Narrow Search

Comment Archives: stories: Last 7 Days

Re: “Oakland Congresswoman Barbara Lee To Boycott Trump Inauguration

No one is going to miss you Barbara there.

Posted by Robert Hope on 01/15/2017 at 9:55 PM

Re: “Oakland Congresswoman Barbara Lee To Boycott Trump Inauguration

She's right on the nose with everything.

Posted by Donnell Moses on 01/15/2017 at 4:45 PM

Re: “Ambushed: Contra Costa County Law Enforcement Sets Up Surprise Stings To Help Federal Immigration Agents Arrest and Deport Immigrants

I missed the first two pages of this article. Is this author really defending three criminals? AND questioning "why in the world would local law enforcement work with ICE?" for these cases: Kim who has committed armed robbery and found with stolen goods over ten years later (who knows what else he's done in the last ten years); Jones who has put numerous other lives at risk by getting arrested for driving under the influence FOUR times (who knows how many times he's really driven under the influence and not caught); and Smith for Domestic violence.

And its law enforcement who is doing something wrong. Riiiiiiiightttt.........

Posted by JODY SMITH on 01/15/2017 at 2:07 PM

Re: “Protest Trump's Inauguration in Oakland, But Please Don't Be Violent

Adding a bit:

Thanks you for the correction on the quote. She did not say she that she had not made calls for violence. She only said she had not made calls for property damage.

And, correcting my own post, I meant to type "pretending that all is clear" but I inadvertantly type "pretending that almost clear"

Of course, causing death is not the same as property damage. But, you appear to have missed the point. Just because you do not call for an activity, does not mean you are against it. So, in war, just because you did not order the soldier to kill does not mean you are against the soldier killing. And, in Oakland, just because you did not call for property damage does not mean you are against it. Silence is not innocence.

So, let us know which form of destructive or harmful activities are condoned and which ones are not. And, if it is OK to cause harm for some and not others, how does that work?

Thank you.

Posted by Michael Good on 01/15/2017 at 1:17 PM

Re: “Top Commander Accused of Turning California National Guard Into ‘Criminal Syndicate’

It's worse than you can imagine. I personally have identified a number of people (not at all exclusive to SSO) that do not come to work, some for months at a time...but keep drawing a paycheck. So-called "soldiers" who openly refuse to go overseas but keep full-time jobs. Soldiers who are injured overseas and then sent home, only for the CAARNG to discharge them without medical separation! So-called "Soldiers" taking government vehicles (with their families driving and on-board, no less) to sporting events out of state. "Soldiers" and "airmen" retiring from active duty National Guard and then being hired in as effect civilian consultants for the same jobs they left. Guardsmen being told they will lose their full-time NG jobs if they dare to actual go into hostile combat...and when they come home, no job - while their colleagues who sat home still draw a paycheck and job. Shameful: fear of losing a job while others are losing life and limb, yet they use the words "selfless service" and "heroes." Absolutely appalling; convenient self-indoctrination.

Other superbly-qualified leaders and Soldiers are not retained on active duty in the CNG while those without the training, less experience, no active duty overseas time, and even those with letters of reprimand are not only retained but moved to new locations at government expense. When an imminently-qualified Guardsman applies for a tour or job with the California National Guard, if not one of the sycophants of the status-quo, his packet will be "lost" and never accepted for consideration; the same for promotions. Sometimes Soldiers are "not renewed" within months of retirement so others can keep jobs AFTER military retirements. So-called senior leaders who have NEVER been in the regular Army! Look at the General officers of the CAARNG and most senior leaders - they command Infantry units and pride themselves as Infantrymen yet NO combat time as Infantrymen; some have never even been awarded the job skill qualification. It may be legal, but absolutely not moral. Certainly the most qualified are not the ones selected for senior leadership, merely those politically-connected who avoid actual direct service.

These issues are usually clouded and explained as budget considerations; dedicated Soldiers and Airmen, both officer and enlisted, are often told their organization is being downsized due to budget constraints and their position goes away, yet within weeks multiple new bootlickers are hired, including relatives of the very ones who said there was no budget allotment.

Appalling, and this is YOUR National Guard. This is YOUR tax dollar being abused. I have many more examples and evidence of all...but no one will do a darn thing. Our properly-elected civilian leadership, not being of the military profession, do not which questions to ask or issues to explore. Inquiries solicit information from the very same praetorian guard protecting said corruption. The base fact is that many of the National Guard leadership (surely the culture) did not join for service; they joined to be pretend Soldiers, enjoying the reputation and benefits of professionals all while enabling their perception of self-importance.

Posted by Joshua McCorkendale on 01/15/2017 at 11:38 AM

Re: “Ambushed: Contra Costa County Law Enforcement Sets Up Surprise Stings To Help Federal Immigration Agents Arrest and Deport Immigrants

What a shame that this reporter would write something this far from the truth. Media is the reason why there is so much hate being spread especially to our law enforcement personnel. Anything for ratings, right? No matter how incorrect and one-sided the story is.

The Actual Law for anyone reading this article:
An alien who overstays becomes an illegal alien and is deportable. If the alien overstays a by more than 180 days, but less than one year, and then departs the United States voluntarily, he is barred from reentering the United States for a period of three years. If he leaves after having been in the country illegally for one year or more, then the alien is barred from reentering for ten years.33 It is inaccurate to label as "law-abiding" a person who fails to uphold their end of an agreement to visit the United States on a temporary basis and chooses to remain in the country illegally.

It looks like Smith overstayed her visa for give or take 10 years. And there is nothing wrong with that, right? But when local law enforcement works with ICE to follow the laws of the land, then there is something wrong with that.

This speaks loads to the type of report this is.

The officers did nothing wrong.

Posted by JODY SMITH on 01/15/2017 at 10:59 AM

Re: “Oakland Mayor Schaaf Issues Order Intended to Improve Safety of Unpermitted Housing While Avoiding Displacement

Bill H raises the salient equation: Who pays for rehabilitating Oakland?

I suggest we take our cue from commonsense (and Tom Paine, while we're at it (Agrarian Justice)).

Land values belong to the community, not to those who nominally own one and another plots of nature. Tax land values heavily, and the owners of land will get that land into use quickly. The rent for the structure will pay for the rehabilitation; meanwhile the land value rents won't go to the mere landlord, they'll be a pass-through from renter through landlord and back to the community where they'll pay for streets, fire protection, and other social services. Renters will get what they pay for: safe, secure housing and work space (the building rent) AND public infrastructure (the land value rent).

And, all that rehabilitating of Oakland's buildings will employ scads of people!

Posted by David Giesen on 01/15/2017 at 10:51 AM

Re: “Protest Trump's Inauguration in Oakland, But Please Don't Be Violent

If I knew I would not ask.

But, while pretending that almost clear, you dance around and obfuscate. Violence has many degrees. A much lesser degree is vandalism. Worse is bodily harm. The most heinous results in death.

I would hope that no violence is supported against anyone or anything. Keep dancing and avoid the point.

Come out and say it if you think any of these things are OK. Then tell us exactly what you and / or Brooks support.

Posted by Michael Good on 01/15/2017 at 10:17 AM

Re: “Protest Trump's Inauguration in Oakland, But Please Don't Be Violent

Michael Good remarked: "Well, Michelle Metiche, I hope it is that simple. Maybe there is little to no nuance intended by Cat Brooks in her remarks.

She never made a "call for violence." Not calling for it - is that the same as not condoning it? Is not actually issuing orders for the soldier to shoot and kill the same thing as being against the war?

"We not only emphatically condemn violence against the people" - Who are the "people"? Is that all of us? Or only the ones that Cat Brooks wants to support? Does it mean that she emphatically does not condemn violence agains the police and/or anyone at all?"

well first off, you misquoted cat brooks. she said, "For the record: Neither I, nor APTP, have ever made a call for property damage" in response to being accused of supporting vandalism. your war analogy makes no sense here, as a broken window is clearly not comparable to people's bodies being injured or to people being killed.

next, in response to your question about who are the people, let me ask you this: who is it that you THINK cat brooks is referring to?

Posted by Michelle Metiche on 01/15/2017 at 9:22 AM

Re: “Protest Trump's Inauguration in Oakland, But Please Don't Be Violent

Well, Michelle Metiche, I hope it is that simple. Maybe there is little to no nuance intended by Cat Brooks in her remarks.

She never made a "call for violence." Not calling for it - is that the same as not condoning it? Is not actually issuing orders for the soldier to shoot and kill the same thing as being against the war?

"We not only emphatically condemn violence against the people" - Who are the "people"? Is that all of us? Or only the ones that Cat Brooks wants to support? Does it mean that she emphatically does not condemn violence agains the police and/or anyone at all?

Sandy Sanders: "Disrupting the status-quo non violently." Good, one hopes you mean just that. Throwing rocks at windows is pretty violent, right? Throwing rocks at police? Burning trashing cans is pretty violent as is smashing up cars. Take it a step further - imagine blocking the freeway. Imagine a person having a heart attack or a woman in labor, maybe in an ambulance and maybe not. They can't get through to the hospital. They die. Is that OK? The death was a direct result of your deliberate and illegal act. Running out on the freeway and trying to stop traffic. Someone gets hit and killed. Is that peaceful? We are at great risk of these acts of violence.

It would be good if we could hold the protestors to the standard of behaving non-violently. And really mean it without wiggling out of it with excuses or rationalizations. Hope you are right.

We all have the right to peaceful assembly. Let's keep it peaceful. Everyone and in every way.

Posted by Michael Good on 01/15/2017 at 7:43 AM

Re: “Protest Trump's Inauguration in Oakland, But Please Don't Be Violent

Been reading the comments flowing in and glad to see support for the rights of people to be protected from police violence vs the rights of Commerce to do as it pleases without protest, disruption or inconvenience of any kind.

As per George Lakoff's theory, society is broken into two factions. Those who want equality, an egalitarian society, and those who like authoritarianism. The egalitarians love freedom, equality, openness and sharing. The other loves order, control, and the certainty of uninterrupted business as usual by whoever is in power of authority... usually themselves.

I am glad to a part of those seeking equality and justice for all. We will continue to speak out and disrupt the status quo non-violently while the Praetorian Guard of the 1% tries to crush us with distortions, lies, trickery, confusion and gibberish meant to keep themselves as overlord. Like tRUMP has done. Bon apptit America!

Posted by Sandy Sanders on 01/14/2017 at 8:47 PM

Re: “Protest Trump's Inauguration in Oakland, But Please Don't Be Violent

"For the record: Neither I, nor APTP, have ever made a call for property damage."

hello.

what part of this is unclear?

some of the readers are playing stupid. cat made it crystal clear what the stance is on property damage.

Posted by Michelle Metiche on 01/14/2017 at 5:19 PM

Re: “Protest Trump's Inauguration in Oakland, But Please Don't Be Violent

"Overwhelmingly, communities of color in both West and East Oakland have said they do not want a torn-up Oakland. A busted up Youth Radio building or family-owned downtown business alienates us from the very people we say we are fighting for."

can you people read?

cat books clearly says that property damage is not the will of oakland communities that ATPT is fighting for.

Posted by Michelle Metiche on 01/14/2017 at 5:18 PM

Re: “Protest Trump's Inauguration in Oakland, But Please Don't Be Violent

Ms. Cat Brooks, I would like to take this opportunity to say that you are one of my sheroes and I am so proud and humbled by the great work that you are doing on behalf of our people.

I share your sentiments exactly and am so tired of the violence being perpetuated against our people being compared and conflated to destruction of property. I'm tired of our ancestors efforts being thrown in our faces as if their way of organizing is the only way, or as if the white people throwing it in our faces actually know anything about how or why they organized. As if we weren't at home digging through their words, searching for direction and finding in it exactly the direction we are going.

For all the people writing in opposition to Cat, I laugh at you. How amusing it is to see people sitting on their asses complaining to a revolutionary in the midst of a full and successful revolution that somehow you know better how this revolution should be conducted. Cat Brooks name will be written in the history books and your will too, but only when we quote your racist, hateful comments. I'm writing a book now about the movement and it's naysayers. so thank you for providing me with such rich material.

And Cat, I hope I get the opportunity to meet you someday soon. In Solidarity, Phoenix.

Posted by Phoenix Love Armenta on 01/14/2017 at 12:07 PM

Re: “Protest Trump's Inauguration in Oakland, But Please Don't Be Violent

David Cohen: well said..

I mentioned that it was a slight of hand because it seemed to me it was out of step with journalism norms. When a journalist makes a correction, they normally own it and point it out.

Either way, it further highlights the ambivalence (or support) Brooks appears to have about vandalism.

Posted by Michael Good on 01/14/2017 at 10:39 AM

Re: “Protest Trump's Inauguration in Oakland, But Please Don't Be Violent

Thanks to Michael Good for pointing out the change in the headline (appropriately deleting "vandalism"). However, I don't see this as a sleight of hand, but rather just a correction, for which the editor of East Bay Express deserves credit. As for Ms. Brooks, she may want to reflect on exactly what her thesis is, and focus on that core message when she next writes an opinion piece, rinsing out some of the distracting off-point rhetoric.

Posted by David Cohen on 01/14/2017 at 10:11 AM

Re: “Oakland Congresswoman Barbara Lee To Boycott Trump Inauguration

I send her all our Aloha from Hawaii!!!

Posted by Terry Aguiar on 01/14/2017 at 9:34 AM

Re: “Protest Trump's Inauguration in Oakland, But Please Don't Be Violent

Interesting that the East Bay Express changed the title of this opinion piece -

from:

Protest Trump's Inauguration in Oakland, But Please Don't Vandalize or Become Violent

to:

Protest Trump's Inauguration in Oakland, But Please Don't Be Violent

Seems to me that East Bay Express has made a correction to reflect that Cat Brooks was so vague about vandalization. They must have realized she is not really coming out against vandalization - she seems to think it is OK. Remember, it was the "independent" protesters doing this anyway.

Very slick slight of hand by the editors..............

Posted by Michael Good on 01/14/2017 at 9:16 AM

Re: “Protest Trump's Inauguration in Oakland, But Please Don't Be Violent

I stand with Cat Brooks and the APTP.

Posted by Ann Swinburn on 01/13/2017 at 11:40 PM

Re: “Oakland Congresswoman Barbara Lee Refuses to Certify Trump's Electoral College Win

Henry Wade
Still holding out hope? Well stop. It's over! The liberals are parched and dying as they claw through an unending desert of denial. And for the next four years, the Hand of God will be dry.So you may want to save a precious swallow or two.

Posted by Henry Wade on 01/13/2017 at 10:30 PM

Most Popular Stories


© 2017 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation