Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range

Re: “#PhilandoCastile #AltonSterling #BlackLivesMatter — Share Your Words and Thoughts With the Express

It is beyond frustration and anger for the tremendous sadness I feel for all the lives lost due to sick, phobic, psychos with guns randomly killing innocent people. But on the issue of Black Lives can another innocent black man be killed at the hands of police? How can it be that this is still happening where the color of one's skin causes them to be killed for no apparent reason? It is on tape for all the world to see yet still the police do not admit they made a mistake. "Stand behind your own is bullshit" and they need to admit their faults and fire the ignorant asses who are shooting people for no reason. And even if and when men or women of color may be doing something illegal, Why SHOOT? Why not taser or spray them with something that will hault them? Why are the policemen trained to shoot to kill!!! KILLING people is wrong!!!! It needs to stop. What can we do as a people to stop them from killing innocent men and women of color?Unfortunately, I don't have an answer. I really don't know what it's going to take to make a change. I have a niece and two nephews of mixed race and I am scared to death for their future. If I were a mother of sons of color, I would be extremely frightened for their lives knowing that they can be pulled over whether walking or in a vehicle and harassed at the hands of the police for no reason. Wearing a hoodie, playing with a toy gun, walking in a white neighborhood, standing on a corner, walking in a convenience store, selling cigarettes, DOING NOTHING. This should not be happening. The police need to take a good hard look at the men and women on their force and get rid of the aggressive, warlike behavior of these officers. It is 2016 for gods sake!!! We have supposedly moved past the time of oppression and slavery and racism. We are regressing folks and it is not pretty. The color of ones skin should not cause them to be in danger and in fear of their lives. What happened to love for all? Why is it that people of color are treated like a lesser race. Why do we notice the color of one's skin at all? It is unacceptable, appalling and intolerable. If you haven't seen Michael Moore's documentary on "Where to Invade Next" you might want to have a look at it. There are policemen in the world who don't carry guns. And when asked why, their response is they don't need them!!! BLACK LIVES MATTER. STOP THE KILLING. Jail the corrupt criminal police officers who are killing innocent people and maybe that would put a little more trust in the police. At this point, I would have a hard time stopping if I were to be pulled over and I'm a white, 65 year old woman. Who knows what would happen!!!

Posted by Francine Fanali on 07/07/2016 at 3:57 PM

Re: “East Bay Environmentalists at Odds Over Future of Eucalyptus Trees

Having witnessed a Eucalyptus fire first hand in Australia and having a forester uncle who worked with them (including in fire fighting and fire management) for 25 years, if the opponents of removal are successful a large fire in the hills will involve the deaths of people.
People are right that Eucalyptus are highly fire resistant, but they do this by becoming incredibly dangerous to any building or human near by. Gums (the name they commonly known by in Australia and NZ) have evolved to burn extremely hot to rapidly exhaust the available fuel. The mean the fire burns itself out very quickly on the individual tree itself, but causes immense heat and embers which mean Eucalyptus fires often turn into fire storm events. (google Australian fire storm to see how terrifying this is)
As trees literally explode in minutes to shooting out flames 40-50 feet high the intense heat sucks in so much air to feed the fire it starts to generate its own weather, which when added to the huge amounts of embers that are generated means you get a very rapidly moving fire, as glowing hot embers will travel miles on the self generated winds.
These fires are almost impervious to conventional North American fire fighting techniques. In Australia back burning and very wide fire breaks (I think the aim is to get a least 1 kilometer( or 2/3 of mile) wide) is the main way these fires are fought. I've seen a controlled burn where so much heat was generated that when a heavy rain storm blew in it hardly reduced the size of the flames, as the heat from them turned the falling rain into steam which didn't reach the ground.

Australians living in forested area are instructed that if a fire is reported 5 miles away or less to pack and evacuate immediately. They are also told to make sure no large tree is within 60 to 100 feet of any building. Even then, many Australians have been killed in bush fires in the last 20 years. Some have been incinerated in their cars as the fire engulfed it as they were trying to escape.

In the closely settled hills with narrow and steep roads an Eucalyptus fire event would likely turn into a tragedy as some people wouldn't be able to escape the rapidly moving fire.
It is this reality which is driving public safety authorities to push to remove Eucalyptus from a closely settled area. Failure to do so before the next fire will result in people dying.
Keeping the trees is very much about choosing aesthetics over human lives.

Posted by David O'Sullivan on 07/07/2016 at 3:27 PM

Re: “#PhilandoCastile #AltonSterling #BlackLivesMatter — Share Your Words and Thoughts With the Express

In three months we will mark the 50th anniversary of the founding of The Black Panther Party For Self Defense. FYI

Posted by Freewheelin Kendon Smith on 07/07/2016 at 2:42 PM
Posted by Tonya Love on 07/07/2016 at 2:41 PM

Re: “#PhilandoCastile #AltonSterling #BlackLivesMatter — Share Your Words and Thoughts With the Express

That Second Amendment appears to apply only to white people.

Jim Calhoun

Posted by Jas Calhoun on 07/07/2016 at 1:13 PM

Re: “East Bay Environmentalists at Odds Over Future of Eucalyptus Trees

Talking about two things. Yes, Eucs are very flammable. However, a crown fire will not kill the tree. It will regenerate. But that doesn't mean they are not extremely flammable.

Posted by Mike Yarmouth on 07/07/2016 at 12:24 PM

Re: “East Bay Environmentalists at Odds Over Future of Eucalyptus Trees

Thank you for this article. Sierra Club does not seem to know that almost all fire, like the 1991 firestorm starts in grasslands, which is most of what we will have left when the FEMA plan is finished.

Not one tree is scheduled for "restoration." While our native trees are dying, the magnificent Eucalyptus, Acacias, Monterey Pines are thriving in the drought. Eagles and raptors prefer Eucs for nesting.

EBMUD and others know that the most flammable tree her is the native Bay Laurel, while Eucs are fire resistant and there are plenty of photos showing them standing after firestorms destroyed houses from fire started by arson in grasslands.

Monsanto and Dow will benefit from planned herbiciding for years.

The issue really is, the way things are now scheduled, our rare and beautiful East Bay Hills wilderness parks and public land are being clearcut and poisoned, and we will be left with highly flammable grasslands. And the only real reason is money.

Posted by Bev Von Dohre on 07/07/2016 at 12:05 PM

Re: “East Bay Environmentalists at Odds Over Future of Eucalyptus Trees

There are several studies of soil moisture in the eucalyptus forest. A study in the Presidio reported an average of 19% soil moisture in the eucalyptus forest year around. A study of ants in the eucalyptus forests in San Francisco reported 16 inches of fog drip in the driest months of the year and soil moisture of 15%. Harold Gilliam in his book about the climate of the San Francisco Bay Area reported that fog drip in eucalyptus and Monterey pine forests in the East Bay hills was measured at 10 inches per year. These are published studies that anyone can read.

When all else fails, there is also common sense. Do you really think that a huge pile of wood chips with no tree canopy above it is going to be more moist than the shaded forest floor? I doubt it.

All leaves have stoma that take up moisture from the air. That capability is not confined to native plants.

Posted by Millie Trees on 07/07/2016 at 11:18 AM

Re: “East Bay Environmentalists at Odds Over Future of Eucalyptus Trees

There are several studies of soil moisture in eucalyptus forest resulting from fog drip. A study in the Presidio found soil moisture in eucalyptus forest averaged 19% year around. Another study of ants in San Francisco's eucalyptus forests reports 16 inches of fog drip per year and 15% soil moisture in the driest months of the year, August and September. Harold Gilliam in his book about the climate of the San Francisco Bay Area reports 10 inches of fog drip measured in eucalyptus and Monterey pine forests in the East Bay. All of these studies are available for people to read if they wish.

Then, there's always common sense when all else fails. Do you really think that a huge pile of wood chips with no tree canopy is going to be more moist than the shaded forest floor? I doubt it.

Posted by Millie Trees on 07/07/2016 at 10:52 AM

Re: “East Bay Environmentalists at Odds Over Future of Eucalyptus Trees

"And, even if the eucalyptus was flammable, Gescheidt says, it's better when alive, and adding fog drip to the soil, rather than being a pile of wood chips."

That statement is 100% total bullshit. Eucalyptus is extremely flammable...that's a fact. Fog drip barely penetrates the soils, the native vegetation take in the moisture through stoma in the leaves. Jackson Demo Forest has done many scientific studies on frog drip.

Posted by Mike Yarmouth on 07/07/2016 at 9:35 AM
Posted by Saul Goode on 07/07/2016 at 8:58 AM

Re: “LocoL is Fast Food with Heart and Soul

Well, Sam, he already had the space and has been operating there since well before Uber decided to move there. That area serves a lot of people, not just the new white folk. I applaud Patterson for learning more about the community he serves, closing the pricey destination Plum restaurant (yes, Plumbar is still there, a scaled back version with more affordable food), and trying something that might actually appeal to the broader base of customers in that area. As to the "he is only employing people to help make his profit" ...well, yes. But a lot of hot Oakland restaurants are not at all concerned with employing or training people in the actual community, or providing healthy, tasty, affordable food. Could he change his business model and do more? Maybe. But he could have bailed on Oakland entirely and instead is is doing something.

Posted by Leigh Costain 1 on 07/07/2016 at 8:06 AM

Re: “East Bay Environmentalists at Odds Over Future of Eucalyptus Trees

This is a good, well-balanced article. I was in that protest. I believe the Sirra Club board has become infested with nativists.

Posted by Pam Portugal Walatka on 07/07/2016 at 7:54 AM

Re: “LoBot Gallery, Mainstay of Oakland's DIY Art and Music Scenes, to Shutter at End of Month

As an artist and a former resident of Oakland, I'm sickened by what's happening to the rich culture and the creatives that are being displaced by gentrification.

Licita Fernandez

Posted by Licita Fernandez on 07/06/2016 at 8:15 PM

Re: “LocoL is Fast Food with Heart and Soul

Why all the hate? I tell you what, when someone, maybe you Sam, can open a healthy, cheap, profit sharing, community, sustainable, local, unionized, happy happy fast food joint, I will be the first to go. But until then, I'm heading to Local. It's a fantastic vision & we should all support it. And if Patterson & Choi make a few bucks along the way, don't they kind of deserve it? I mean, I hope they do well so they will keep the vision going & who knows? Maybe they will convert to employee owned in the future.

It won't happen if we throw a bunch of hate on them & they fail. So, I say, go!

Posted by andrewdeangelo on 07/06/2016 at 6:58 PM

Re: “LocoL is Fast Food with Heart and Soul

I am very excited to try LocoL but my only question is why is the price for everything in the Oakland storefront one dollar more than everything at the Watts location? I feel as though they are trying to exploit the tech profits of the bay area. A dollar may not be a huge difference to the new influx of gentrification but to the original inhabitants of Oakland a dollar can make a big decision on where they spend their money. Especially if you're trying to feed a low-income family which I feel is their mission.


Posted by Dale Gribbel on 07/06/2016 at 6:06 PM

Re: “East Bay Environmentalists at Odds Over Future of Eucalyptus Trees

The Sierra Club, “invites detractors to ‘see the recovery and restoration happening now before your very eyes!’ at Signpost 29.”
Hmmm. Have they visited Site 29 lately? Here is a photo essay about Site 29. It’s covered in non-native weeds, except where the weeds are brown and dead after being sprayed with herbicide. Take a look:…

Claremont Canyon Conservancy says, “"What I see is a restored native woodland that's coming along. There's no weeds,"
The person who said this is either delusional or he has not been there recently. Maybe both.

“HCN has speculated as many as 500,000 trees would be removed….but the Sierra Club says these numbers wildly overestimate the final count.”
This is yet more evidence that the Sierra Club has not read the project plan or its Environmental Impact Statement. It’s a matter of public record, but Sierra Club can’t be bothered to actually read the plans. OR, are they are making up a less drastic version of these very real plans?

The Sierra Club says, “"This is not about us wanting to have native vegetation, as we're accused of being…It's the best approach fiscally, and for fire vegetation."
Since when does the Sierra Club care about saving money? Aren’t they an environmental organization? Are we supposed to believe it’s just a coincidence that the Sierra Club lawsuit demands the eradication of all non-native species on thousands of acres of public land? Not credible claims, Sierra Club.

The Sierra Club says, “"If you personally don't believe that eucalyptus ... were a major reason for why that ['91] fire was as extensive and dangerous, then I can't talk to you,"
Ah finally, a credible comment from the Sierra Club! Sierra Club members who oppose these projects have been trying to talk to the Sierra Club leadership for years. They refuse to discuss the issue. That’s the main reason why they continue to say fundamental stupid things, such as claiming that native plants are less flammable than non-native plants. Don’t they watch the news? Don’t they see the wildfires that rage all over the West in exclusively native vegetation? Maybe they have their heads in the sand.

Thank you for this fair and balanced article about a controversial issue.

Posted by Millie Trees on 07/06/2016 at 5:43 PM

Re: “Mama’s Royal Cafe Is for Sale

Yeah, great place. But also in the early seventies we got Rockridge Cafe (still going) and the Brick Hut, now gone. Not just Mama's. And wasn't there that little place up Fruitvale? with the small counter and huge omelets?

Posted by Ambierce Brose on 07/06/2016 at 4:43 PM

Re: “Mid-Week Menu: LocoL Expands to West Oakland; Burma Bear and Agave Open Uptown

The owners must not have read or don't care about the reviews of the location on Broadway.I cannot think of a good reason why they would want to open another location when so many people have commented about the food lacking. The taste of the food is basic at best.

Posted by Mari jones on 07/06/2016 at 4:29 PM

Re: “LocoL is Fast Food with Heart and Soul

Michael's comment proves it - Tea Party Republican folks love LOCOL! haha

Posted by Sam Lowry on 07/06/2016 at 3:44 PM

Most Popular Stories

© 2016 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation