten minute walk.)

It was slightly busy as a lot of the BU students got up from their slumber and decided to have lunch. UBurger feels like a cafeteria, but it's run by people whose only interest is making good food, not to make the district manager happy.  (Unlike McDonalds, where you feel you're going to either get piping hot food and great service or lukewarm leftovers and "hey, I'm just here to collect a paycheck" service)

I ordered a hamburger with red peppers, green peppers, guacamole and swiss cheese.  I also made it a combo special (with fries and a large drink) for an additional $3.39.  When I received my burger, someone got the order incorrect, as it was loaded with onions.  I returned the burger to them and they cheerfully replaced it with the correct items within two minutes.

The burger itself was delicious - firm and juicy.  The roll I would presume was either steamed and/or buttered, but it held all the condiments well.  The fries were hand cut and fresh, with a little grease.  Their menu is very simple and getting extras on your basic burger ($3.39) has its most expensive item at $0.50 (the guacamole).  You could likely have a burger with everything for under $7.

UBurger reminded me of the old Burrito Max where Boca Grande is now - that was the where you could get a overstuffed burrito for under $5.  I've been to Boca Grande a couple of times and it's OK, but Burrito Max was the sine non qua of burrito joints.  I wouldn't be surprised if the old owners of Burrito Max were behind UBurger.

Will I go back again?  Yes - as long as they're responsive with the orders and service.  BGood is also a great place to get burgers, and they also sell sweet potato fries.

Sorry, McDonald's - I think I'll stick to your chicken wraps instead.

When gentrification pisses off an entire neighborhood

Yuppie scum at its finest and most obnoxious, and a few questions:

1. How many of those condo units are affordable?

2. Are the loud booms from old Ironsides ruining people's whoopie making/yoga/debating sessions?

3. If you're here because it's an attractive area, why in blazes do you want to change it without a single shred of consideration for your neighbors, who were here much longer than you've been?