Narrow Search

Comment Archives: Stories: Last 7 Days

Re: “For MLK Holiday, Activists Tear Down Fence and Take Over Oakland's St. Andrew's Plaza in the Name of 'Black Joy'

If, indeed, "a group of neighbors had complained for years that the sliver of land was a magnet for illegal drug use and crime," why weren't any of them interviewed for this story? For that matter, those neighbors were evidently there for years: were all of them white? As neighbors (not to mention other passers-by) did they find that park intimidating?

A power play is a power play -- a battle for control (with conflicting cultural norms being weaponized by both sides). "Displacement" cuts both ways.

Posted by Mitchell Halberstadt on 01/16/2017 at 8:26 PM

Re: “For MLK Holiday, Activists Tear Down Fence and Take Over Oakland's St. Andrew's Plaza in the Name of 'Black Joy'

@jerome funkhauser
your use of the phrase 'black joy' is disgusting.

Posted by Neck Stuffing on 01/16/2017 at 7:50 PM

Re: “For MLK Holiday, Activists Tear Down Fence and Take Over Oakland's St. Andrew's Plaza in the Name of 'Black Joy'

Good to see the plaza opened up again as it has been a bastion of black joy for decades. Drug use, prostitution, violence, public defecation and various other forms of black joy on display for the whole world to see.

Posted by Jerome Funkhauser on 01/16/2017 at 7:16 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: “Housing Groups Slam Proposal to Redefine Affordable Housing in Oakland

Hi I am Mr Damian Parker the creditor of Private loans, and I'm here to make your dreams come true to get a loan. Do you need a loan urgently? Do you need a loan to pay off your debts? Do you need a loan for expansion of your business or start your own business, we are here for you with a low interest rate of 3% and you can get a credit of 1,000 to 100,000,000.00 the maximum loan amount and up to 20 years loan duration. Contact us today for more information at
dparkerservices@hotmail.com

Posted by David Flinch on 01/16/2017 at 4:37 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: “Berkeley Social Club Is a Different Kind of Korean Restaurant

BTW, Pican's "Creole Spiced Bacon" is dead easy to make; I do it all the time at home. Didn't even need a recipe to figure that one out, LOL. We prefer it with a modest amt of brown sugar, we like our spicy bacon to taste balanced between sweet/salt and less like candied jerky.

Posted by Jean Komatsu 1 on 01/16/2017 at 2:25 PM

Re: “Oakland Congresswoman Barbara Lee To Boycott Trump Inauguration

Thank you Congresswoman Lee for standing up to an unprincipled, bigoted and immature individual by NOT attending the inauguration - we are a great country because of principled politicians like you!

Posted by Amy R. Booe on 01/16/2017 at 7:33 AM

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

Most Popular Stories


© 2017 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation