Blog 20: Final Version of Major Research Essay

David Rodriguez
Dr. Luke Vasileiou
ENG 103
31 May 2011
The Siege of New York
You can read the words “Welcome to New York – The Empire State” as you commute every day into the City. From then on fourth you are surrounded by an endless sea of buildings made up of bricks, steel, and concrete. Let us not also forget the streets with pot holes so large you almost feel as though if you were ever to fall into one you’d vanish completely off the face of the earth. This is a city which has seen the roughest of times and the most momentous of triumphs, and has been depicted throughout Movies, Television, and Music, the place millions of people call home including myself.
The 90s was a time when New York City was economically sound, had a richer job market, and money was in full circulation. It was the right ingredients to perpetuate the idea of the “American Dream.” During that time a new wave of immigrants migrated to New York. This migration of new immigrants increased the population to almost double the size even among the largest of cities. Now to determine and track the growth of New York City’s population Census Bureau was brought in to survey the population. Approximately 7.3 million people lived New York City during the 90’s from surveys recorded over a 10 year period. These surveys and inquiries provided better insight into the division among the boroughs of these immigrants. Once recorded & accounted for the city would then have to devise a plan to provide and care for its new residents. This led to the renovation of housing, newer businesses, development of more educational institutions, and the implementation of newer laws to establish order within this diverse society.
New York City has always been a cultural melting pot. It is home to some of the largest Asian, African American, Italian, Hispanic, and Jewish (etc.) immigrant populations. All of whom wanted to come to America for a better life for their families as well as themselves. Since the economy was prosperous throughout the 90’s, immigrants almost immediately upon arrival sought out to create their own businesses and become entrepreneurs. This was the “American Dream” for them to be able to own their own business within this market and make a name for themselves was the pinnacle of their efforts. Even if they were illegally living here it was worth the risk just to be able to have a chance at a prosperous life.
In the United States on November 29, 1990 a new act and policy was introduced it was titled the “Immigration Act of 1990.” This act was a catalyst for the increased number of legal immigrants allowed into the United States each year. By providing a randomly assigned visa through a lottery styled program, the United States gave an opportunity to countries of which were not often granted visas. With the law in effect it would admit approximately seven hundred thousand new immigrants annually. However even though this act would simplify entering the US for some it did not stop the determination of others, some of which would pay top dollar to have their loved ones or even themselves smuggled into the U.S. With New York City being this enormous melting pot at the time smuggling rings designed to provide passage in New York became the focal point of news articles and media coverage. An article publish on December 11, 1998 by Steven A. Holmes of The New York Times depicts how young men from Fujian Province would pay this smuggling ring as much as $47,000 for passage from China. This Ring, as well as others before it, was sophisticated with its trafficking of these Chinese immigrants into United States, though bound for New York City in the end. It just goes to show the determination and lengths immigrants are willing to take just to arrive into a land of greater opportunity.
With immigration on the rise and the population changing and or increasing so did other aspects around New York City during the 90’s. The progression of higher rents, crime, salary’s and other attributes associated with tension were some of these changes which began to also build up. During the early 90’s the rent average was in between $400-500 dollars a month for location throughout 4 of the 5 boroughs Manhattan being the exception with rent estimated around $900+ a month. As time went on the rent for these location increased by double. I recall living in Brooklyn during the early 90’s and my family paying around $460 for a 4 bedroom apartment this was the average going rate at the time. Around 1991 we moved into Queens to a rent of $660. Depending on the area of town you lived at the time it could fluctuate up or down a few hundred dollars. As far of crime goes, with Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani around the crime rate in New York dropped. Giuliani took pride in the city and wanted to improve the city over all for future generation to be able to enjoy. In a report from Mayor Giuliani’s Archives he states since 1993 the overall crime in NYC had fallen by nearly 44 percent. This was a clear cut analysis at the time. The crime in New York seemed as though it was almost nonexistent. All these attributes were from incidents that escalated this change over time from both local and global events.
Operation Desert Storm, a common name however it was incorrect. This war by its true name was The Persian Gulf War which extended from August 2, 1990 to February 28, 1991. It was a war waged on Iraq in response to Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait. The United Nations in conjunction with President Gorge H.W. Bush deployed American forces into Saudi Arabia. The date at which the Iraqi Troops began to be expelled from Kuwait was on January 17, 1991 with a heavy air to surface and surface to ground series of missile launches. February 23, 1991 a strategic ground assault brought an end to this war. This could have been seen by some as an early prediction of future events to come from the Middle East.
Not long after the Gulf War; on February 26, 1993 a Ryder van armed with 2,000lbs of explosives was driven below the North Tower of the World Trade Center located in Manhattan. The bomb was intended to level the North Tower into the South Tower with the expectation of killing thousands of people. This attempt however failed with only causing 7 casualties and merely injuring a thousand people. It was later reported on several new channels that this attack was planned by a group of Islamic radicals. At the time the Muslim community was growing here in New York City and was thought to be a peaceful group. Residents in the city were shocked. They never expected a bombing attempt such as this to ever have occurred. So for the Muslim and the bombing attempt to be associated together it was beyond comprehension.
What this bombing did was wake up not only New Yorkers but the rest of the world as well. This once thought to be peaceful group of religious faithful believers was no longer viewed as such. As the weeks went on the stereotypes started to become evident. Muslims, whose only relation to the bombing attempt was the same religion, were unjustly targeted by the public. In an article published on August 2, 1997 in The New York Times it gave us a glimpse into what innocent Muslims are facing each day. During an interview a women who had given her name simply as Sarah yelled sarcastically at a mosque “Blow up New York! Blow up New York! Are they teaching you to make bombs?” Remarks such as these and much worse were being told to these innocent Muslims. For just the actions of a group of radicals it would condemn all Muslims as a whole.
Since the events of the World Trade Center bombing and the Gulf War; Muslims have been portrayed throughout movies, television, and even video games as religious extremists, more so the “Other” in this case meaning those whom are against us. The constant conveying of this message is essentially placing a poor understanding on this religion and its followers. In 1998 a controversial film titled The Siege was released to the disgust of the Muslim community, however to the average New Yorker it was a sort of surreal feeling, Years had passed since the events of 1993 and most people either forgot about it or were too involved in their own personal affairs to even have time to remember it.
The Siege was based on New York City during 1998 and portrays a state of terrorism which was unimaginable at the time. The film depicts New York as being a very heavy culturally diverse state. The image of the city was that of a city which never slept, having constant movement round-the-clock and extremely congested. Every minute every turn you were surrounded by lights, traffic, people, and buildings. It provided a glimpse as to how populated the city was at the time. This led to the understanding that any terrorist act of any kind would have an enormous and detrimental impact on the city. The movie begins with news segments of terrorism in the Middle East. Bombings throughout Saudi Arabia on United States bases killing soldiers and innocent civilians. The report then goes on to say these bombings are the acts of radicals. Following the footage a clip of President Bill Clinton states “We take care of our own.” As the story progresses we are carried over the New York City skyline. Below endless rows of people, lights, and traffic all showing us exactly how busy the city is. A Muslim man singing on a roof top (in the middle of this enormous city) signifying that even though he was in a distant land he stayed true to his religion. Minutes later a call to a police precinct is made, there was a bomb on a city bus with people onboard. This is when we are first introduced to our main character in the film Anthony Hubbard (Denzel Washington) as he races off in hopes to save innocent lives. Now this series of terrorist attacks is in response to the abduction of a Muslim leader by the United States. Anthony Hubbard remains on the phone in constant communication with the anti-terrorism task force, which is in the process of making way their way the bomb on the bus. When they approach the bus and use surveillance equipment the bomb detonates and releases blue paint everywhere as if almost a joke. At this point there is a sign of relief but remains a more profound level of concern. Who would be doing this and why? Another similar call was placed later on in the film however this time it would be the real deal. A bus carrying innocent bystanders was being held hostage. Anthony Hubbard was able to talk the terrorists on the bus to release the children. Next he asked for the elderly to be released. The bus doors open up after a long drawn out pause. An elderly couple begins to make their way off the bus, at that very instant the bus erupts into a ball of fire. No one would survive the blast.
A state of fear and panic was conveyed throughout the film, However at the time in the city even though there were previous terrorist attempts, one of which the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the people were not as fearful and weren’t living with a panicked state of mind. Always having to look over their shoulder and cringe at every vehicles back fire. The presence of law enforcement was not as massive and robust as the film depicts. As the bombings persisted, throughout the film, the military was brought in by order of the president and the use of a policy known as Martial Law was instituted on the borough of Brooklyn. This use of Martial Law was to be able to detain a certain profile of man as declared by Major General William Devereaux during a press conference. The profile they were after in the film was that of Muslim relation. In reality at the time New York was not on a man hunt of Muslims the biggest concern had to have been the allegation which arose about our president at the time Bill Clinton.
The portrayal of Muslims within this film was extremely negative. The media was broadcasting its propaganda throughout a different array of outlets. A scene in the film of Anthony Hubbard (Denzel Washington) flying overhead into the city while a radio station had a caller phoning in with the statement of “This is the kind of shit these towel heads do in their own countries and now they’re bringing it here” a statement which shows major concern, fear, and judgment. Granted there is tension and will always be tension among different ethnic groups but at the time 1998 New York City was not on a “Witch Hunt” of the Muslim community.
The message this movie presents is almost a foreshadowing of events that could happen in New York City at a not so far distant future. A widespread panic and a lack of knowledge of other cultures driven by mediated propaganda led to the quick isolation and persecution of innocent Muslims. When detaining Muslims in the film they used concentration style camps to hold the captive innocent alongside the guilty. In reality no concentration camps of any kind were created to withhold any Muslim. Though there still remains a stereotype on Muslims based on previous events in history none were being detained and herded in like cattle into metal fenced enclosures. In reality it may just be easier to point the finger at a whole group rather than on a single individual or single group of individuals.
The questions of could this truly happen in New York City, and would we be in so much fear that we would persecute Muslims or any other ethnic group arises after viewing this film. The views expressed of Muslims, the depiction of the city with its massive builds to its crowds of people which cover it like ants on a hill, are all possibilities yet we would not be able to truly know until placed into such tragic incidents. I feel this movie was truly ahead of its time for 1998, it does make us think about how we would punish an ethnic group as a whole rather than punish those who are the sources behind a terrorist attacks.


















Works Cited

Atkinson, Rick. “Crusade: The Untold Story of the Persian Gulf War"
Mariner Books, 19 October 1994. Print.

Housingnyc.com. “Is Net Operating Income Rising in Rental Housing?"
Housingnyc.com, 24 February 1997. Web. 9 May 2011.
http://www.housingnyc.com/downloads/research/pdf_reports/tcie.pdf

Nytimes.com. “In Park Slope, Stereotyping Breaks Out"
New York Times, 02 August 1997. Web. 9 May 2011.
http://www.nytimes.com/1997/08/02/nyregion/in-park-slope-stereotyping-breaks-out.html?pagewanted=2

Nytimes.com. “Ring Is Cracked in Smuggling of Illegal Chinese Immigrants"
Steven A. Holmes, 11 December 1998. Web. 9 May 2011.
http://www.nytimes.com/1998/12/11/nyregion/ring-is-cracked-in-smuggling-of-illegal-chinese-immigrants.html

Sklar, Helen. “Immigration Act of 1990 Today, 2010-2011 ed."
Clark Boardman Callaghan, 4 August 2010. Print.

Blog 19: Reflection on Archives Essay

The archives project allowed me to gain insight into Roger Starr’s policy of Plan Shrinkage by providing with the personal interview and the news paper articles. As I progressed with my research I understood that the perception of society at the time and his own beliefs where different. Starr was labeled a racist by the residents of the slums, but he was more so just trying to keep the city afloat during a tough economical time. The introduction of the archives project was efficient and effective. I tend to value more a report or a personal interview having this in front of me lead to a better more clearer understanding behind his policy. The archives and the major research essay differed in levels of difficulty. With the archives the information and research was already provided the hardest aspect here really was just coming up with an idea as to how it should begin. The major research essay as with any independent research essay posed various difficulties. For starters: finding accurate sources that are not running off in their own opinionated tangents. Next: tracking down dates, times, and other graphical charts that pertain to certain events, populations, salaries, and other expenses which occurred at the time. Last up: I’d have to say was once obtaining all the information needed, having to then find a way to link all the information in a smooth transition. So between the two projects the archives was for sure the easier of the two but the major allowed me to generate a more opinionated thought and have more control as far as the content which to include.

Blog 18: Report on major research paper

As I did the research for the paper, I used outlets such as the library, news paper articles, the internet, and personal experiences to help provide information about New York City over an 8-year period. While doing the research I feel as though I was not able to obtain more insight on the economical stand point of the city. Though I was able to find out minimal details on cost of rent, I would have rather included the average cost of commuting per day. Another problem I came across was the lack of information pertaining to the city at that time in general. Between 1990 and 1998 a few incidents and political changes had occurred though I would’ve rather included more. With writing this paper and based on the topics in class, I minimized my introduction using downshifting and integrated the use of more descriptive details. I still have to improve on sentence variety as well as restructuring of my conclusion.

Blog 17: Minority Report, Oedipus, and free will

David Rodriguez
Dr. Luke Vasileiou
ENG 103
18 May 2011
Free Will is an illusion. A concept; which we fail to produce enough substantial evidence to provide a plausible reason. There are plenty of innovative theories and infinite possibilities; however nothing to provide a contradiction that our lives are not, nor have not been already scripted for us. “All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players” Shakespeare captured it best, by laying claim that we are similar to performers playing just another role within our society. We play a role do to the model, influence, and environment of our world around us.
So having this influence would also control our “Free Will.” Granted we have a choice that we can make and for it a cause and effect would occur. In the film “Minority Report” a little food for thought is given as Chef John Anderton (Tom Cruise) rolls a ball across a table, seconds before it drops to the ground Danny Witwer (Colin Farrell) catches it in his hand. John “Why did you catch it?” Danny “Cause it was going fall” John “But it didn’t fall because you caught it” this conversation between them provided us with the idea that John knew ahead of time that Danny would react in this way and catch the ball. Now even though Danny had the choice whether or not to catch the ball in the first place, John had already set it up to gain this reaction within Danny. So “Free Will” here would not be found.
It is safe to assume that our reaction, even though thought to be our very own, is in fact just the effect to someone’s cause. Another interesting event in the film was how they went about arresting people minutes before the crime was even committed by the suspect. This was all based on understanding the cause and preventing the effect. With the Precogs prediction they could see the cause of a crime about to happen and stop the effect minutes before it would become the reality. In the film the question is brought up “How do you arrest someone before they make the choice to commit the crime?” this would make a good argument; however if we take a look at the husband that violently kills his wife and her lovers in the precogs vision we can see that he has already gone about building up his rage. Even though the police arrived in time to stop him from committing the crime the anger and rage within him would have lead him up to this event.
In comparison the play Oedipus the King, Oedipus is told by the Delphic Oracle that he would one day kill his father and would then mate with his mother. This Oedipus was destined to do. Hearing that he was destined to do this created a level of paranoia. The words of the Oracle began the series of events to unfold. They were the “cause” which was enough to have led Oedipus to pursue a path which was already predetermined. Taking a closer look at both works you can see how the actions or words from another can affect the path which one takes. Even though we believe that we have “Free Will” and are able to control it, our emotions, thoughts, doubts, and understanding can dramatically change us, our actions, our reason. The influence given since birth ultimately affects our “Free Will” so we are never as free as we believe ourselves to be, though we can think it.

Blog 16: Report on your selected movie

The Siege is a film based in New York City pertaining to the abuse of power the US military demonstrates. Within the film an Islamic religious leader is abducted by the US military and is interrogated and treated inhumanly. This causes an outcry from the Islamic community and New York City becomes the target of upcoming series of escalating terrorist attacks. There are a series of bombings that occur in the film and throughout the city. There is a scene where a city bus full of people becomes a bus full of hostages. At first the authorities in the film thought it was just another hostage style situation not thinking it would even escalate to the level it did. I recall the character Elise Kraft a CIA operative having a conversation with Anthony Hubbard, the head of the FBI’s Counter-Terrorism Task Force Anthony: ”What are they waiting for” Elise: “they are waiting for the news cameras” just as she made that statement the news helicopters flew overhead and the bus exploded. As the bombings would pursue, the US government responded by instating the use of Martial Law, and enlisting the aid of US soldiers under the leadership of Gen. Devereaux, into the streets of New York City. The film relates to NYC in the sense of possibility that this could in fact one day happen. It also depicts the fear and misguided thought process our public may have. The film captures NYC in it most busy of times, people commuting throughout the city, traffic. You can gain a glimpse into the life of a New Yorker.

Blog 15: Minority Report response

Our society in its current state is too well guarded. The sense of security we have is not an acceptable trade off for the invasion of ones own privacy. The “Patriot Act” (which was signed into law on October 26, 2001), gave all law enforcement agencies the right and ability to trace and listen in to telephone calls, personal emails, and even private records such as medical and financial. This added policy invades our personal thoughts, feelings, and beliefs to the point that we now may feel the need to suppress these very same concepts, ideas, and reasons for fear of maybe wrongful persecution. This elevated state of security creates a level of paranoia. Who is this person listening to our conversations, how much do they really know about us? I feel that our society need not be so heavily guarded and monitored. To monitor societies ever email, phone call, and private record is almost the equivalent to observing and monitoring a prisoner in a detention center and or correctional institution. Granted society needs rules and restrictions to help perpetuate order, this does not and should not have to include as well the invasion upon our own private matters. The film “Minority Report” told a story of a society whose crime was monitored by “Precogs” these such oracle like beings could see into the future minutes or hours or days before a crime of murder could have occurred. The outcome from their predictions was enough to arrest an individual minutes before he/she could or would’ve committed a murder. This was done giving the individual no chance of defending himself or herself or even making a choice. Now this could be compared to our society now, with knowing and listening in to our communications or searching private medical records could we not also be convicted ahead of time without making a choice or being able to defend ourselves. We live in a society where assumption is everything. At time just this very same assumption can be the downfall of an innocent. Same was also seen in the “Minority Report” when Tom Cruise’s character was wrongfully arrested based on the assumption that the “Precogs” knew without a doubt that his actions where pre-written and determined.

Archives Project Essay

David Rodriguez
Dr. Luke Vasileiou
ENG 103
9 May 2011
Planned Shrinkage
Minorities, immigrants, and crime all on the rise led to the development of new policies to institute relief to slum plagued areas in New York City during the 1970’s. However this method of relief caused an outcry from the communities which were closely affected by its design and goal. This policy though thought at the time to be a way to move people out of these slums to a more vacant area really was a way for the city to turn its back on its public more so these slum filled communities.
It was the 1970’s in New York City the birthplace of a new public policy called “Planned Shrinkage”. This proposal was introduced by Roger Starr as a way to restructure decaying urban societies throughout New York City. Neighborhoods suffering from this urban decay included the South Bronx, Brooklyn and Harlem; distinct neighborhoods of which was home to minorities at the time and was considered having the highest crime and poverty levels. In an interview with Robert Fitch on September 9, 1993 Roger Starr speaks about the reasons behind the “Planned Shrinkage” of the 1970’s and makes the statement “The problem is to fill the housing with tenants who are not destructive and who will pay their rent, and who we want to keep there forever because they are good tenants” with this statement you can assess that he had a problem with these high crime and poverty parts of town and the people that resided in them.
Slum clearance or “Planned Shrinkage” as Rodger Starr would have put it was the withdrawing of essential city services. These services such as police patrols, garbage removal, street repairs, and fire services were all removed from these neighborhoods suffering from urban decay, crime, and poverty. By the mid-1970s in the Bronx approximately 120,000 fires occurred per year. 40 percent of the housing in the area was destroyed. As the fires kept increasing the response time of the firefighters depleted less and less. They simply could not keep up with all the fires that were going on at the time. With cutbacks on such services many residents felt the city was doing nothing to help them. This caused many living in these poor neighborhoods to move and begin looking for new places to live. Going back to the report between Starr and Fitch, Starr talks about a conversation over at Randalls Island that he recalled having with Robert Moses and telling him “Bob, you don’t really think that you can treat people nowadays as though they were parcels in the package room.” When “Planned Shrinkage” became a reality in the 1970s it did just that. Areas affected by these cutbacks to public services began to see a decline within its population.
In an article from the Daily News dated March 1, 1976, the headline read as “Starr under fire for plan to shrink slum services” there is a given percentage of the decrease of the population and the areas most affected by it. The city was losing 1% of its population per year, (which since the introduction of the policy to the date that article in 1976 was published) there were approximately 400,000 people lost. These statistic show that cuts in services to these arson, crime and housing abandonment parts of town during that time is evidence that people where really forced to get up and leave. There were no other options but to do so. Now with these people relocated and most of the buildings vacant from fires it created extensive vacant land which held a higher redevelopment value, more so in the South Bronx. So what “Planned Shrinkage” did was not only cut off public services, it helped also clear the land to be available for redevelopment and economic growth. To this day if we take a look at Brooklyn and see how rapid the growth the change of the population we can assess that maybe in fact a plan similar to “Planned Shrinkage” is in effect just worded differently so we are not as aware.
Rodger Starr’s personal philosophy about human nature and its relationship to populations and housing could be seen as a negative one. In the report held between Starr and Fitch, Starr states that the theory that all people are alike set forth by the “Brook Amendment” was devastating. Starr believed that not all people were fundamentally good and decent. He believed you needed to worry about the character and quality of the people. He felt that people were assumed to be the ideal of the American wholesome family and knew this was in fact not the case. I agreed with his belief that not everyone is alike but I did not agree with his method of execution to deal with these populations.
The population at the time consisted of immigrants from all over. As time progressed these groups of immigrants both legal and illegal grew. South Bronx, Brownsville, and Harlem where home to these immigrants consisting of different minority groups such as Hispanic, Israelis, Chinese, African American and so on. Now taking a look at more article from the Daily News there were many people at the time who labeled Starr as a racist or genocidal lunatic, some even calling for his resignation. From what Starr says in an interview with Fitch he makes the comment of “I didn’t know that Nigerians were going to come over here and take over the sidewalks” the fact he says “come over here and take over” can lead to the understanding of him being seen as racists but I did not think it was in fact racist. The action of his policy thought to be racist was in fact more so a way of economic reforms it just so happened that these groups of people were living in these areas.
Housing had become a part of the problem. Edward Brooke during this time introduced a new amendment titled “Brook Amendment” which to Starr was the one thing that could have destroyed a federal program. With this amendment in place housing authorities all over the country had to take tenants who couldn’t pay the average going rental rate. So the maintenance of these public housing deteriorated very rapidly do to this amendment allowing anyone to just move in. Starr felt a major problem with the government process of taking in and filling these public housings with tenants whom were extremely destructive and you could not get rid of. With these tenants now living across from the “good” tenants it would just have led to more good rent paying tenants to pack up and move away.
So Starr by many was labeled a racist, a genocidal lunatic, and his idea of “Planned Shrinkage” was thought of as a way to just uproot and remove immigrant families and individuals from their homes. What I found is his approach though was not positive for these immigrants he was not targeting them out of malice but more so was aiming for a bigger picture of improving the city. I feel it wouldn’t have mattered really what race these groups would have been what mattered was if these neighborhoods where poverty stricken, crime infested parts of town. “Planned Shrinkage” was mainly designed to try to save the city and rebuild its economy what led me to this was in the report between Fitch and Starr, Roger says “In fiscal terms the city was in bad shape because it had borrowed all its money.” So what I get from it is there is no money to pay for extra services and cut backs needed to be made. The first place to go would be the slums. Move the people living in these slums to another location and get them out of sight out of mind really. Then rebuild whatever has been left behind in hopes to repair a city that was down in the dumps. Roger Starr’s concept behind this plan was to ultimately improve certain geographical areas but through his efforts he crossed lines of decency and treated the people living in these places as insignificant individuals as though herding them around to distant locations like cattle.