Narrow Search

Comment Archives: stories: News & Opinion

Re: “Kaiser Still Violating Mental Health Laws, Clinicians Say

My children were needing CA HHSA DS 5862 this month and saw an excellent service that hosts an online forms database . If you require CA HHSA DS 5862 too , here's https://goo.gl/fkU6DD

Posted by Pat Redman on 01/18/2017 at 4:51 AM

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

I wonder if all these people railing against "illegals" and "criminals" in Contra Costa would like their drunk uncle JimBob shipped backed to Germany for reaching HIS fourth DUI. Let's just revoke birthright citizenship altogether and if you mess up, we send you "back" to whatever is closest to being your most recent homeland. Sounds fair, right?

The coordination of ICE and Contra Costa County Sheriff's office and probation offices are about nothing but moving bodies for profit. The county is raking in millions and filling jail cells by destroying families and stealing chances from people.

Those of you who choose not to see that are just the willing dupes aiding and abetting.

Posted by Mercy Garetz on 01/17/2017 at 9:05 PM

Re: “My Afternoon With E-40: A Day in the Life of the Bay Area's Most Prolific and Respected Rapper

@Charlie Pine. maaan, i can't believe you are still at it. This is literally the same argument you were making in 2005. Ok, so let's say a video shot on a closed lot features Youth Uprising turf dancers glorifying Oakland's youth-created cultural expression, and that video was also promoted by a major corporation, who got it aired on MTV, which led to entertainment careers and continued job opportunities for those dancers, and brought the local rap scene out of a sales and name recognition slump it had been in for 8 years. If an elected official came up with such a scheme, it would be called a landmark economic development initiative.
Should we forget that the military sponsors professional sports, or that big banks invest in private prisons? How are we holding Youth UpRising--whose mission is to create economic opportunity for underserved populations--accountable, but not Warner Brothers or Viacom? you should know as well as anyone there was a proposal to legalize what you call "reckless driving" put forth by the D6 Councilmember which was quickly rejected by the rest of the Council.
So, E-40 could have just as easily been promoting legal driving had a Council vote gone the other way. In other words, the criminalization of youth is not a justification for the criminalization of youth, it's a justification for bloated law enforcement spending instead of social services, and so-called public safety policies which take hundreds of millions of dollars out of the general fund, where they are spent disproportionately, i.e., not spread evenly throughout the city.
So, what happens if we take performance money out of these artists' and dancers' pockets? Do we make any dent whatsoever in curbing illegal activity? if anything, we create more illicit crime, because we've now eliminated a pathway to a career, or at least steady and gainful employment, for kids who are already at a disadvantage.
After all this time, Charlie, it's difficult to believe that you don't see the larger picture of how culture--yes, even youth culture--is an economic driver. The city's own website says so.
If you're suggesting that youth should work minimum wage jobs and turn down the chance to be in a major rap video because you disagree with its subject matter, well that just sounds mean and short-sighted.
I dont think anyone has ever proven a direct correlation between suggestive lyrics and actual actions--shout out to the First Amendment, homie--and besides, what we actually saw following the release of this video was a bunch of YouTube tributes showing suburban youth hilariously attempting to "ghost-ride" their parent's Volvos on near-empty suburban streets.
If that's a cause for alarm, then maybe its time to admit you have an adverse reaction to anything cultural which is black-created and youth-oriented. Which makes you a bigger part of the problem than one now-legendary rap video.

Posted by Eric Arnold on 01/17/2017 at 8:43 PM

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

I've heard the "diversity of tactics" so many times before. It's code for property destruction. I can see taking over space, or blocking a roadway for a period of time. But the babies who want to smash windows and light things on fire should be exposed and ejected by the group.

Posted by Rob Walker on 01/16/2017 at 8:57 PM

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

I think you are understanding my point. There is no true clarity that Cat Brooks (or you?) is actually opposed to property damage. Nor is it clear that is she supportive of it.

Her lack of a call for property damage is, therefore, not an indicator of her support of lack of it. My call is for her to speak plainly about it.

If you trace back to your earlier postings, you said:

*****
"
"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.
"
****
So, hello, you do see what is unclear. It is clear that she did not make a call for property damage. It remains unsaid and unclear exactly how she actually feels about it.

Up to her to make decide whether or not she actually wants to be clear or obfuscate. And, as I said, maybe there is no nuance here. Maybe, she is actually quite opposed to property damage. That would be nice.

Posted by Michael Good on 01/16/2017 at 5:24 PM

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

michael good also wrote:

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.

*******

it is not that i've missed the point, it's that you've failed to make a sound one.

in ordering a sandwich, just because you did not ask for pickles does not mean that you hate pickles - nor does it mean you like pickles. it only means you didn't ask for them.

in oakland, just because you did not call for property damage doesn't mean that you are for it, either.

it's neither here nor there.

you're trying to force a confession to determine guilt of an imagined war criminal when there is no need to do so.

Posted by Michelle Metiche on 01/16/2017 at 4:14 PM

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

michael good replied:

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

********

regarding the last part of your response, i have no obligation to tell you what i personally do or do not support. you're no authority to me, and this isn't an inquisition or a trial. i'm only responding to that which is available for both of us to read and react to - which is this piece written by cat brooks.

there is no way i can tell you what books supports. i'm not a mind reader, and neither are you. we are both reading what has been published in EBX.

Posted by Michelle Metiche on 01/16/2017 at 4:07 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: “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

Most Popular Stories


© 2017 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation