Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

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

      To:


Comment Archives: stories: News & Opinion: Opinion

Re: “Are the Golden State Warriors a Dynasty? Obviously.

Did anyone else find the cover of this week's issue a bit... racist? You have two light-skinned African-Americans at the bottom, in the front, looking calm and civilized. Behind them, two dark-skinned men, waving their arms, with wide-open mouths showing white, kind of sharp-looking teeth. The one on the right looks just like King Kong. I don't happen to be African-American myself, so maybe it's not for me to complain, but it made me quite uncomfortable.

Posted by Michael Stoler on 06/19/2017 at 9:23 PM

Re: “Are the Golden State Warriors a Dynasty? Obviously.

. So, perhaps the more pressing dilemma is whether the teams Big Four will make the sacrifices to stick together in the coming years, as Oakland passes its legacy team off to that city on the other side of the bay.


Yes they will.

Posted by jo pac on 06/19/2017 at 2:44 PM

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

michael good: it looks like (as i thought) that there was nothing to fear regarding property destruction from any demonstrator or protester.

absolutely nothing negative happened as a result of days of protest.

hope that crow tasted *good.*

Posted by Michelle Metiche on 02/19/2017 at 5:37 PM

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

thank you cat brooks, for all you do . several people commenting are more interested in undermining your message than in understanding it . sad for them

Posted by demotro polis on 01/19/2017 at 6:10 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: “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: “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: “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

Most Popular Stories

Best of the East Bay


© 2017 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation