From gerrygras at earthlink.net Tue Jan 1 13:50:22 2013 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2013 13:50:22 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] 1912 vs. 2012 Message-ID: <50E35A1E.6040100@earthlink.net> "Compare the 1912 Elections with the 2012 Elections" by Ralph Nader http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/01/01-1 Gerry From perrysandy at aol.com Tue Jan 1 22:56:49 2013 From: perrysandy at aol.com (perrysandy at aol.com) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2013 01:56:49 -0500 (EST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] speaker for January meeting In-Reply-To: <50E22ADB.6000009@sbcglobal.net> References: <50DFCEF2.7070305@sbcglobal.net> <8CFB520D2A653CC-1DD8-6C25A@webmail-m035.sysops.aol.com> <50E22ADB.6000009@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <8CFB6CD78C50A55-15F0-7B276@Webmail-d122.sysops.aol.com> Hi Jim, Thanks for your detailed response to my inquiry about the Veronica. In fact, 9 to 5 is one of those organizations of CalWorks allies I was referring to. Others include CHAM, Low-Income Self-Help Center, SIREN, Silicon Valley Independent Living Center, California Partnership, Community Health Partnership, AACI, and others. I still believe that speakers we invite to our meetings should be proposing specific campaigns that we will (as far as we can project) have some capacity and willingness to take up. I believe the presentation by David Merritt was in this category; it involved the foreclosure summit that many Greens participated in last September. I do not think we should invite speakers OR decide our involvement in campaigns on an ad hoc basis. As much as possible, our speakers should address campaigns we are already considering, based on the interests, abilities, and connections of our membership. Sandy -----Original Message----- From: Jim Doyle To: perrysandy Cc: sosfbay-discuss Sent: Mon, Dec 31, 2012 4:16 pm Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] speaker for January meeting perrysandy at aol.com wrote: > I would not agree to this proposal without knowing who the person is, Her name is Veronica. > what groups he or she is a member of, Working Women 9 to 5 > what proposals he or she is advocating, amending the California Welfare and Institutions Code to eliminate withdrawal of either the parental allotment when a dependant under16 old is truant or the dependant's allotment when the dependant is under 16 and truant. There are other penalties in the Education Code. > whether he or she is a member of the Green Party, welfare is non partisan > . What is our criteria for inviting speakers? to my knowledge we do not have any formal criteria for speaker selection > There are about 25,000 people on CalWorks in our County, why this person? availability, personal experience, articulate > > As I said earlier, I believe our meetings should be short and energetic. amen brother. Is this going to be an agenda item? > That means the speakers we invite should be part of a plan to get > involved in a particular campaign. I am not aware of any plans to get involved in any campaign. We operate in an ad hoc basis endorsing actions, movements, events. > > > Sandy > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Doyle > To: sosfbay discussion group > Sent: Sat, Dec 29, 2012 9:19 pm > Subject: [GPSCC-chat] speaker for January meeting > >First question >would the group like to have a person who is or has been >on welfare - CalWorks- as a speaker at our January meeting? > >I know one and the person is willing to speak to us. > >Jim Doyle > >_______________________________________________ >sosfbay-discuss mailing list >sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spencer.graves at prodsyse.com Wed Jan 2 03:51:42 2013 From: spencer.graves at prodsyse.com (Spencer Graves) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 03:51:42 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] speaker for January meeting In-Reply-To: <8CFB6CD78C50A55-15F0-7B276@Webmail-d122.sysops.aol.com> References: <50DFCEF2.7070305@sbcglobal.net> <8CFB520D2A653CC-1DD8-6C25A@webmail-m035.sysops.aol.com> <50E22ADB.6000009@sbcglobal.net> <8CFB6CD78C50A55-15F0-7B276@Webmail-d122.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <50E41F4E.3010408@prodsyse.com> Hi, Sandy, et al.: What about organizing other events, e.g., panel discussions of things like Jeff Rosen's proposal to repeal at least part of the refusal of Santa Clara County to cooperate with ICE in "[in]Secure Communities"? Merriam and John organized monthly Movie Nights for a year or so. Then Merriam got tired, because she was not getting enough help to organize them. We can broaden the focus from just movies to other topics in local politics, like the recent report in the Mercury News about the VTA light rail being one of the worst performing in the nation financially, effectively because it was planned that way! I want to know what we can do in the following areas: 1. Understand better how the current light rail system was planned -- including the role of money in making the many decisions that. 2. What we can do differently to obtain more citizen interest and input to reduce the role of money in making so many decisions like this in the city, county, school board, water district, etc. Spencer On 1/1/2013 10:56 PM, perrysandy at aol.com wrote: > Hi Jim, > > Thanks for your detailed response to my inquiry about the Veronica. In fact, 9 to 5 is one of those organizations of CalWorks allies I was referring to. Others include CHAM, Low-Income Self-Help Center, SIREN, Silicon Valley Independent Living Center, California Partnership, Community Health Partnership, AACI, and others. > > I still believe that speakers we invite to our meetings should be proposing specific campaigns that we will (as far as we can project) have some capacity and willingness to take up. I believe the presentation by David Merritt was in this category; it involved the foreclosure summit that many Greens participated in last September. I do not think we should invite speakers OR decide our involvement in campaigns on an ad hoc basis. As much as possible, our speakers should address campaigns we are already considering, based on the interests, abilities, and connections of our membership. > > > Sandy > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Doyle > To: perrysandy > Cc: sosfbay-discuss > Sent: Mon, Dec 31, 2012 4:16 pm > Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] speaker for January meeting > > > perrysandy at aol.com wrote: > >> I would not agree to this proposal without knowing who the person is, > Her name is Veronica. > >> what groups he or she is a member of, > Working Women 9 to 5 > >> what proposals he or she is advocating, > amending the California Welfare and Institutions Code to eliminate > withdrawal of either the parental allotment when a dependant under16 > old is truant or the dependant's allotment when the dependant is under 16 > and truant. There are other penalties in the Education Code. > >> whether he or she is a member of the Green Party, > welfare is non partisan > >> . What is our criteria for inviting speakers? > to my knowledge we do not have any formal criteria for speaker selection > >> There are about 25,000 people on CalWorks in our County, why this person? > availability, personal experience, articulate > >> >> As I said earlier, I believe our meetings should be short and energetic. > amen brother. Is this going to be an agenda item? > >> That means the speakers we invite should be part of a plan to get >> involved in a particular campaign. > I am not aware of any plans to get involved in any campaign. > We operate in an ad hoc basis endorsing actions, movements, events. > > >> >> >> Sandy >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jim Doyle >> To: sosfbay discussion group >> Sent: Sat, Dec 29, 2012 9:19 pm >> Subject: [GPSCC-chat] speaker for January meeting >> >> First question >> would the group like to have a person who is or has been >> on welfare - CalWorks- as a speaker at our January meeting? >> >> I know one and the person is willing to speak to us. >> >> Jim Doyle >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sosfbay-discuss mailing list >> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >> http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss >> -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com From carolineyacoub at att.net Fri Jan 4 18:31:26 2013 From: carolineyacoub at att.net (Caroline Yacoub) Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 18:31:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: [HCA-SantaClara] Interested, Concerned about Health Care Reform? Message-ID: <1357353086.83618.YahooMailRC@web181301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Lynn Huidekoper To: HCAC Activists ; One Care Now ; HCA Santa Clara Yahoo Group Sent: Fri, January 4, 2013 3:27:06 AM Subject: [HCA-SantaClara] Interested, Concerned about Health Care Reform? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Interested, Concerned about?Health Care Reform? ? Is it needed?? How are other countries managing? What has been proposed in California? ? Informational meeting (free) ? Presentations ? (1) 10 minutes. Dr. Jeff Gee, M.D., Seton Medical Center?on?Current impediments to good health care practice. ? (2) 10 minutes. Hubert Morel-Seytoux, member of HCA?Health care outcomes and costs in?the US and other industrial countries ? (3)? 25 minutes. ?What is Single Payer?? and How does such health care system work? Carol Dalrymple, member of HCA- Santa Clara County Chapter ? ? Questions and Answers from the audience 45 minutes:?panel with all speakers, moderator Hubert Morel-Seytoux ? Tuesday January 15, 2013? 7:00 to 8:30 pm Foster City library, 1000 East Hillsdale Blvd ? Co-sponsors: Physicians for a National Health Program ?????????????????? ? (PNHP) San Francisco chapter, and ?????????????????? ? HCA Santa Clara chapter ? Health Care for All San Francisco mid-Peninsula chapter 57 Selby Lane Atherton, CA??94027 (650) 365 4080 hydroprose at sbcglobal.net __._,_.___ Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1) Recent Activity: Visit Your Group Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest ? Unsubscribe ? Terms of Use ? Send us Feedback . __,_._,___ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Flyer draft, 01022013 (1).doc Type: application/msword Size: 25600 bytes Desc: not available URL: From gerrygras at earthlink.net Sun Jan 6 20:25:55 2013 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 20:25:55 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Bill Moyers and Climate Change Message-ID: <50EA4E53.7040604@earthlink.net> Hi, I just watched a video of Bill Moyers interviewing Anthony Leiserowitz about climate change. Anthony Leiserowitz is the Director of the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication: http://environment.yale.edu/climate/about/staff/ Although I already know a lot about climate change, I still learned a few new interesting / surprising things from this interview. The interview is from 02:32 to 48:04 here: http://billmoyers.com/episode/full-show-ending-the-silence-on-climate-change/ Gerry From gerrygras at earthlink.net Tue Jan 8 12:37:51 2013 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 12:37:51 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] White House Petition In-Reply-To: <50EC7FAB.9020202@earthlink.net> References: <50EC7FAB.9020202@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <50EC839F.6090603@earthlink.net> FYI, This morning I received an email from Free Speech for People, ( http://www.freespeechforpeople.org/ ), Here's the important part: "We?re partnering with Avaaz to launch a new petition on the White House?s official petition site, asking President Obama to include a call for a constitutional amendment to overturn the Citizens United case in this major speech [State of the Union]." The petition is now at: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/use-state-union-call-constitutional-amendment-get-big-money-out-politics/Tc8XfKdj I am unfamiliar with White House petitions. It might be that that is a dynamic link and might not be available for long, so if that URL does not work, this one works: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petitions I would prefer a petition along the lines of what Move to Amend is trying to do (speech is not money, corporations are not people): https://movetoamend.org/ but I think signing this is better than not signing it. So I signed it at 11:58 AM and was signer #2,991. This petition was created this morning. Gerry From snug.bug at hotmail.com Tue Jan 8 16:05:37 2013 From: snug.bug at hotmail.com (Brian Good) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 16:05:37 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Drone Toy at Amazon gets Satirical Reviews Message-ID: This one's my favorite: (5 stars!) This is the best toy ever. Finally, I can pretend that I'm a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize! It's like I'm sitting right there in the White House with my very own kill list! http://www.amazon.com/Maisto-Fresh-Metal-Tailwinds-Endurance/dp/B004JFMOGK/ref=cm_rdp_product -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gerrygras at earthlink.net Tue Jan 8 16:11:59 2013 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 16:11:59 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] A Hot Year In-Reply-To: <50ECB083.3070903@earthlink.net> References: <50ECB083.3070903@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <50ECB5CF.8070408@earthlink.net> FYI, The US had a new record year. From the San Jose Mercury News: http://www.mercurynews.com/nation-world/ci_22333798/us-roasts-hottest-year-record-by-landslide From the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/ Gerry From carolineyacoub at att.net Wed Jan 9 10:37:08 2013 From: carolineyacoub at att.net (Caroline Yacoub) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 10:37:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Instead of dragging all of sosfbay with you through personal conversations Message-ID: <1357756628.6428.YahooMailRC@web181302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: Lynn Huidekoper To: HCA Santa Clara Yahoo Group Sent: Wed, January 9, 2013 2:06:29 AM Subject: [HCA-SantaClara] How to reply on Yahoo group ? The way that you reply to someone on a Yahoo group you hit Reply , then delete the "HCA Santa Clara Yahoo Group" in the "To:" section and cut and paste the person who sent the posting. In this case below you would send your reply to Joan only.? I am a member of several Yahoo groups and that is what I do. If I feel that my reply has nothing to do with Single Payer or the whole group of 181 members I don't send it to the group. It prevents clogging up of the group emails. Thanks, Lynn ________________________________ To: HCA-SantaClara at yahoogroups.com- do not reply to the group From: peacenut99 at yahoo.com ?Send replies to the sender Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2013 21:59:36 +0000 Subject: [HCA-SantaClara] Health Care For All Meeting, Thursday, January 17th, 2013, 5:45 - 7:45 pm Health Care for All Meeting Thursday, January 17th, 2013 5:45-7:45P Erik's Deli 830 Kiely Blvd. Santa Clara near Homestead Look for Neon Sign-Soup's On http://www.yelp.com/map/eriks-delicafe-santa-clara __._,_.___ Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1) Recent Activity: Visit Your Group Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest ? Unsubscribe ? Terms of Use ? Send us Feedback . __,_._,___ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com Wed Jan 9 14:38:38 2013 From: spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com (Spencer Graves) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 14:38:38 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Fwd: PLEASE SIGN ON: Support Letter to Protect Santa Clara County's Immigrant Detainer Policy In-Reply-To: <009f01cddfbe$2f375c70$8da61550$@org> References: <009f01cddfbe$2f375c70$8da61550$@org> Message-ID: <50EDF16E.4050401@structuremonitoring.com> Hello, All: Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen is asking Santa Clara to support the Secure Communities program of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The Santa Clara Forum for Immigrant Rights and Empowerment (FIRE) supports the current policy of refusing to comply with this federal program. They are asking different concerned groups to "sign on" to a letter they've drafted in opposition to this Rosen's attack on the current policy; please see the letter below. Moreover, they would like an answer by this Friday, if possible. The current policy seems to support social justice and respect for diversity, items 2 and 8 in the Green Party's Ten Key Values (www.gp.org/tenkey.php). If anyone knows a good reason the Green Party should NOT endorse this, please let me know. Otherwise, I will assume attempt to obtain approval by the County Council and assume the group would want us to support this. Thanks, Spencer -------- Original Message -------- Subject: PLEASE SIGN ON: Support Letter to Protect Santa Clara County's Immigrant Detainer Policy Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:00:02 -0800 From: Jazmin Segura To: 'Jazmin Segura' Apologies for the Cross-Postings. Please distribute widely. Dear community allies, We are the Santa Clara County FIRE Coalition, a broad cross-ethnic collaboration among community groups, faith-based groups, immigrants rights advocates, immigrants rights service providers, youth organizations, legal service providers, and civil rights groups. In October 2011, our County became a beacon for counties in the nation to protect immigrants rights and public safety by passing the most progressive detainer policy in the nation. Our County rightly and courageously stood up to ICE, and for our community. Most recently, District Attorney Jeff Rosen is trying to force the Board to re-neg this policy. We are asking you to please sign on to this letter and urge the County Board of Supervisors to protect it. To sign on, please email Jazmin Segura at SIREN at jazmin at siren-bayarea.org or Charisse Domingo with Silicon Valley De-Bug at charissedomingo at gmail.com We would like to get as many organizations to sign on by Tuesday, January 8, 2013. Thank you so much for your support. Sincerely, Santa Clara County FIRE Coalition SIGN ON LETTER: We, the undersigned, stand together in strongly supporting Santa Clara County's current Civil Detainer Policy 3.54 voted in by the Board of Supervisors that separates local law enforcement from federal immigration, builds needed trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement, and creates a safer Santa Clara County for all. As such, we also collectively reject any attempts to undermine the policy. Since October 2011, when the policy was passed, Santa Clara County has become a beacon for counties nationwide to follow as an intelligent and value-driven response to immigration detainer requests in a way that protects immigrant rights. As a region where one-third of our residents are immigrants, nearly half of our workforce is foreign-born and close to two-thirds of those under the age of 18 are children of immigrants -- it was appropriate that our county lead the way. Refusing to buy any more lies from ICE who strung along the entire country with the failed promises of the Secure Communities Program, Santa Clara County wisely took a stand to not fuel this broken immigration system that to date, has deported more than over 80,000 from California alone. The policy, guided through a lengthy process that included input from elected decision-makers, law enforcement officials, legal experts, and community advocates respects the criminal court system in imposing and overseeing the appropriate punishment on criminal behavior. Local law enforcement's use of detainer requests to determine public safety even after the courts have determined the appropriate custodial status only erodes trust and causes confusion between immigrant communities and the local law enforcement. ICE, which has proven to be as unaccountable as it has been deceptive, should not be controlling our county's local justice system. When this happens, public safety and belief in the integrity of our local justice system becomes compromised. The current policy demonstrated our County's capacity to elevate local policy setting beyond the false choice propagated by ICE of public safety OR immigrants rights. In addition, it is a failure of leadership if the County decides to even reconsider - or worse revoke -- this policy only a year after it was passed. We count on our leaders to be consistent, strong, and enduring in their commitment to the people of this county. To retreat from a policy you voted in just a year prior would send a confusing message to the public that would cause a crisis of confidence. How much can we depend on our elected officials if they believe in a policy enough to vote for it one year, then flip flop just a year later? The County spent more than a year deliberating on this policy which was passed by the Board of Supervisors and supported by a cross-ethnic collaboration of faith based organizations, civil rights groups, community groups, immigrants rights service providers, and immigrant rights advocates. Santa Clara County had it right the first time. Protecting immigrant rights results in public safety. We urge you to protect the Civil Detainer Policy 3.54 as it stands, and let our community continue to build a County that respects the rights and well-being of all its residents through sound and principled policies. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: winmail.dat Type: application/ms-tnef Size: 6102 bytes Desc: not available URL: From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 9 18:12:00 2013 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 18:12:00 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Fwd: PLEASE SIGN ON: Support Letter to Protect Santa Clara County's Immigrant Detainer Policy In-Reply-To: <50EDF16E.4050401@structuremonitoring.com> References: <009f01cddfbe$2f375c70$8da61550$@org> <50EDF16E.4050401@structuremonitoring.com> Message-ID: <50EE2370.4000802@sbcglobal.net> I approve of the Green Party of Santa Clara County signing on to the letter. Jim Doyle Spencer Graves wrote: > Hello, All: > > > Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen is asking Santa > Clara to support the Secure Communities program of US Immigration and > Customs Enforcement. The Santa Clara Forum for Immigrant Rights and > Empowerment (FIRE) supports the current policy of refusing to comply > with this federal program. They are asking different concerned > groups to "sign on" to a letter they've drafted in opposition to this > Rosen's attack on the current policy; please see the letter below. > > > Moreover, they would like an answer by this Friday, if > possible. The current policy seems to support social justice and > respect for diversity, items 2 and 8 in the Green Party's Ten Key > Values (www.gp.org/tenkey.php). If anyone knows a good reason the > Green Party should NOT endorse this, please let me know. Otherwise, I > will assume attempt to obtain approval by the County Council and > assume the group would want us to support this. > > > Thanks, > Spencer > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: PLEASE SIGN ON: Support Letter to Protect Santa Clara > County's Immigrant Detainer Policy > Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 13:00:02 -0800 > From: Jazmin Segura > To: 'Jazmin Segura' > > > >Apologies for the Cross-Postings. Please distribute widely. > >Dear community allies, > >We are the Santa Clara County FIRE Coalition, a broad cross-ethnic >collaboration among community groups, faith-based groups, immigrants rights >advocates, immigrants rights service providers, youth organizations, legal >service providers, and civil rights groups. In October 2011, our County >became a beacon for counties in the nation to protect immigrants rights and >public safety by passing the most progressive detainer policy in the nation. >Our County rightly and courageously stood up to ICE, and for our community. > > >Most recently, District Attorney Jeff Rosen is trying to force the Board to >re-neg this policy. We are asking you to please sign on to this letter and >urge the County Board of Supervisors to protect it. To sign on, please >email Jazmin Segura at SIREN at jazmin at siren-bayarea.org or Charisse Domingo >with Silicon Valley De-Bug at charissedomingo at gmail.com We would like to >get as many organizations to sign on by Tuesday, January 8, 2013. > >Thank you so much for your support. > >Sincerely, >Santa Clara County FIRE Coalition > >SIGN ON LETTER: >We, the undersigned, stand together in strongly supporting Santa Clara >County's current Civil Detainer Policy 3.54 voted in by the Board of >Supervisors that separates local law enforcement from federal immigration, >builds needed trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement, and >creates a safer Santa Clara County for all. As such, we also collectively >reject any attempts to undermine the policy. > > > >Since October 2011, when the policy was passed, Santa Clara County has >become a beacon for counties nationwide to follow as an intelligent and >value-driven response to immigration detainer requests in a way that >protects immigrant rights. As a region where one-third of our residents are >immigrants, nearly half of our workforce is foreign-born and close to >two-thirds of those under the age of 18 are children of immigrants -- it was >appropriate that our county lead the way. Refusing to buy any more lies from >ICE who strung along the entire country with the failed promises of the >Secure Communities Program, Santa Clara County wisely took a stand to not >fuel this broken immigration system that to date, has deported more than >over 80,000 from California alone. > >The policy, guided through a lengthy process that included input from >elected decision-makers, law enforcement officials, legal experts, and >community advocates respects the criminal court system in imposing and >overseeing the appropriate punishment on criminal behavior. Local law >enforcement's use of detainer requests to determine public safety even after >the courts have determined the appropriate custodial status only erodes >trust and causes confusion between immigrant communities and the local law >enforcement. ICE, which has proven to be as unaccountable as it has been >deceptive, should not be controlling our county's local justice system. When >this happens, public safety and belief in the integrity of our local justice >system becomes compromised. The current policy demonstrated our County's >capacity to elevate local policy setting beyond the false choice propagated >by ICE of public safety OR immigrants rights. > >In addition, it is a failure of leadership if the County decides to even >reconsider - or worse revoke -- this policy only a year after it was passed. >We count on our leaders to be consistent, strong, and enduring in their >commitment to the people of this county. To retreat from a policy you voted >in just a year prior would send a confusing message to the public that would >cause a crisis of confidence. How much can we depend on our elected >officials if they believe in a policy enough to vote for it one year, then >flip flop just a year later? > >The County spent more than a year deliberating on this policy which was >passed by the Board of Supervisors and supported by a cross-ethnic >collaboration of faith based organizations, civil rights groups, community >groups, immigrants rights service providers, and immigrant rights advocates. >Santa Clara County had it right the first time. Protecting immigrant rights >results in public safety. We urge you to protect the Civil Detainer Policy >3.54 as it stands, and let our community continue to build a County that >respects the rights and well-being of all its residents through sound and >principled policies. > > > > > > From vdf at juno.com Wed Jan 9 18:45:33 2013 From: vdf at juno.com (Valerie D. Face) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 02:45:33 GMT Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Silicon Valley Transportation Summit: Sat 2/23/2013, 10-4, San Jose Message-ID: <20130109.184533.10823.0@webmail05.vgs.untd.com> Hi folks, FYI, there will be a Silicon Valley Transportation Summit on Saturday, February 23 from 10:00 AM to 4:00 PM at Luther Burbank School in San Jose. Online registration starts a week from today (January 16) at: http://www.transformca.org/SiliconValleySummit2013 Event description: "The Silicon Valley Transportation Summit is a day-long gathering to encourage community leaders and residents to get involved in the many opportunities to shape their neighborhoods, streets, and transportation options in the coming years. The conference aims to foster deep community engagement and meaningful participation in transportation and land use planning processes by providing trainings on what?s at stake in the coming year and how to influence plans, projects, and policies. The conference will also feature accessible and interactive workshops on best practices for creating accessible communities. Our target audience is new and experienced community residents, leaders, and activists who want to take part in shaping their communities." Best wishes, Valerie ~*~*~*~ "Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - from "The Summer Day" by Mary Oliver http://www.loc.gov/poetry/180/133.html ____________________________________________________________ Woman is 53 But Looks 25 Mom reveals 1 simple wrinkle trick that has angered doctors... http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/50ee2ba7864e32ba63f85st02vuc From spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com Sun Jan 13 14:54:06 2013 From: spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com (Spencer Graves) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 14:54:06 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] "Enemy Alien" at the Peace Center, March 23, 30, or Apr. 6? Message-ID: <50F33B0E.8080203@structuremonitoring.com> Hello, All: Might the Green Party of Santa Clara County care to endorse the showing of the movie "Enemy Alien" (www.lifeorliberty.org/enemy-alien)? It's the story of a Palestinian-American activist harassed by authorities. The filmmaker is a Japanese-American, whose parents spent World War II in a concentration camp in the US. This is being organized by the South Bay Committee Against Political Repression. We plan to show it at the Peace Center. Our first choice of date is Saturday, March 23. However, if you know of some other event that might conflict with that date, we might be convinced to change to March 30 or April 6. I plan to put this on the agenda for our meeting January 24. Best Wishes, Spencer -- Spencer Graves, PhD Executive Director effectivedefense.org 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com From cbrouillet at igc.org Mon Jan 14 14:32:03 2013 From: cbrouillet at igc.org (Carol Brouillet) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:32:03 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Join Tuesday Protest Against Citizens United Message-ID: Let me know if you want a ride or a copy of the flyer. Carol -650-857-0927 Join Protest Against Citizens United Over 85% of Americans agree that 1) there is too much special interest money in elections and 2) corporations have too much control over government rules and regulations. The Mercury News has corroborated this by showing who really writes bills in Sacramento. These facts mean very little unless We the People express our righteous anger?peacefully but vociferously. Locally, Santa Clara County Move To Amend (SCC MTA) is making a difference. Of over 100 MTA affiliates nation-wide working for a 28th amendment to overturn corporate constitutional rights, SCC MTA is the only one to conduct national webinars on corporate constitutional rights and duties, on grassroots organizing, and on legal analysis of Supreme Court cases like Citizens United. Please join over 25 organizations at noon on Tuesday, January 15 where corporate constitutional rights took hold in 1886: at the historic courthouse on First Street in St. James Park. Speakers from Rev. Jeff Moore and Blanca Alvarado to Ben Field and Craig Dunkerley will join a 3-piece brass band to proclaim: We the People must act. Richard Hobbs Moderator, Santa Clara County Move To Amend San Jose -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From snug.bug at hotmail.com Thu Jan 17 00:03:24 2013 From: snug.bug at hotmail.com (Brian Good) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 00:03:24 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Petition to Ban Weaponized Drones Message-ID: http://act.rootsaction.org/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=6180 Almost 60,000 signed already. Impressive sponsor list. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spencer.graves at prodsyse.com Thu Jan 17 19:22:29 2013 From: spencer.graves at prodsyse.com (Spencer Graves) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:22:29 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Volunteers for delegates for the statewide Standing General Assembly and Santa Clara County Council? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50F8BFF5.5060902@prodsyse.com> Hello, All: The Santa Clara Greens could use more people on the County Council and as representatives for a statewide email Standing General Assembly (SGA). We currently have 4 people on the County Council, only 3 of which are officially signed up for the SGA. We're allowed 5 on the SGA. A call for volunteers is hereby tendered for at least one more person to serve on the County Council and two more to represent Santa Clara County on the SGA. We currently have 4 males on the County Council. More females would reduce the apparent discrepancy between the current gender composition of our County Council and our party's commitment to gender equity. For the past year or so that I've been on the County Council, our duties have essentially been limited to informal meetings to consider approving time sensitive issues that can't wait until the next monthly meeting. The duties of members of the SGA have been to monitor email traffic on "gpca-votes at cagreens.org" and do whatever you think is appropriate. For more on this, see the email below -- or ask me. Best Wishes, Spencer -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: SGA Quorum Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 09:00:53 -0800 From: Jared Laiti To: Spencer Graves Spencer, Below is the message that went out to the county contacts list including the email to report delegates to. Jared ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: County Contacts Date: Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 11:14 PM Subject: [GPCA Official Notice] Announcement: GPCA Standing Green Assembly To: County Contacts Subject: Announcement: GPCA Standing Green Assembly Dear Green Party County Council This is an initial announcement to let you know that the GPCA Coordinating Committee has acted to establish a GPCA Standing General Assembly (SGA) for these two purposes *(1) To conduct County Polling on the ballot measures that will be on the statewide ballot in November. * *(2) To conduct voting on the individual sections of the SGA proposal presented at the San Francisco General Assembly, as requested by many delegates there* * * Voting on these sections would occur after voting upon the ballot measures, to leave time for careful consideration of each. The SGA will consists of delegates from each county, just like a face-to-face General Assembly, and will be conducted on-line via a voting page similar to that of the Green Party of the United States (http://gp.org/cgi-bin/vote/index), supported by email list and conference call discussion. Counties are asked to identify their Standing Green Delegates for this process before July 1, appointed by the outgoing 2010-2012 County Council, and send their names and email addresses to applications at cagreens.org. The number of delegates per active county with data based upon the annual February statewide registation count is listed on this web page Further details on the operation and exact timing of the SGA will be soon forthcoming. Please contact us with any questions you may have. Sincerely, Sanda Everette, Alex Shantz Co-coordinators, GPCA Coordinating Committee http://www.cagreens.org/committees/coordinating PS - Please note that the use of the SGA for these two purposes does not affect the scheduling of General Assemblies. Since the San Francisco General Assembly did not set the next date and location, GPCA Bylaws task the Coordinating Committee with that responsibility. At present, no potential host county has been identified. It is expected that no General Assembly would occur before the November election. *Attached below - Proposal approved by the Coordinating Committee on June 4th: * That the CC adopt the following bylaws interpretation Whereas there has been broad interest within the GPCA in establishing a Standing General Assembly since at least 2004-2007, when a CC-appointed sub-committee was tasked with researching how to bring one to the GPCA (http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sgarc-l); and Whereas there was strong support for a Standing General Assembly during the December 2011 General Assembly strategy session discussion in Los Angeles; and Whereas the strategy session is designated by GPCA bylaws to provide input into a two-year party work plan for the CC to present at the subsequent General Assembly; and Whereas the GPCA Bylaws Committee subsequently began work on an SGA right at that meeting and thereafter; and Whereas the GPCA Bylaws Committee determined that a revision of the GPCA Bylaws to incorporate a Standing General Assembly would be best accomplished as part of an overall reordering and simplification of the existing bylaws text that reformatted, renumbered, and edited for brevity, clarity, consistency and better organization, without changing any meaning; and Whereas the GPCA Bylaws Committee additionally determined that to ensure a smoothly functioning SGA, other amendments to the text should be made to resolve ambiguities and disputed points in related processes that would affect the SGA, including how delegates would be chosen, which counties are active, which committees and working groups can bring proposals to the SGA and upon what areas, and when and how coordinating committee elections are held; and Whereas the Agenda Team, Coordinating Committee and General Assembly all agreed upon dedicating less than two hours to the SGA proposal on Sunday morning, May 13; and Whereas it was clear from discussion from delegates during that agenda item that they wanted to see an SGA; and Whereas the GPCA?s consensus-seeking process was followed, where clarifying questions were taken and outstanding concerns expressed on the text, and amendments proposed to address the outstanding concerns; and Whereas many delegates did not express concerns with specific parts of the SGA proposal, but instead requested breaking up the proposal into a series of votes on various parts of the proposal; and Whereas for the purposes of responding to this outstanding concern, the presenters separated the part of the proposal about Coordinating Committee elections from those parts relating to an SGA; Whereas by the end of the time allowed, there was not a decision to approve bylaws language to establish an SGA; and Whereas the General Assembly approved of a two year work plan calendar on May 12th, which was based a Standing Green Assembly being in place and in use over next two years, starting on July 1; with the calendar's approval contingent upon an SGA being approved by the General Assembly; and Whereas there will not be a General Assembly before the November General Election and therefore the GPCA must use its County Polling process to take its positions on the between seven and nine measures that will be on the November ballot; and Whereas the work plan calendar is based upon the SGA scheduled County Polling to take place via the SGA this fall; and Whereas the GPCA did not reach quorum in County Polling held this spring, with the email County Polling model used; and Whereas the GPCA Campaigns and Candidates Working Group is of the opinion that the existing County Polling process in the Bylaws appendix can be interpreted to allow for the use of the same voting page technology such as that specified in the SGA proposal; and Whereas for the purposes of maximizing its stances on the ballot measures, its in the strategic interest of the GPCA to establish its positions by Labor Day, when the fall campaign official begins; and therefore such County Polling should begin its discussion process by approximately the same time as advocated in the SGA proposal ? July 1st ? in order to provide for sufficient discussion and voting before Labor Day; Therefore it is in the interest of the CC to authorize its IT sub-committee to prepare the web-paged voting capability to effectuate such a County Polling process in the time period recommended by July 1st if feasible; and Whereas the CC is tasked with calling a General Assembly under GPCA Bylaws, when the General Assembly has not done so itself; and Whereas the San Francisco General Assembly in May did not set a date or location for the next General Assembly; and Whereas no county party has come forward with a proposal to host the next General Assembly; and Whereas under GPCA Bylaws the CC is authorized to ?make decisions (but not set policy) between General Assembly meetings; and Whereas given the broad support for the SGA concept at the May General Assembly suggests that the topic continues to need to be heard; and Whereas to address the SGA proposal in its multiple parts in the manner requested by some delegates would require a large part of the weekend of the next General Assembly, if the SGA is agendized for it; and Whereas attendance at recent General Assembly has been only between the high 30s to high 40s in delegates, with many parts of the state unrepresented because of the time and cost involved with travel; and Whereas a General Assembly that is mostly about bylaws is likely to draw an even smaller number of delegates than the low turnout of recent years, depreciating the democratic decision-making base of any decisions taken; and Whereas at the same time it was clear that for the just concluded General Assembly, many delegates came without having either read the material closely and/or didn't know or understand the existing GPCA bylaws, suggesting that the face-to-face process may not be the best for intricate, extensive bylaw revision work; and Whereas establishing a SGA would address many issues for the party, including allowing it to make decisions in between general assemblies, to involve more counties in the process, to provide more time for delegates to review proposed material, and to take care of various administrative decision-making via the SGA to free up face-to-face meetings for more direct political work; and Whereas GPCA Bylaws around bylaws interpretations state that the CC "shall decide these questions subject to review at the next General Assembly?; Therefore the CC interprets the existing bylaws that allow it to set the next GA, to set the next GA as an SGA, based upon the SGA proposal of May 13, for the following purposes: 1) Conducting County Polling; and 2) Voting upon the individual sections of the SGA proposal, to address the outstanding concerns from the San Francisco General Assembly (and in the process allow the SGA to conduct its review of the CC?s interpretation). _______________________________________________ Contacts2006 mailing list Contacts2006 at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/contacts2006 > -- > Spencer Graves, PE, PhD > President and Chief Technology Officer > Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. > 751 Emerson Ct. > San Jos?, CA 95126 > ph: 408-655-4567 > web: www.structuremonitoring.com From snug.bug at hotmail.com Fri Jan 18 15:38:29 2013 From: snug.bug at hotmail.com (Brian Good) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:38:29 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Matt Taibbi Rides Again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A fine harrumph about the Bailout. My 1600-word digest of a 7500-word article appears below. The article is in the January 17th, 2013 issue of Rolling Stone. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/secret-and-lies-of-the-bailout-20130104#ixzz2HQx5HDxw Secrets and Lies of the Bailout The federal rescue of Wall Street didn?t fix the economy ? it created a permanent bailout state based on a Ponzi-like confidence scheme. And the worst may be yet to come We were told that the bank bailout not only prevented a Depression, but the money was all paid back. No harm, no foul? Not so. The bailout was one of the biggest and most elaborate falsehoods ever sold to the American people. While they said the taxpayers were stepping in temporarily to prop up the economy, we were doing the exact opposite: committing to permanent, blind support of an ungovernable, unregulatable, hyperconcentrated new financial system that exacerbates the greed and inequality that caused the crash, and forces Wall Street banks like Goldman Sachs and Citigroup to increase risk rather than reduce it. And all done in the name of creating jobs and helping regular people. The government gave Wall Street not just heaps of money but also the right to hide the truth. The most important mechanism of the bailout was its lies. Investors stay in an obviously corrupt financial marketplace not because they believe the bullshit (they don't) but because the government's commitment to sell the idea that 2008's problems have been fixed impresses them. THEY LIED TO PASS THE BAILOUT The proposal was that Treasury buy $700 billion of troubled mortgages from the banks and modify them to help struggling homeowners, but as soon as the legislation was passed the Fed and the Treasury abandoned the purchase in favor of direct injections of billions in cash into companies like Goldman and Citigroup. Larry Summers, Obama's senior economic adviser, pitched the bailout in January, 2009 as aid to homeowners in foreclosure and a stimulus to bank lending to put people back to work. But only $50 billion was earmarked for homeowner relief, and of this only $4 billion has been spent?just one percent of the total TARP spending. THEY LIED ABOUT LENDING Though Summers promised Congress that increased lending by banks would be a condition for receiving bailout funds, officials decided they would not even ask the banks to monitor what they did with the bailout money, fearing that banks would reject money that had strings attached. Over four years, banks spent about 3.6 billion for mortgage modifications, but during this time they mothballed enormous sums at the Federal Reserve ($2 billion before the bailout became $843 billion a few months after the bailout?and today $1,400 billion). The interest rate is very low, but the $3.6 billion a year the banks get returns more in one year than the total spent on homeowner relief over 4 years. Though the bailouts were sold as a means of stimulating economy-boosting lending, three months after the bailout TARP recipients' lending had slowed at a rate double that of banks that didn't receive TARP funds. The biggest bailout recipient, Citigroup, cut lending by 3 percent. The government found that among the nine biggest TARP recipients, lending "did not, in fact, increase." Instead, taxpayer money subsidized finance mergers (Chase-Bear Stearns, Wells Fargo?-Wachovia, Bank of America-Merrill Lynch). THEY LIED ABOUT THE BANKS' HEALTH Congress had approved $700 billion to buy up toxic mortgages, but $250 billion of the money was given as direct capital injections for banks, half of it to nine of the largest banks. Though Paulson and Co. claimed that only "healthy and viable" banks would get the cash, Tim Geithner admitted to the inspector general, Neil Barofsky, that the first nine bailout recipients were chosen for size, not viability. "These companies weren't really healthy and viable," said Barofsky. This episode set the precedent: unhealthy banks were allowed to falsely claim health, and the government endorsed their claims. Projecting an image of soundness and bolstering market confidence were, to the government, more important than truth. So now the financial market had two tiers?those who knew how bad things were and those who didn't. Then-FDIC chief Sheila Bair expressed astonishment when Citibank got an acceptable fitness rating from regulators ?when it was on the brink of failure", but FDIC gave Citi bailout help. For years the big banks had been falsely claiming financial health. Lehman Brothers, for instance, used funny accounting to book tens of billions of loans as revenues each quarter, overstating its cash holdings. In 2007 Citi paid $10.7 billion in dividends though it had lost $9.8 billion in one quarter of that year alone. The Ponzi-flavored financial sector depended on continual flows of new money from things like subprime mortgage sales to cover up toxic investments that, sooner or later, would explode. Instead of clearing the air, the government doubled down on such fraud, awarding healthy ratings to failing banks and even twisting its numerical audits and assessments to fit the cooked-up narrative, using lies as a form of monetary aid as the economy becomes a vast confidence game based not on real accounting and real numbers, but on belief. THEY LIED ABOUT BONUSES TARP's restrictions on executive bonuses had loopholes, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac gave more than $200 million in bonuses? between 2008 and 2010, even though they (a) lost $100 billion in 2008 alone, and (b) required nearly $400 billion in federal assistance during the bailout period. AIG paid $1 million each to 73 employees of AIG Financial Products. The top five executives at each of the 18 biggest bailout recipients received a total of $142 million in stocks and options which then, due to government support of the banks, soared to $457 million, an average of $4 million per executive. THEY LIED ABOUT THE BAILOUT BEING TEMPORARY Tens of billions in deferred tax assets constitute an off-the-books bailout for companies like AIG, GM and Citigroup as they keep future tax bills down. "That's never going to appear on any report," says Barofsky. The losses from the same toxic deals that cratered the economy can be written off for years to come, depriving the government of tax revenues that might have helped homeowners and small businesses who were screwed over by the banks in the first place. Even worse, only in late 2011 did news of a ?secret bailout? of $7.7 trillion in loans become public, and this was only after Congress forced an extraordinary one-time audit of the Federal Reserve, and Bloomberg Markets went to court to win the right to publish the data. By late 2008, Goldman Sachs had snarfed up $34 billion in federal loans that were not disclosed to shareholders or taxpayers. Stephen Friedman, a Goldman director who was also chairman of the New York Fed, bought $4 million of Goldman stock in 2008 and 2009 ? years before the Federal lifeline was made public. Citigroup CEO Vikram Pandit bought nearly $7 million in Citi stock just as his firm was secretly taking out $99.5 billion in Fed loans. Jamie Dimon bought $11 million in Chase stock at a time when his firm was receiving as much as $60 billion in secret Fed loans and more than a year before it was disclosed to shareholders in March 2010. In late 2011, the SEC sent letters to five megabanks asking why they hadn't fully disclosed their secret borrowing. All five essentially replied that their massive borrowing from the Fed was not "material," or that its piecemeal disclosure was adequate. By failing to act, federal regulators? have tacitly approved the nondisclosure. The government has decided that the markets can't handle the truth. Willingness to call dying banks healthy, sham tests, failure to enforce bonus rules, indifference to public disclosure, not to mention the lack of criminal investigations into pre-bailout fraud?these comprise the largest and most valuable bailout of all. The government promises the banks: No matter how much you screw up, we will lie for you and let you get away with just about anything. We will make this ongoing bailout a pervasive and permanent part of the financial system. Geithner's program of ?capital support? was an Implicit Guarantee that the banks would not be allowed to fail. Its cash value shows in the interest rates. Just before the crisis began, Big Finance ($100 billion or more in assets) paid about 0.29 percent less to borrow money than smaller firms did. Once the bailouts were in full swing, the spread was 0.78 percent and it remains at 0.5 percent today?an annual subsidy of $34 billion a year to the nation's 18 biggest banks. While more than 300 smaller firms are still struggling to repay their bailout debts, the megabanks have all paid back their TARP loans, and have grown even bigger and more unmanageable, concentrating and endangering the economy more than ever. With their combined 14,420 subsidiaries, the six largest banks would need 70,000 examiners to get the same attention normally given to a community bank. They're beyond regulation even while free or nearly-free money has inspired the megabanks to take on riskier and more speculative investments. 2011 saw banks increase their investments in junk-rated companies by 74 percent, systematically easing standards in search of more high-yield lending business. The bailouts have brought us right back where we started, bringing a banking system that discriminates against community banks, makes Too Big to Fail banks even Too Bigger to Failier, increases risk, discourages sound business lending, and punishes savings. The bailout makes lying on behalf of our biggest and most corrupt banks the official policy of the United States government. If any one of those banks fails, it will cause another financial crisis, meaning we're essentially wedded to that policy for the rest of eternity ? or at least until the markets call our bluff, which could happen any minute now. ### -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: taibbi shortened3.doc Type: application/msword Size: 31232 bytes Desc: not available URL: From gerrygras at earthlink.net Fri Jan 18 18:18:03 2013 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:18:03 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Matt Taibbi Rides Again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50FA025B.60202@earthlink.net> Good article. I recommend reading the whole thing. If you won't, then at least read the last page: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/secret-and-lies-of-the-bailout-20130104?page=5 I think this is a serious matter. Basically the government has not fixed the problems that created the 2008 crisis, so we can expect another similar crisis with consequences that might be as bad or worse. Gerry Brian Good wrote: > > A fine harrumph about the Bailout. My 1600-word digest of a 7500-word > article appears below. > > > /The article is in the January 17th, 2013 issue of Rolling Stone./ > > http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/secret-and-lies-of-the-bailout-20130104#ixzz2HQx5HDxw > > > Secrets and Lies of the Bailout > > > The federal rescue of Wall Street didn?t fix the economy ? it > created a permanent bailout state based on a Ponzi-like confidence > scheme. And the worst may be yet to come > > > > We were told that the bank bailout not only prevented a Depression, but > the money was all paid back. No harm, no foul? Not so. The bailout was > one of the biggest and most elaborate falsehoods ever sold to the > American people. While they said the taxpayers were stepping in > temporarily to prop up the economy, we were doing the exact opposite: > committing to permanent, blind support of an ungovernable, > unregulatable, hyperconcentrated new financial system that exacerbates > the greed and inequality that caused the crash, and forces Wall Street > banks like Goldman Sachs and Citigroup to increase risk rather than > reduce it. And all done in the name of creating jobs and helping regular > people. > > The government gave Wall Street not just heaps of money but also the > right to hide the truth. The most important mechanism of the bailout was > its lies. Investors stay in an obviously corrupt financial marketplace > not because they believe the bullshit (they don't) but because the > government's commitment to sell the idea that 2008's problems have been > fixed impresses them. > > *THEY LIED TO PASS THE BAILOUT* > The proposal was that Treasury buy $700 billion of troubled mortgages > from the banks and modify them to help struggling homeowners, but as > soon as the legislation was passed the Fed and the Treasury abandoned > the purchase in favor of direct injections of billions in cash into > companies like Goldman and Citigroup. Larry Summers, Obama's senior > economic adviser, pitched the bailout in January, 2009 as aid to > homeowners in foreclosure and a stimulus to bank lending to put people > back to work. But only $50 billion was earmarked for homeowner relief, > and of this only $4 billion has been spent?just one percent of the total > TARP spending. > > *THEY LIED ABOUT LENDING* > Though Summers promised Congress that increased lending by banks would > be a condition for receiving bailout funds, officials decided they would > not even ask the banks to /monitor/what they did with the bailout money, > fearing that banks would reject money that had strings attached. Over > four years, banks spent about 3.6 billion for mortgage modifications, > but during this time they mothballed enormous sums at the Federal > Reserve ($2 billion before the bailout became $843 billion a few months > after the bailout?and today $1,400 billion). The interest rate is very > low, but the $3.6 billion a year the banks get returns more in one year > than the total spent on homeowner relief over 4 years. > > Though the bailouts were sold as a means of stimulating economy-boosting > lending, three months after the bailout TARP recipients' lending had > slowed at a rate double that of banks that didn't receive TARP funds. > The biggest bailout recipient, Citigroup, cut lending by 3 percent. The > government found that among the nine biggest TARP recipients, lending > "did not, in fact, increase." Instead, taxpayer money subsidized finance > mergers (Chase-Bear Stearns, Wells Fargo?-Wachovia, Bank of > America-Merrill Lynch). > > > *THEY LIED ABOUT THE **BANKS' **HEALTH* > > Congress had approved $700 billion to buy up toxic mortgages, but $250 > billion of the money was given as direct capital injections for banks, > half of it to nine of the largest banks. Though Paulson and Co. claimed > that only "healthy and viable" banks would get the cash, Tim Geithner > admitted to the inspector general, Neil Barofsky, that the first nine > bailout recipients were chosen for size, not viability. "These companies > weren't really healthy and viable," said Barofsky. > > > This episode set the precedent: unhealthy banks were allowed to falsely > claim health, and the government endorsed their claims. Projecting an > image of soundness and bolstering market confidence were, to the > government, more important than truth. So now the financial market had > two tiers?those who knew how bad things were and those who didn't. > Then-FDIC chief Sheila Bair expressed astonishment when Citibank got an > acceptable fitness rating from regulators ?when it was on the brink of > failure", but FDIC gave Citi bailout help. > > For years the big banks had been falsely claiming financial health. > Lehman Brothers, for instance, used funny accounting to book tens of > billions of loans as revenues each quarter, overstating its cash > holdings. In 2007 Citi paid $10.7 billion in dividends though it had > lost $9.8 billion in one quarter of that year alone. The Ponzi-flavored > financial sector depended on continual flows of new money from things > like subprime mortgage sales to cover up toxic investments that, sooner > or later, would explode. Instead of clearing the air, the government > doubled down on such fraud, awarding healthy ratings to failing banks > and even twisting its numerical audits and assessments to fit the > cooked-up narrative, using lies as a form of monetary aid as the economy > becomes a vast confidence game based not on real accounting and real > numbers, but on /belief/. > > *THEY LIED ABOUT BONUSES* > > TARP's restrictions on executive bonuses had loopholes, and Fannie Mae > and Freddie Mac gave more than $200 million in bonuses? between 2008 and > 2010, even though they (a) lost $100 billion in 2008 alone, and (b) > required nearly $400 billion in federal assistance during the bailout > period. AIG paid $1 million each to 73 employees of AIG Financial > Products. The top five executives at each of the 18 biggest bailout > recipients received a total of $142 million in stocks and options which > then, due to government support of the banks, soared to $457 million, an > average of $4 million per executive. > > > *THEY LIED ABOUT THE BAILOUT BEING TEMPORARY* > > Tens of billions in deferred tax assets constitute an off-the-books > bailout for companies like AIG, GM and Citigroup as they keep future tax > bills down. "That's never going to appear on any report," says Barofsky. > The losses from the same toxic deals that cratered the economy can be > written off for years to come, depriving the government of tax revenues > that might have helped homeowners and small businesses who were screwed > over by the banks in the first place. > > > Even worse, only in late 2011 did news of a ?secret bailout? of $7.7 > trillion in loans become public, and this was only after Congress forced > an extraordinary one-time audit of the Federal Reserve, and /Bloomberg > Markets /went to court to win the right to publish the data. By late > 2008, Goldman Sachs had snarfed up $34 billion in federal loans that > were not disclosed to shareholders or taxpayers. Stephen Friedman, a > Goldman director who was also chairman of the New York Fed, bought $4 > million of Goldman stock in 2008 and 2009 ? years before the Federal > lifeline was made public. Citigroup CEO Vikram Pandit bought nearly $7 > million in Citi stock just as his firm was secretly taking out $99.5 > billion in Fed loans. Jamie Dimon bought $11 million in Chase stock at a > time when his firm was receiving as much as $60 billion in secret Fed > loans and more than a year before it was disclosed to shareholders in > March 2010. In late 2011, the SEC sent letters to five megabanks asking > why they hadn't fully disclosed their secret borrowing. All five > essentially replied that their massive borrowing from the Fed was not > "material," or that its piecemeal disclosure was adequate. By failing to > act, federal regulators? have tacitly approved the nondisclosure. The > government has decided that the markets can't handle the truth. > > Willingness to call dying banks healthy, sham tests, failure to enforce > bonus rules, indifference to public disclosure, not to mention the lack > of criminal investigations into pre-bailout fraud?these comprise the > largest and most valuable bailout of all. The government promises the > banks: No matter how much you screw up, we will lie for you and let you > get away with just about anything. We will make this ongoing bailout a > pervasive and permanent part of the financial system. Geithner's program > of ?capital support? was an Implicit Guarantee that the banks would not > be allowed to fail. Its cash value shows in the interest rates. Just > before the crisis began, Big Finance ($100 billion or more in assets) > paid about 0.29 percent less to borrow money than smaller firms did. > Once the bailouts were in full swing, the spread was 0.78 percent and it > remains at 0.5 percent today?an annual subsidy of $34 billion a year to > the nation's 18 biggest banks. > > > While more than 300 smaller firms are still struggling to repay their > bailout debts, the megabanks have allpaid back their TARP loans, and > have grown even bigger and more unmanageable, concentrating and > endangering the economy more than ever. With their combined 14,420 > subsidiaries, the six largest banks would need 70,000 examiners to get > the same attention normally given to a community bank. They're beyond > regulation even while free or nearly-free money has inspired the > megabanks to take on riskier and more speculative investments. 2011 saw > banks increase their investments in junk-rated companies by 74 percent, > systematically easing standards in search of more high-yield lending > business. The bailouts have brought us right back where we started, > bringing a banking system that discriminates against community banks, > makes Too Big to Fail banks even Too Bigger to Failier, increases risk, > discourages sound business lending, and punishes savings. The bailout > makes lying on behalf of our biggest and most corrupt banks the official > policy of the United States government. If any one of those banks fails, > it will cause another financial crisis, meaning we're essentially wedded > to that policy for the rest of eternity ? or at least until the markets > call our bluff, which could happen any minute now. > > ### > > > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > From snug.bug at hotmail.com Sat Jan 19 10:13:25 2013 From: snug.bug at hotmail.com (Brian Good) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 10:13:25 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Guns Message-ID: I don't know the Green Party's position on gun control, but the lack of chatter on the issue here increases my confidence that that the issue is trivial and Obama's recent aggressive activity is a mere smokescreen so he can make his supporters think he's progressive even while he's caving in on social security and medicare. My view about guns changed when I was living in my car for weeks and months in the National Forests and in Manhattan. My initial terror that some nut might attack me at 3:00 am turned out to be groundless--the only people who ever bothered me were streetsweepers who wanted my car moved so they could hoover the leaves up, and police in Chicago and NYC checking to see that I wasn't dying of a drug overdose. I came to suspect that my personal security rested on the fact that only a totally crazed person would even consider bothering me because they had no way of knowing if I had a gun or not. Thus I came to regard guns as peacekeepers. Yes, guns sometimes fall into the hands of nutjobs. If some nut wants to kill a lot of people, many schemes are practical even without guns. I was surprised recently to find my thinking echoed by a prominent South Bay peace activist who said that though he will probably never own a gun himself, he supports the 2d amendment. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pagesincolor at yahoo.com Sat Jan 19 10:54:16 2013 From: pagesincolor at yahoo.com (John Thielking) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 10:54:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Guns In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1358621656.86582.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> This is not a trivial issue (guns).? I'm not sure if I sent the following article to the list or not. This is from my web site www.peacemovies.com, which has had the homepage replaced with a 1 year anniversary of the SOPA strike page until next Thursday in solidarity with Aaron Swartz who committed suicide last week because he was indicted for 13 felony counts carrying a maximum 35 year sentence for simply downloading a few million articles from a pay per view site for free. ? John Thielking? ? ? What Does Gun Violence Have To Do With Movies? by John Thielking 12-15-12 The massacre in Connecticut this week has left people devastated and some are looking for answers. Does boycotting violent movies (or realizing that there are nonviolent alternatives available) offer any hope of creating a mandate for change/gun control/ poverty elimination? This author says an emphatic Yes! A recent debate with Steven Argue brought up the fact that there are two sides in the debate over whether violence in movies and video games significantly increases violence in the real world. Jonathan L. Freedman wrote a report published by The Media Institute (a movie producer funded outfit) located here: http://www.mediainstitute.org/PDFs/policyviews/Freedman-TelevisionViolence.pdf that tries it's best to debunk the notion that violence in movies is significantly associated with violence in the real world. He claims that as little as 28% of the published studies on the issue show a positive correlation. However, while he is good at criticizing the other side for doing sloppy science (such as not being able to eliminate experimenter demand effects and achieve a perfectly double blind experiment that uses violent and nonviolent movies), he himself neglects to do a formal meta-analysis of the entire set of studies that he is reviewing. If there are 28 studies with 100 subjects that show a positive correlation while there are 72 studies with 10 subjects that do not, then it is quite obvious that the balance of the evidence shows a positive correlation. On the other side is Craig A. Anderson PhD of Center For Study Of Violence of Iowa State University, who has his own vested interest in that his career depends upon him continuing to find problems with violence in movies re: violence in society. In his latest work (written by a panel of experts from the organization that he heads), available here: http://www.israsociety.com/pdfs/Media%20Violence%20Commission%20final%20report.pdf it is claimed that no less than 3 formal meta-analyses of the possible correlation between violence in media and violence in the real world show a positive correlation. In that same paper the panel writes that while there is a positive correlation between media violence and increased indicators of violence in experimental trials, this does not translate into as strong a correlation between media violence and criminal activity. That is a different level of violence not addressed by most of the studies. The bottom line is this: A 2009 on the street survey of what kind of movies people want to watch showed that 1/2 of the people want to watch a nonviolent movie, 1/2 the people don't care one way or the other, and only 2 or 3 people out of 35 want to watch a violent movie or seek out violent themes such as horror movies as their favorite. In light of the latest school shooting in Connecticut, it seems that one route to diminishing gun violence is to make sure that the box office receipts match the survey results. If that ever happened, all the politicians would start running scared every time someone wanted to start a war or if there was any kind of gun violence anywhere in the USA. Every trick in the book would be thrown at the problem until it was solved. Not all of the problem has to do with gun control. Some of it has to do with income inequality and general economic insecurity. We should be solving those problems too. But we need something to signal that we have a mandate. If 75% of box office receipts went to movies such as Eat Pray Love and Dolphin Tale, we would have just such a mandate. Let's get cracking! --- On Sat, 1/19/13, Brian Good wrote: From: Brian Good Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Guns To: "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" Date: Saturday, January 19, 2013, 10:13 AM I don't know the Green Party's position on gun control, but the lack of chatter on the issue here increases my confidence that that the issue is trivial and Obama's recent aggressive activity is a mere smokescreen so he can make his supporters think he's progressive even while he's caving in on social security and medicare. My view about guns changed when I was living in my car for weeks and months? in the National Forests and in Manhattan.? My initial terror that some nut might attack me at 3:00 am turned out to be groundless--the only people who ever bothered me were streetsweepers who wanted my car moved so they could hoover the leaves up, and police in Chicago and NYC checking to see that I wasn't dying of a drug overdose.?? I came to suspect that my personal security rested on the fact that only a totally crazed person would even consider bothering me because they had no way of knowing if I had a gun or not.? Thus I came to regard guns as peacekeepers.? Yes, guns sometimes fall into the hands of nutjobs.? If some nut wants to kill a lot of people, many schemes are practical even without guns.? I was surprised recently to find my thinking echoed by a prominent South Bay peace activist who said that though he will probably never own a gun himself, he supports the 2d amendment. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolineyacoub at att.net Sat Jan 19 20:08:56 2013 From: carolineyacoub at att.net (Caroline Yacoub) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 20:08:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Guns In-Reply-To: <1358621656.86582.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1358621656.86582.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1358654936.18876.YahooMailRC@web181306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> I'm with John on this one. Caroline ________________________________ From: John Thielking To: "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" ; Brian Good Sent: Sat, January 19, 2013 10:54:25 AM Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Guns This is not a trivial issue (guns).? I'm not sure if I sent the following article to the list or not. This is from my web site www.peacemovies.com, which has had the homepage replaced with a 1 year anniversary of the SOPA strike page until next Thursday in solidarity with Aaron Swartz who committed suicide last week because he was indicted for 13 felony counts carrying a maximum 35 year sentence for simply downloading a few million articles from a pay per view site for free. John Thielking? ? ? What Does Gun Violence Have To Do With Movies? by John Thielking 12-15-12 The massacre in Connecticut this week has left people devastated and some are looking for answers. Does boycotting violent movies (or realizing that there are nonviolent alternatives available) offer any hope of creating a mandate for change/gun control/ poverty elimination? This author says an emphatic Yes! A recent debate with Steven Argue brought up the fact that there are two sides in the debate over whether violence in movies and video games significantly increases violence in the real world. Jonathan L. Freedman wrote a report published by The Media Institute (a movie producer funded outfit) located here: http://www.mediainstitute.org/PDFs/policyviews/Freedman-TelevisionViolence.pdfthat tries it's best to debunk the notion that violence in movies is significantly associated with violence in the real world. He claims that as little as 28% of the published studies on the issue show a positive correlation. However, while he is good at criticizing the other side for doing sloppy science (such as not being able to eliminate experimenter demand effects and achieve a perfectly double blind experiment that uses violent and nonviolent movies), he himself neglects to do a formal meta-analysis of the entire set of studies that he is reviewing. If there are 28 studies with 100 subjects that show a positive correlation while there are 72 studies with 10 subjects that do not, then it is quite obvious that the balance of the evidence shows a positive correlation. On the other side is Craig A. Anderson PhD of Center For Study Of Violence of Iowa State University, who has his own vested interest in that his career depends upon him continuing to find problems with violence in movies re: violence in society. In his latest work (written by a panel of experts from the organization that he heads), available here: http://www.israsociety.com/pdfs/Media%20Violence%20Commission%20final%20report.pdf it is claimed that no less than 3 formal meta-analyses of the possible correlation between violence in media and violence in the real world show a positive correlation. In that same paper the panel writes that while there is a positive correlation between media violence and increased indicators of violence in experimental trials, this does not translate into as strong a correlation between media violence and criminal activity. That is a different level of violence not addressed by most of the studies. The bottom line is this: A 2009 on the street survey of what kind of movies people want to watch showed that 1/2 of the people want to watch a nonviolent movie, 1/2 the people don't care one way or the other, and only 2 or 3 people out of 35 want to watch a violent movie or seek out violent themes such as horror movies as their favorite. In light of the latest school shooting in Connecticut, it seems that one route to diminishing gun violence is to make sure that the box office receipts match the survey results. If that ever happened, all the politicians would start running scared every time someone wanted to start a war or if there was any kind of gun violence anywhere in the USA. Every trick in the book would be thrown at the problem until it was solved. Not all of the problem has to do with gun control. Some of it has to do with income inequality and general economic insecurity. We should be solving those problems too. But we need something to signal that we have a mandate. If 75% of box office receipts went to movies such as Eat Pray Love and Dolphin Tale, we would have just such a mandate. Let's get cracking! --- On Sat, 1/19/13, Brian Good wrote: >From: Brian Good >Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Guns >To: "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" >Date: Saturday, January 19, 2013, 10:13 AM > > >I don't know the Green Party's position on gun control, but the lack of chatter >on the issue here increases my confidence that that the issue is trivial and >Obama's recent aggressive activity is a mere smokescreen so he can make his >supporters think he's progressive even while he's caving in on social security >and medicare. > >My view about guns changed when I was living in my car for weeks and months? in >the National Forests and in Manhattan.? My initial terror that some nut might >attack me at 3:00 am turned out to be groundless--the only people who ever >bothered me were streetsweepers who wanted my car moved so they could hoover the >leaves up, and police in Chicago and NYC checking to see that I wasn't dying of >a drug overdose.?? I came to suspect that my personal security rested on the >fact that only a totally crazed person would even consider bothering me because >they had no way of knowing if I had a gun or not.? Thus I came to regard guns as >peacekeepers.? > > >Yes, guns sometimes fall into the hands of nutjobs.? If some nut wants to kill a >lot of people, many schemes are practical even without guns.? I was surprised >recently to find my thinking echoed by a prominent South Bay peace activist who >said that though he will probably never own a gun himself, > >he supports the 2d amendment. > > > >-----Inline Attachment Follows----- > > >_______________________________________________ >sosfbay-discuss mailing list >sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com Sat Jan 19 20:56:07 2013 From: spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com (Spencer Graves) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2013 20:56:07 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Guns In-Reply-To: <1358654936.18876.YahooMailRC@web181306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1358621656.86582.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1358654936.18876.YahooMailRC@web181306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <50FB78E7.6050301@structuremonitoring.com> If anyone knows about research on this, I'd be interested. I think I remember hearing reports that suggest that Great Britain had fewer homicides in the past when the police carried only night sticks than they do today when police (and therefore more thieves and robbers) carry firearms. Today's Mercury News has a story about "Luis Ricardo Hernandez, 26, who is being held in Santa Clara County Jail on $1 million bail in the death of 36-year-old Christopher Soriano of San Jose. Hernandez was a maintenance worker at the Summer Breeze apartments when on Dec. 31 he and a supervisor reportedly tried to perform a citizen's arrest on Soriano, who they suspected of burglarizing cars at the complex. In an ensuing physical confrontation, police said, Hernandez shot Soriano, who later died. ... According to authorities, Hernandez's maintenance supervisor at the apartments on Lewis Road noticed a truck and remembered it being around the time of previous burglaries. The supervisor told investigators that based on what he felt was inadequate police response to prior calls, he didn't believe officers would come. He enlisted Hernandez's help to detain the driver, since identified as Soriano, until they could get police to show up." (www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_22404350/supporters-rally-petition-san-jose-man-charged-murder) Based on this report, I think the situation could have been handled better using cameras than a firearm: First take pictures of the truck, especially the license plate. Then start taking pictures of the alleged burglar -- from a distance -- while calling police. Continue taking pictures, and don't try to confront the guy: He could have been armed, and there's no point in risking your life to protect property -- especially of relatively modest value. However, individual protection seems NOT to have been a primary motivation for the second amendment: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the defense of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The defenders of the second amendment seem bent on suggesting guns are necessary to protect individual liberties from encroachments by the state. The best research I know on this is Chenoweth and Stephan (2011) Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict (Columbia U. Pr.). They led a collaborative effort that created a database representing a consensus among leading experts on violent and nonviolent change efforts in the twentieth century focusing on campaigns that ended between 1902 and 2006. Their experts identified 105 nonviolent change efforts and 218 violent movements. Full or partial success was achieved by 53% of the nonviolent campaigns but only 26% of the violent efforts. Success in virtually all cases was achieved in large part through defections from the established authorities, and the leaders key supporters were more likely to defect when confronted with nonviolent resistance than violence. Moreover, the nonviolent successes were followed years later by an improvement in Freedom Scores from Freedom House of 2.68 vs. only 1.52 for violent change efforts. Spencer On 1/19/2013 8:08 PM, Caroline Yacoub wrote: > I'm with John on this one. > Caroline > > > > > ________________________________ > From: John Thielking > To: "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" ; Brian Good > > Sent: Sat, January 19, 2013 10:54:25 AM > Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Guns > > > This is not a trivial issue (guns). I'm not sure if I sent the following > article to the list or not. > This is from my web site www.peacemovies.com, which has had the homepage > replaced with a 1 year anniversary of the SOPA strike page until next Thursday > in solidarity with Aaron Swartz who committed suicide last week because he was > indicted for 13 felony counts carrying a maximum 35 year sentence for simply > downloading a few million articles from a pay per view site for free. > > John Thielking > > > What Does Gun Violence Have To Do With Movies? > by John Thielking > 12-15-12 > > The massacre in Connecticut this week has left people devastated and some are > looking for answers. Does boycotting violent movies (or realizing that there are > nonviolent alternatives available) offer any hope of creating a mandate for > change/gun control/ poverty elimination? This author says an emphatic Yes! > > A recent debate with Steven Argue brought up the fact that there are two sides > in the debate over whether violence in movies and video games significantly > increases violence in the real world. Jonathan L. Freedman wrote a report > published by The Media Institute (a movie producer funded outfit) located here: > http://www.mediainstitute.org/PDFs/policyviews/Freedman-TelevisionViolence.pdfthat > tries it's best to debunk the notion that violence in movies is significantly > associated with violence in the real world. He claims that as little as 28% of > the published studies on the issue show a positive correlation. However, while > he is good at criticizing the other side for doing sloppy science (such as not > being able to eliminate experimenter demand effects and achieve a perfectly > double blind experiment that uses violent and nonviolent movies), he himself > neglects to do a formal meta-analysis of the entire set of studies that he is > reviewing. If there are 28 studies with 100 subjects that show a positive > correlation while there are 72 studies with 10 subjects that do not, then it is > quite obvious that the balance of the evidence shows a positive correlation. > > On the other side is Craig A. Anderson PhD of Center For Study Of Violence of > Iowa State University, who has his own vested interest in that his career > depends upon him continuing to find problems with violence in movies re: > violence in society. In his latest work (written by a panel of experts from the > organization that he heads), available here: > http://www.israsociety.com/pdfs/Media%20Violence%20Commission%20final%20report.pdf > > it is claimed that no less than 3 formal meta-analyses of the possible > correlation between violence in media and violence in the real world show a > positive correlation. In that same paper the panel writes that while there is a > positive correlation between media violence and increased indicators of violence > in experimental trials, this does not translate into as strong a correlation > between media violence and criminal activity. That is a different level of > violence not addressed by most of the studies. > The bottom line is this: A 2009 on the street survey of what kind of movies > people want to watch showed that 1/2 of the people want to watch a nonviolent > movie, 1/2 the people don't care one way or the other, and only 2 or 3 people > out of 35 want to watch a violent movie or seek out violent themes such as > horror movies as their favorite. In light of the latest school shooting in > Connecticut, it seems that one route to diminishing gun violence is to make sure > that the box office receipts match the survey results. If that ever happened, > all the politicians would start running scared every time someone wanted to > start a war or if there was any kind of gun violence anywhere in the USA. Every > trick in the book would be thrown at the problem until it was solved. Not all of > the problem has to do with gun control. Some of it has to do with income > inequality and general economic insecurity. We should be solving those problems > too. But we need something to signal that we have a mandate. If 75% of box > office receipts went to movies such as Eat Pray Love and Dolphin Tale, we would > have just such a mandate. Let's get cracking! > > > > > --- On Sat, 1/19/13, Brian Good wrote: > > >> From: Brian Good >> Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Guns >> To: "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" >> Date: Saturday, January 19, 2013, 10:13 AM >> >> >> I don't know the Green Party's position on gun control, but the lack of chatter >> on the issue here increases my confidence that that the issue is trivial and >> Obama's recent aggressive activity is a mere smokescreen so he can make his >> supporters think he's progressive even while he's caving in on social security >> and medicare. >> >> My view about guns changed when I was living in my car for weeks and months in >> the National Forests and in Manhattan. My initial terror that some nut might >> attack me at 3:00 am turned out to be groundless--the only people who ever >> bothered me were streetsweepers who wanted my car moved so they could hoover the >> leaves up, and police in Chicago and NYC checking to see that I wasn't dying of >> a drug overdose. I came to suspect that my personal security rested on the >> fact that only a totally crazed person would even consider bothering me because >> they had no way of knowing if I had a gun or not. Thus I came to regard guns as >> peacekeepers. >> >> >> Yes, guns sometimes fall into the hands of nutjobs. If some nut wants to kill a >> lot of people, many schemes are practical even without guns. I was surprised >> recently to find my thinking echoed by a prominent South Bay peace activist who >> said that though he will probably never own a gun himself, >> >> he supports the 2d amendment. >> >> >> >> -----Inline Attachment Follows----- >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sosfbay-discuss mailing list >> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >> http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com From carolineyacoub at att.net Sun Jan 20 09:18:54 2013 From: carolineyacoub at att.net (Caroline Yacoub) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 09:18:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Guns In-Reply-To: <50FB78E7.6050301@structuremonitoring.com> References: <1358621656.86582.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1358654936.18876.YahooMailRC@web181306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <50FB78E7.6050301@structuremonitoring.com> Message-ID: <1358702334.43137.YahooMailRC@web181302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> I think the change in Great Britain has more to do with a change in population than with what the police are carrying. ________________________________ From: Spencer Graves To: Caroline Yacoub Cc: John Thielking ; "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" ; Brian Good Sent: Sat, January 19, 2013 8:56:52 PM Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Guns ? ? ? If anyone knows about research on this, I'd be interested.? I think I remember hearing reports that suggest that Great Britain had fewer homicides in the past when the police carried only night sticks than they do today when police (and therefore more thieves and robbers) carry firearms. ? ? ? Today's Mercury News has a story about "Luis Ricardo Hernandez, 26, who is being held in Santa Clara County Jail on $1 million bail in the death of 36-year-old Christopher Soriano of San Jose.? Hernandez was a maintenance worker at the Summer Breeze apartments when on Dec. 31 he and a supervisor reportedly tried to perform a citizen's arrest on Soriano, who they suspected of burglarizing cars at the complex. In an ensuing physical confrontation, police said, Hernandez shot Soriano, who later died. ... According to authorities, Hernandez's maintenance supervisor at the apartments on Lewis Road noticed a truck and remembered it being around the time of previous burglaries. The supervisor told investigators that based on what he felt was inadequate police response to prior calls, he didn't believe officers would come. He enlisted Hernandez's help to detain the driver, since identified as Soriano, until they could get police to show up." (www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_22404350/supporters-rally-petition-san-jose-man-charged-murder) ? ? ? Based on this report, I think the situation could have been handled better using cameras than a firearm:? First take pictures of the truck, especially the license plate.? Then start taking pictures of the alleged burglar -- from a distance -- while calling police.? Continue taking pictures, and don't try to confront the guy:? He could have been armed, and there's no point in risking your life to protect property -- especially of relatively modest value. ? ? ? However, individual protection seems NOT to have been a primary motivation for the second amendment:? "A well regulated militia being necessary to the defense of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."? The defenders of the second amendment seem bent on suggesting guns are necessary to protect individual liberties from encroachments by the state.? The best research I know on this is Chenoweth and Stephan (2011) Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict (Columbia U. Pr.).? They led a collaborative effort that created a database representing a consensus among leading experts on violent and nonviolent change efforts in the twentieth century focusing on campaigns that ended between 1902 and 2006.? Their experts identified 105 nonviolent change efforts and 218 violent movements.? Full or partial success was achieved by 53% of the nonviolent campaigns but only 26% of the violent efforts.? Success in virtually all cases was achieved in large part through defections from the established authorities, and the leaders key supporters were more likely to defect when confronted with nonviolent resistance than violence.? Moreover, the nonviolent successes were followed years later by an improvement in Freedom Scores from Freedom House of 2.68 vs. only 1.52 for violent change efforts. ? ? ? Spencer On 1/19/2013 8:08 PM, Caroline Yacoub wrote: > I'm with John on this one. > Caroline > > > > > ________________________________ > From: John Thielking > To: "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" ; Brian Good > > Sent: Sat, January 19, 2013 10:54:25 AM > Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Guns > > > This is not a trivial issue (guns).? I'm not sure if I sent the following > article to the list or not. > This is from my web site www.peacemovies.com, which has had the homepage > replaced with a 1 year anniversary of the SOPA strike page until next Thursday > in solidarity with Aaron Swartz who committed suicide last week because he was > indicted for 13 felony counts carrying a maximum 35 year sentence for simply > downloading a few million articles from a pay per view site for free. > > John Thielking >? ? ? What Does Gun Violence Have To Do With Movies? > by John Thielking > 12-15-12 > > The massacre in Connecticut this week has left people devastated and some are > looking for answers. Does boycotting violent movies (or realizing that there >are > nonviolent alternatives available) offer any hope of creating a mandate for > change/gun control/ poverty elimination? This author says an emphatic Yes! > > A recent debate with Steven Argue brought up the fact that there are two sides > in the debate over whether violence in movies and video games significantly > increases violence in the real world. Jonathan L. Freedman wrote a report > published by The Media Institute (a movie producer funded outfit) located here: >http://www.mediainstitute.org/PDFs/policyviews/Freedman-TelevisionViolence.pdfthat >t >? tries it's best to debunk the notion that violence in movies is significantly > associated with violence in the real world. He claims that as little as 28% of > the published studies on the issue show a positive correlation. However, while > he is good at criticizing the other side for doing sloppy science (such as not > being able to eliminate experimenter demand effects and achieve a perfectly > double blind experiment that uses violent and nonviolent movies), he himself > neglects to do a formal meta-analysis of the entire set of studies that he is > reviewing. If there are 28 studies with 100 subjects that show a positive > correlation while there are 72 studies with 10 subjects that do not, then it is > quite obvious that the balance of the evidence shows a positive correlation. > > On the other side is Craig A. Anderson PhD of Center For Study Of Violence of > Iowa State University, who has his own vested interest in that his career > depends upon him continuing to find problems with violence in movies re: > violence in society. In his latest work (written by a panel of experts from the > organization that he heads), available here: >http://www.israsociety.com/pdfs/Media%20Violence%20Commission%20final%20report.pdf >f > > it is claimed that no less than 3 formal meta-analyses of the possible > correlation between violence in media and violence in the real world show a > positive correlation. In that same paper the panel writes that while there is a > positive correlation between media violence and increased indicators of >violence > in experimental trials, this does not translate into as strong a correlation > between media violence and criminal activity. That is a different level of > violence not addressed by most of the studies. > The bottom line is this: A 2009 on the street survey of what kind of movies > people want to watch showed that 1/2 of the people want to watch a nonviolent > movie, 1/2 the people don't care one way or the other, and only 2 or 3 people > out of 35 want to watch a violent movie or seek out violent themes such as > horror movies as their favorite. In light of the latest school shooting in > Connecticut, it seems that one route to diminishing gun violence is to make >sure > that the box office receipts match the survey results. If that ever happened, > all the politicians would start running scared every time someone wanted to > start a war or if there was any kind of gun violence anywhere in the USA. Every > trick in the book would be thrown at the problem until it was solved. Not all >of > the problem has to do with gun control. Some of it has to do with income > inequality and general economic insecurity. We should be solving those problems > too. But we need something to signal that we have a mandate. If 75% of box > office receipts went to movies such as Eat Pray Love and Dolphin Tale, we would > have just such a mandate. Let's get cracking! > > > > > --- On Sat, 1/19/13, Brian Good wrote: > > >> From: Brian Good >> Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Guns >> To: "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" >> Date: Saturday, January 19, 2013, 10:13 AM >> >> >> I don't know the Green Party's position on gun control, but the lack of >chatter >> on the issue here increases my confidence that that the issue is trivial and >> Obama's recent aggressive activity is a mere smokescreen so he can make his >> supporters think he's progressive even while he's caving in on social security >> and medicare. >> >> My view about guns changed when I was living in my car for weeks and months? >in >> the National Forests and in Manhattan.? My initial terror that some nut might >> attack me at 3:00 am turned out to be groundless--the only people who ever >> bothered me were streetsweepers who wanted my car moved so they could hoover >>the >> leaves up, and police in Chicago and NYC checking to see that I wasn't dying >of >> a drug overdose.? I came to suspect that my personal security rested on the >> fact that only a totally crazed person would even consider bothering me >because >> they had no way of knowing if I had a gun or not.? Thus I came to regard guns >>as >> peacekeepers. >> >> >> Yes, guns sometimes fall into the hands of nutjobs.? If some nut wants to kill >>a >> lot of people, many schemes are practical even without guns.? I was surprised >> recently to find my thinking echoed by a prominent South Bay peace activist >who >> said that though he will probably never own a gun himself, >> >> he supports the 2d amendment. >> >> >> >> -----Inline Attachment Follows----- >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> sosfbay-discuss mailing list >> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >> http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph:? 408-655-4567 web:? www.structuremonitoring.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolineyacoub at att.net Sun Jan 20 09:57:49 2013 From: carolineyacoub at att.net (Caroline Yacoub) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 09:57:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Peace Movies Message-ID: <1358704669.23145.YahooMailRC@web181301.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Hey John-on Face the Nation this morning, someone--it may have been Condoleeza Rice--said that Obama should have addressed the effect the "entertainment" industry has on our young people's attitudes toward guns and violence. Caroline -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com Sun Jan 20 10:42:11 2013 From: spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com (Spencer Graves) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 10:42:11 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Guns In-Reply-To: <1358702334.43137.YahooMailRC@web181302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1358621656.86582.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1358654936.18876.YahooMailRC@web181306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <50FB78E7.6050301@structuremonitoring.com> <1358702334.43137.YahooMailRC@web181302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <50FC3A83.4090204@structuremonitoring.com> I misspoke: Police in Great Britain do NOT carry firearms routinely, except in Northern Ireland. "Arming the force would, say opponents, undermine the principle of policing by consent - the notion that the force owes its primary duty to the public, rather than to the state, as in other countries. ... In terms of the police being approachable, in terms of the public being the eyes and ears of the police, officers don't want to lose that ... . Jean Charles de Menezes [was] shot dead by a Met firearms officer after he was wrongly identified as a terrorist." (www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19641398) I still haven't seen any studies that attempt to model the homicide rate as a function of other things. However, it's my impression that increasing poverty reduces public safety, and that may be more important than the rate of firearm ownership. I know that many of the homicides are between people who know one another, e.g., a father mistaking his son for a burglar when climbing in a window at 2 AM. Best Wishes, Spencer On 1/20/2013 9:18 AM, Caroline Yacoub wrote: > I think the change in Great Britain has more to do with a change in population > than with what the police are carrying. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Spencer Graves > To: Caroline Yacoub > Cc: John Thielking ; "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" > ; Brian Good > Sent: Sat, January 19, 2013 8:56:52 PM > Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Guns > > If anyone knows about research on this, I'd be interested. I think I > remember hearing reports that suggest that Great Britain had fewer homicides in > the past when the police carried only night sticks than they do today when > police (and therefore more thieves and robbers) carry firearms. > > > Today's Mercury News has a story about "Luis Ricardo Hernandez, 26, who is > being held in Santa Clara County Jail on $1 million bail in the death of > 36-year-old Christopher Soriano of San Jose. Hernandez was a maintenance worker > at the Summer Breeze apartments when on Dec. 31 he and a supervisor reportedly > tried to perform a citizen's arrest on Soriano, who they suspected of > burglarizing cars at the complex. In an ensuing physical confrontation, police > said, Hernandez shot Soriano, who later died. ... According to authorities, > Hernandez's maintenance supervisor at the apartments on Lewis Road noticed a > truck and remembered it being around the time of previous burglaries. The > supervisor told investigators that based on what he felt was inadequate police > response to prior calls, he didn't believe officers would come. He enlisted > Hernandez's help to detain the driver, since identified as Soriano, until they > could get police to show up." > (www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_22404350/supporters-rally-petition-san-jose-man-charged-murder) > > > > Based on this report, I think the situation could have been handled better > using cameras than a firearm: First take pictures of the truck, especially the > license plate. Then start taking pictures of the alleged burglar -- from a > distance -- while calling police. Continue taking pictures, and don't try to > confront the guy: He could have been armed, and there's no point in risking > your life to protect property -- especially of relatively modest value. > > > However, individual protection seems NOT to have been a primary motivation > for the second amendment: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the > defense of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not > be infringed." The defenders of the second amendment seem bent on suggesting > guns are necessary to protect individual liberties from encroachments by the > state. The best research I know on this is Chenoweth and Stephan (2011) Why > Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict (Columbia U. > Pr.). They led a collaborative effort that created a database representing a > consensus among leading experts on violent and nonviolent change efforts in the > twentieth century focusing on campaigns that ended between 1902 and 2006. Their > experts identified 105 nonviolent change efforts and 218 violent movements. > Full or partial success was achieved by 53% of the nonviolent campaigns but only > 26% of the violent efforts. Success in virtually all cases was achieved in > large part through defections from the established authorities, and the leaders > key supporters were more likely to defect when confronted with nonviolent > resistance than violence. Moreover, the nonviolent successes were followed > years later by an improvement in Freedom Scores from Freedom House of 2.68 vs. > only 1.52 for violent change efforts. > > > Spencer > > > On 1/19/2013 8:08 PM, Caroline Yacoub wrote: >> I'm with John on this one. >> Caroline >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: John Thielking >> To: "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" ; Brian Good >> >> Sent: Sat, January 19, 2013 10:54:25 AM >> Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Guns >> >> >> This is not a trivial issue (guns). I'm not sure if I sent the following >> article to the list or not. >> This is from my web site www.peacemovies.com, which has had the homepage >> replaced with a 1 year anniversary of the SOPA strike page until next Thursday >> in solidarity with Aaron Swartz who committed suicide last week because he was >> indicted for 13 felony counts carrying a maximum 35 year sentence for simply >> downloading a few million articles from a pay per view site for free. >> >> John Thielking >> What Does Gun Violence Have To Do With Movies? >> by John Thielking >> 12-15-12 >> >> The massacre in Connecticut this week has left people devastated and some are >> looking for answers. Does boycotting violent movies (or realizing that there >> are >> nonviolent alternatives available) offer any hope of creating a mandate for >> change/gun control/ poverty elimination? This author says an emphatic Yes! >> >> A recent debate with Steven Argue brought up the fact that there are two sides >> in the debate over whether violence in movies and video games significantly >> increases violence in the real world. Jonathan L. Freedman wrote a report >> published by The Media Institute (a movie producer funded outfit) located > here: >> http://www.mediainstitute.org/PDFs/policyviews/Freedman-TelevisionViolence.pdfthat >> t >> tries it's best to debunk the notion that violence in movies is significantly >> associated with violence in the real world. He claims that as little as 28% of >> the published studies on the issue show a positive correlation. However, while >> he is good at criticizing the other side for doing sloppy science (such as not >> being able to eliminate experimenter demand effects and achieve a perfectly >> double blind experiment that uses violent and nonviolent movies), he himself >> neglects to do a formal meta-analysis of the entire set of studies that he is >> reviewing. If there are 28 studies with 100 subjects that show a positive >> correlation while there are 72 studies with 10 subjects that do not, then it > is >> quite obvious that the balance of the evidence shows a positive correlation. >> >> On the other side is Craig A. Anderson PhD of Center For Study Of Violence of >> Iowa State University, who has his own vested interest in that his career >> depends upon him continuing to find problems with violence in movies re: >> violence in society. In his latest work (written by a panel of experts from > the >> organization that he heads), available here: >> http://www.israsociety.com/pdfs/Media%20Violence%20Commission%20final%20report.pdf >> f >> >> it is claimed that no less than 3 formal meta-analyses of the possible >> correlation between violence in media and violence in the real world show a >> positive correlation. In that same paper the panel writes that while there is > a >> positive correlation between media violence and increased indicators of >> violence >> in experimental trials, this does not translate into as strong a correlation >> between media violence and criminal activity. That is a different level of >> violence not addressed by most of the studies. >> The bottom line is this: A 2009 on the street survey of what kind of movies >> people want to watch showed that 1/2 of the people want to watch a nonviolent >> movie, 1/2 the people don't care one way or the other, and only 2 or 3 people >> out of 35 want to watch a violent movie or seek out violent themes such as >> horror movies as their favorite. In light of the latest school shooting in >> Connecticut, it seems that one route to diminishing gun violence is to make >> sure >> that the box office receipts match the survey results. If that ever happened, >> all the politicians would start running scared every time someone wanted to >> start a war or if there was any kind of gun violence anywhere in the USA. > Every >> trick in the book would be thrown at the problem until it was solved. Not all >> of >> the problem has to do with gun control. Some of it has to do with income >> inequality and general economic insecurity. We should be solving those > problems >> too. But we need something to signal that we have a mandate. If 75% of box >> office receipts went to movies such as Eat Pray Love and Dolphin Tale, we > would >> have just such a mandate. Let's get cracking! >> >> >> >> >> --- On Sat, 1/19/13, Brian Good wrote: >> >> >>> From: Brian Good >>> Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Guns >>> To: "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" >>> Date: Saturday, January 19, 2013, 10:13 AM >>> >>> >>> I don't know the Green Party's position on gun control, but the lack of >> chatter >>> on the issue here increases my confidence that that the issue is trivial and >>> Obama's recent aggressive activity is a mere smokescreen so he can make his >>> supporters think he's progressive even while he's caving in on social > security >>> and medicare. >>> >>> My view about guns changed when I was living in my car for weeks and months >> in >>> the National Forests and in Manhattan. My initial terror that some nut might >>> attack me at 3:00 am turned out to be groundless--the only people who ever >>> bothered me were streetsweepers who wanted my car moved so they could hoover >>> the >>> leaves up, and police in Chicago and NYC checking to see that I wasn't dying >> of >>> a drug overdose. I came to suspect that my personal security rested on the >>> fact that only a totally crazed person would even consider bothering me >> because >>> they had no way of knowing if I had a gun or not. Thus I came to regard guns >>> as >>> peacekeepers. >>> >>> >>> Yes, guns sometimes fall into the hands of nutjobs. If some nut wants to kill >>> a >>> lot of people, many schemes are practical even without guns. I was surprised >>> recently to find my thinking echoed by a prominent South Bay peace activist >> who >>> said that though he will probably never own a gun himself, >>> >>> he supports the 2d amendment. >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Inline Attachment Follows----- >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> sosfbay-discuss mailing list >>> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >>> http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD > President and Chief Technology Officer > Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. > 751 Emerson Ct. > San Jos?, CA 95126 > ph: 408-655-4567 > web: www.structuremonitoring.com -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com From spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com Sun Jan 20 11:32:24 2013 From: spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com (Spencer Graves) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 11:32:24 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Guns In-Reply-To: <1358702334.43137.YahooMailRC@web181302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1358621656.86582.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1358654936.18876.YahooMailRC@web181306.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <50FB78E7.6050301@structuremonitoring.com> <1358702334.43137.YahooMailRC@web181302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <50FC4648.2000605@structuremonitoring.com> I just checked the Wikipedia article on homicide. It cited a United Nations 2011 Global Study on Homicide. It noted that men are 82% of victims and women 18%. I checked that source and expanded the Wikipedia article, adding the following summary: [W]here homicide rates are high and firearms and organized crime in the form of drug trafficking play a substantial role, 1 in 50 men aged 20 will be murdered before they reach the age of 31. At the other, the probability of such an occurrence is up to 400 times lower. [H]omicide is much more common in countries with low levels of human development, high levels of income inequality and weak rule of law than in more equitable societies, where socio-economic stability seems to be something of an antidote to homicide. Women murdered by their past or present male partner make up the vast majority of [female] victims. TENTATIVE CONCLUSION: Making it more difficult to obtain guns, especially assault rifles would not appear to address any of the primary determinants of homicide, which are "low levels of human development, high levels of income inequality and weak rule of law". Spencer ######################## I misspoke: Police in Great Britain do NOT carry firearms routinely, except in Northern Ireland. "Arming the force would, say opponents, undermine the principle of policing by consent - the notion that the force owes its primary duty to the public, rather than to the state, as in other countries. ... In terms of the police being approachable, in terms of the public being the eyes and ears of the police, officers don't want to lose that ... . Jean Charles de Menezes [was] shot dead by a Met firearms officer after he was wrongly identified as a terrorist." (www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19641398) I still haven't seen any studies that attempt to model the homicide rate as a function of other things. However, it's my impression that increasing poverty reduces public safety, and that may be more important than the rate of firearm ownership. I know that many of the homicides are between people who know one another, e.g., a father mistaking his son for a burglar when climbing in a window at 2 AM. Best Wishes, Spencer On 1/20/2013 9:18 AM, Caroline Yacoub wrote: > I think the change in Great Britain has more to do with a change in population > than with what the police are carrying. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Spencer Graves > To: Caroline Yacoub > Cc: John Thielking ; "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" > ; Brian Good > Sent: Sat, January 19, 2013 8:56:52 PM > Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Guns > > If anyone knows about research on this, I'd be interested. I think I > remember hearing reports that suggest that Great Britain had fewer homicides in > the past when the police carried only night sticks than they do today when > police (and therefore more thieves and robbers) carry firearms. > > > Today's Mercury News has a story about "Luis Ricardo Hernandez, 26, who is > being held in Santa Clara County Jail on $1 million bail in the death of > 36-year-old Christopher Soriano of San Jose. Hernandez was a maintenanceworker > at the Summer Breeze apartments when on Dec. 31 he and a supervisor reportedly > tried to perform a citizen's arrest on Soriano, who they suspected of > burglarizing cars at the complex. In an ensuing physical confrontation, police > said, Hernandez shot Soriano, who later died. ... According to authorities, > Hernandez's maintenance supervisor at the apartments on Lewis Road noticed a > truck and remembered it being around the time of previous burglaries. The > supervisor told investigators that based on what he felt was inadequate police > response to prior calls, he didn't believe officers would come. He enlisted > Hernandez's help to detain the driver, since identified as Soriano, untilthey > could get police to show up." > (www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_22404350/supporters-rally-petition-san-jose-man-charged-murder) > > > > Based on this report, I think the situation could have been handled better > using cameras than a firearm: First take pictures of the truck, especially the > license plate. Then start taking pictures of the alleged burglar -- froma > distance -- while calling police. Continue taking pictures, and don't try to > confront the guy: He could have been armed, and there's no point in risking > your life to protect property -- especially of relatively modest value. > > > However, individual protection seems NOT to have been a primary motivation > for the second amendment: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the > defense of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not > be infringed." The defenders of the second amendment seem bent on suggesting > guns are necessary to protect individual liberties from encroachments by the > state. The best research I know on this is Chenoweth and Stephan (2011) Why > Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict (Columbia U. > Pr.). They led a collaborative effort that created a database representing a > consensus among leading experts on violent and nonviolent change efforts in the > twentieth century focusing on campaigns that ended between 1902 and 2006. Their > experts identified 105 nonviolent change efforts and 218 violent movements. > Full or partial success was achieved by 53% of the nonviolent campaigns but only > 26% of the violent efforts. Success in virtually all cases was achieved in > large part through defections from the established authorities, and the leaders > key supporters were more likely to defect when confronted with nonviolent > resistance than violence. Moreover, the nonviolent successes were followed > years later by an improvement in Freedom Scores from Freedom House of 2.68 vs. > only 1.52 for violent change efforts. > > > Spencer > > > On 1/19/2013 8:08 PM, Caroline Yacoub wrote: >> I'm with John on this one. >> Caroline >> >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: John Thielking >> To: "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" ; BrianGood >> >> Sent: Sat, January 19, 2013 10:54:25 AM >> Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Guns >> >> >> This is not a trivial issue (guns). I'm not sure if I sent the following >> article to the list or not. >> This is from my web site www.peacemovies.com, which has had the homepage >> replaced with a 1 year anniversary of the SOPA strike page until next Thursday >> in solidarity with Aaron Swartz who committed suicide last week because he was >> indicted for 13 felony counts carrying a maximum 35 year sentence for simply >> downloading a few million articles from a pay per view site for free. >> >> John Thielking >> What Does Gun Violence Have To Do With Movies? >> by John Thielking >> 12-15-12 >> >> The massacre in Connecticut this week has left people devastated and some are >> looking for answers. Does boycotting violent movies (or realizing that there >> are >> nonviolent alternatives available) offer any hope of creating a mandate for >> change/gun control/ poverty elimination? This author says an emphatic Yes! >> >> A recent debate with Steven Argue brought up the fact that there are twosides >> in the debate over whether violence in movies and video games significantly >> increases violence in the real world. Jonathan L. Freedman wrote a report >> published by The Media Institute (a movie producer funded outfit) located > here: >> http://www.mediainstitute.org/PDFs/policyviews/Freedman-TelevisionViolence.pdfthat >> t >> tries it's best to debunk the notion that violence in movies is significantly >> associated with violence in the real world. He claims that as little as 28% of >> the published studies on the issue show a positive correlation. However,while >> he is good at criticizing the other side for doing sloppy science (such as not >> being able to eliminate experimenter demand effects and achieve a perfectly >> double blind experiment that uses violent and nonviolent movies), he himself >> neglects to do a formal meta-analysis of the entire set of studies that he is >> reviewing. If there are 28 studies with 100 subjects that show a positive >> correlation while there are 72 studies with 10 subjects that do not, then it > is >> quite obvious that the balance of the evidence shows a positive correlation. >> >> On the other side is Craig A. Anderson PhD of Center For Study Of Violence of >> Iowa State University, who has his own vested interest in that his career >> depends upon him continuing to find problems with violence in movies re: >> violence in society. In his latest work (written by a panel of experts from > the >> organization that he heads), available here: >> http://www.israsociety.com/pdfs/Media%20Violence%20Commission%20final%20report.pdf >> f >> >> it is claimed that no less than 3 formal meta-analyses of the possible >> correlation between violence in media and violence in the real world show a >> positive correlation. In that same paper the panel writes that while there is > a >> positive correlation between media violence and increased indicators of >> violence >> in experimental trials, this does not translate into as strong a correlation >> between media violence and criminal activity. That is a different level of >> violence not addressed by most of the studies. >> The bottom line is this: A 2009 on the street survey of what kind of movies >> people want to watch showed that 1/2 of the people want to watch a nonviolent >> movie, 1/2 the people don't care one way or the other, and only 2 or 3 people >> out of 35 want to watch a violent movie or seek out violent themes such as >> horror movies as their favorite. In light of the latest school shooting in >> Connecticut, it seems that one route to diminishing gun violence is to make >> sure >> that the box office receipts match the survey results. If that ever happened, >> all the politicians would start running scared every time someone wantedto >> start a war or if there was any kind of gun violence anywhere in the USA. > Every >> trick in the book would be thrown at the problem until it was solved. Not all >> of >> the problem has to do with gun control. Some of it has to do with income >> inequality and general economic insecurity. We should be solving those > problems >> too. But we need something to signal that we have a mandate. If 75% of box >> office receipts went to movies such as Eat Pray Love and Dolphin Tale, we > would >> have just such a mandate. Let's get cracking! >> >> >> >> >> --- On Sat, 1/19/13, Brian Good wrote: >> >> >>> From: Brian Good >>> Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Guns >>> To: "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" >>> Date: Saturday, January 19, 2013, 10:13 AM >>> >>> >>> I don't know the Green Party's position on gun control, but the lack of >> chatter >>> on the issue here increases my confidence that that the issue is trivial and >>> Obama's recent aggressive activity is a mere smokescreen so he can makehis >>> supporters think he's progressive even while he's caving in on social > security >>> and medicare. >>> >>> My view about guns changed when I was living in my car for weeks and months >> in >>> the National Forests and in Manhattan. My initial terror that some nutmight >>> attack me at 3:00 am turned out to be groundless--the only people who ever >>> bothered me were streetsweepers who wanted my car moved so they could hoover >>> the >>> leaves up, and police in Chicago and NYC checking to see that I wasn't dying >> of >>> a drug overdose. I came to suspect that my personal security rested onthe >>> fact that only a totally crazed person would even consider bothering me >> because >>> they had no way of knowing if I had a gun or not. Thus I came to regard guns >>> as >>> peacekeepers. >>> >>> >>> Yes, guns sometimes fall into the hands of nutjobs. If some nut wants to kill >>> a >>> lot of people, many schemes are practical even without guns. I was surprised >>> recently to find my thinking echoed by a prominent South Bay peace activist >> who >>> said that though he will probably never own a gun himself, >>> >>> he supports the 2d amendment. >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Inline Attachment Follows----- >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> sosfbay-discuss mailing list >>> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >>> http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD > President and Chief Technology Officer > Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. > 751 Emerson Ct. > San Jos?, CA 95126 > ph: 408-655-4567 > web: www.structuremonitoring.com -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss From carolineyacoub at att.net Tue Jan 22 02:59:34 2013 From: carolineyacoub at att.net (Caroline Yacoub) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 02:59:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] meeting Message-ID: <1358852374.42575.YahooMailRC@web181302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Are we having a meeting in January? Is anybody doing an agenda? Caroline -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spencer.graves at prodsyse.com Tue Jan 22 10:05:31 2013 From: spencer.graves at prodsyse.com (Spencer Graves) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 10:05:31 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Please peruse: and Agenda Items Request For Jan 2013 GPSCC Meeting In-Reply-To: <1358870356.59769.YahooMailClassic@web122903.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1358870356.59769.YahooMailClassic@web122903.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <50FED4EB.6040803@prodsyse.com> PROPOSED AGENDA ITEM FOR OUR NEXT MEETING, THIS THURSDAY, JANUARY 24: * Obtaining other people for the County Council and to represent Santa Clara County on the statewide Standing General Assembly. *.1. Santa Clara County is allowed 5 representatives on the statewide Standing General Assembly. We currently have only 3. John Thielking is currently not on that list; we should put him on. That would bring us to 4, consisting entirely of our current County Council. *.2 Drew noted that our County Council is currently all male. Number 7 of the 10 key values of the Green Party is "Feminism and Gender Equity" (www.gp.org/tenkey.php). We could use some females. Spencer On 1/22/2013 7:59 AM, John Thielking wrote: > Since no one else has taken on this task yet, I am requesting everyone submit agenda items for the Jan 24th GPSCC meeting to pagesincolor at yahoo.com . The deadline is Wednesday at 5PM, after which time I will publish the final agenda. > > Is something wrong with the GPSCC chat e-mail again? I sent a message to it yesterday and so far there is not even a "rejected by the moderator" response. > > Also, do we have to pay a fee for any of our committees per the item at the bottom of this e-mail? I think our central committee/county council might qualify as a committee that has to pay the fee. > > John Thielking > > --- On Tue, 1/22/13, Caroline Yacoub wrote: > > > From: Caroline Yacoub > Subject: Please peruse > To: "Dana St. George" , "Gerry Gras" , "Andrea Dorey" , "fred Duperrault" , WSB3ATTYCA at aol.com, "Jim Doyle" , "Drew" , "Tian Harter" , "Valerie D. Face" , "Brian Good" , "Jules Brouillet" , "Spencer Graves" , "sandy perry" , "John Thielking" > Date: Tuesday, January 22, 2013, 2:54 AM > > > > > > > > I don't know whether you are on Shane's list or not, butI thought it would be instructive to look at this agenda. Just glance at it. Did you think our meetings were long and boring? Want to rethink that? > > > > ----- Forwarded Message ---- > From: shane que hee > Sent: Mon, January 21, 2013 9:18:03 PM > Subject: ** Agenda for February 3rd, 2013 meeting of the Los Angeles Green Party County Council (fwd) > > >> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 11:41:55 -0800 >> From: Michael McCue >> Subject: ** Agenda for February 3rd, 2013 >> meeting of the Los Angeles Green Party County Council >> >> Dear Los Angeles-Area Greens, >> Both below and attached you will find the agenda for the next LA Assembly >> of Greens and the following County Council meeting for the representatives >> of the Green Party of Los Angeles. County >> >> We ask our Green locals in Long Beach, SF Valley, LA, Redondo Beach, Harbor >> Area, Mid-City, Skid Row and East Side Greens to share this agenda with >> their locals and with every Green you can reach. >> >> When you review the agenda, you will see that we are conducting important >> discussions about our brothers and sisters in the Peace & Freedom Party, >> and many other important issues, including the Redondo Beach elections, the >> Community College Elections, the South Los Angeles Declaration for Health >> and Human Rights, reviewing our voter registration procedures, as well as >> many other topics of vital interest to all Greens in LA County. >> >> We urge our locals to send representatives to this meeting, and we ask all >> concerned Green Party-registered voters to attend as well. We are >> competing against the Super Bowl on Sunday, Feb. 3rd, so we need your >> support to make this County-wide Assembly of Greens a success that helps us >> to unify the Political Left in California. >> >> Peace and Freedome voters are especially encouraged to attend. >> >> If you have any questions, please email me at sfvgreens at gmail.com >> >> Thank you for your support of our 10 Key Values. >> >> Here's the agenda...(a copy is attached for printing purposes if you need >> it...)...and please bring a vegetarian dish to the potluck! >> >> Let's make 2013 a rear when true progressives roar in Los Angeles and in >> California! >> >> Thank you! >> >> *COUNTYWIDE ASSEMBLY OF LOS ANGELES GREENS* >> >> Sunday, February 3rd, 2013, at The Peace Center, 8124 West 3rd Street, Los >> Angeles, CA 90048 >> >> >> >> 2:00 -3:00pm Countywide Assembly of Greens w/Vegetarian Potluck! >> >> >> >> ? MLK/Black History Month Appreciation ? ?I Have a Dream? speech by >> Dr. Martin Luther King. Council member, Deacon Alexander, will play MLK?s >> speech to inspire our LA-area Greens. (20 mins) >> >> ? Discussion of possibility of Peace & Freedom voters joining the >> Green Party. Discussion led by San Fernando Valley Greens Facilitator, >> Eugene Hernandez, and former P&F voter (now a Green voter & Table Leader), >> Dennis Terill. All interested LA-area Greens and Peace & Freedom voters >> are invited to attend and join this discussion. (20 mins) >> >> ? COMMITTEE MEETING OF VOTER REGISTRATION COMMITTEE?S TABLE LEADERS >> (Tables #1 - #4), Kamran Ghasri, Dorothy Kemeny, Michael McCue & Dennis >> Terill (20 mins) >> >> ? Please contact Will Yeager or Ara Bedian for Potluck >> Coordination. Everyone >> bring a veggie dish! >> >> >> >> >> >> 3:00pm >> >> GPLACC Meeting Agenda ~ Monthly Meeting of Los Angeles County Green Party >> State Senate District Reps, Locals & Green voters >> >> >> >> 1) - Opening Meditation ~ *TBA** **(2 min)*** >> >> >> >> 2) - Call to Order ~ Roll Call ~ Introduction of New Attendees ~ (*Alternates >> Announcement-if any)** **(5 min)*** >> >> o Facilitator: *E.B. Gendel * >> >> o Timekeeper & Vibes Monitor*: Michael McCue * >> >> o Notes*: Will Yeager* >> >> >> >> 3) - Approval of (or Amendments to) the Agenda ~ *Council members** **(5 >> min) 2/3 approval required to make agenda changes* >> >> >> >> 4) - Approval of previous meetings? minutes ~*1) November, 2012 meeting >> minutes & 2) January 2013 meeting minutes (minutes previously submitted >> to list-serve)** **(5 min)* >> >> >> >> 5) ?LOS ANGELES COUNTY-AREA 2013 ELECTIONS >> >> >> >> 5-a) AD HOC DEBATE COMMITTEE UPDATE ~ *(5 mins.)* >> >> >> >> UPDATE: A progress report on planning made during the last month for a City >> of LA mayoral debate, as per Council?s request from Deacon Alexander at the >> January 2013 meeting. >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: In January, Deacon asked the GPLACC to host a mayoral debate >> that he plans to organize with other Greens. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall the GPLACC host a mayoral debate for the >> City of LA elections? Sponsor/Presenter, Deacon Alexander. >> >> 5-b) LA COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT BOARD ELECTIONS ~ Request for Council >> Recommendation from Candidate, Nancy Pearlman. (10 mins.) >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: Former Green, Nancy Pearlman, is running for her fourth term on >> the Board of Trustees of the Los Angeles Community College District. Nancy >> has been an environmentalist for 43 years, is a television documentarian, >> radio broadcaster, anthropologist, educator, and community college >> instructor. Her bio is at www.NancyPearlman.net >> . >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #1: Shall the GPLACC recommend LA County voters >> to support Nancy Pearlman? >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #2: Shall the GPLAC authorize use of its Voter >> Registration Database to campaign for Nancy Pearlman of LACCD? Campaign >> uses include: walk, call, mail and email lists w/mailings & emails. >> >> Sponsor: Michael McCue/Presenter: Nancy Pearlman. >> >> >> >> 5-c) CITY OF REDONDO BEACH MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS, March 5, 2013 (20 mins.) >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #1: Shall the GPLAC endorse Yes on Measure A, >> the ?Redondo Beach Power Plant Phase-Out Initiative Measure? aka the ?No >> Power Plant? Measure? >> >> BACKGROUND: http://nopowerplant.com/npp/ >> >> Full Text of Measure A: http://nopowerplant.com/resources/Initiative.pdf >> >> Redondo Beach City Attorney's Non Partisan Summary: >> http://nopowerplant.com/npp/city-attorneys-summary/ >> >> Sierra Club letter opposing Power Plant: >> http://www.nopowerplant.com/resources/SierraClub2012letter.pdf >> >> Retire Redondo's Power Plant: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGHX_EEdyhk >> >> Sponsor: Ian Sachs, Michael McCue, John Wenger/Presenters: Ian Sachs & Will >> Yeager (10 mins.) >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #2: Shall the GPLAC recommend Bill Brand for >> City Council District 2? >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: Bill Brand Campaign Website: http://billbrandrb.wordpress.com/ >> >> Bill Brand on the AES Power Plant/Time Warner Cable: >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnzjHFcLnFs >> >> Sponsor: Ian Sachs, Michael McCue, John Wenger/Presenter: Bill Brand. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #3: Shall the GPLAC recommend Jim Light for >> City Council District 1? >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: Jim Light Campaign Website: http://jimlightforcouncil.com/ >> >> Jim Light for Redondo Beach Man of the Year: >> http://billbrandrb.wordpress.com/2012/12/31/happy-new-year-jim-light-for-man-of-the-year/ >> Sponsors: Ian Sachs, Michael McCue, John Wenger/Presenter: Jim Light. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #4: Shall the GPLAC authorize use of its Voter >> Registration Database to campaign in Redondo Beach for ?Yes on Measure A?? >> >> Sponsors: Ian Sachs, Michael McCue, John Wenger/Presenter: Will Yeager. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #5: Shall the GPLAC authorize use of its Voter >> Registration Database to campaign in Redondo Beach for Bill Brand for City >> Council, District #2? >> >> Sponsors: Ian Sachs, Michael McCue, John Wenger/Presenter: Will Yeager. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #6: Shall the GPLAC authorize use of its Voter >> Registration Database to campaign in Redondo Beach for Jim Light for City >> Council, District #1? Sponsors: Ian Sachs, Michael McCue, John >> Wenger/Presenter: Will Yeager. >> >> >> >> *************************************************(1 >> HOUR)*************************************************************** >> >> >> >> 6) - FILLING VACANT SEATS ON THE LA COUNTY COUNCIL ~ Confirmation of Greens >> nominated to be Seated on the GPLACC *(15 min, if needed)* BYLAW-REQUIRED >> ACTION - Relevant Bylaw: 5-2.4 Internal Elections - Elect Officers of the >> County Council?.and new County Council members to fill vacant County >> Council seats. NOTE: ANY LA COUNTY GREEN PARTY-REGISTERED VOTER IN ANY >> DISTRICT IN LA COUNTY MAY SUBMIT AN OPEN SEAT NOMINATING PETITION TO THE >> GPLACC OFFICERS FOR VERIFICATION AT ANY TIME BEFORE THE MEETING AND/OR AT >> THE MEETING ITSELF FOR COUNCIL?S CONSIDERATION. >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 7) ? APPROVAL OF $50 EXPENDITURE TO ACCOMPANY THE FILING OF FORM 410* (5 >> mins.) >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: Former Green, Ross Frankel, a former GPLACC Treasurer from >> years ago, informed our current County Coordinator that the CA Secretary of >> State had repeatedly been trying to notify our Council by mail of a filing >> deadline and fee for Form 410. No notification letter from the CA Sec of >> State was forwarded by our PO Box mailbox key-holders to our officers. Our >> timely filing by Feb. 15th, will prevent our Council from being liable for >> a $150 fine for late filings of active political committees. *(See note at >> bottom?) >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall the GPLACC instruct our Treasurer to >> authorize the expenditure of the $50 filing fee to accompany Form 410, made >> payable to the Secretary of State for the State of California? >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 8) ? ESTABLISH A NEW, SECURE, MAILING ADDRESS FOR ALL COUNCIL BUSINESS ~ *(10 >> min) * >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: Our Mailbox contract expires in March. Aside from the failed >> Form 410 notification, there have been multiple instances of our official >> mail not being forwarded to our Council officers in a timely manner, or not >> at all. As a result, our Council?s official business is not being >> conducted in a timely manner with potentially expensive repercussions for >> our Council. A new, permanent mailing address would stabilize this >> situation and save our Council $120 in additional expenses?the benefits of >> which would be not only savings to our Council Treasury, but to insure that >> our officers are able to conduct our Council?s business in a timely, >> professional manner. Our Council?s credibility is at stake. Sponsor: >> GPLACC officers /Presenter: Secretary, Will Yeager >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall the GPLACC establish a new mailing >> address, using GPLACC Treasurer, Dorothy Kemeny?s address, 3521 Monogram >> Ave. Long Beach, CA 90808?or locate a new post office mail box in March >> when Council?s current contract runs out? >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 9) ? NAME CHANGE FOR TWO GPLACC STANDING COMMITTEES *(10 MINS)* >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: At the January 2013 meeting, several Council members mentioned >> that some of our standing committees had inappropriate names, or that our >> members were referring to them incorrectly, or misunderstanding those >> committees? duties because of the committees lacking better, more specific >> names. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council officially change the name of >> the GPLAC ?Finance? Committee to the ?Budget, Finance & Fundraising? (BFF) >> Committee? >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council officially change the name of >> the GPLAC ?Tabling? Committee to the ?Voter Registration? Committee? >> Sponsors/Presenters: >> Deacon Alexander & Michael McCue >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 10) ? VOTER REGISTRATION CONCERNS FOR LA GREENS/P&F VOTERS *(45 MINS total)* >> >> >> >> 10-a) END-OF-YEAR REPORT ~ BRIEF UPDATE plus Q & A w/Committeee Co-Chairs *(5 >> MINS)* >> >> >> >> DISCUSSION: What are council?s reactions to the 2012 End-of-Year report? What >> will be our Council?s goals for the Los Angeles Green Party in 2013? What >> does Council wish to accomplish in 2013 specifically? >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> 10-b) - VOTER REGISTRATION COMMITTEE BUDGET REQUEST *(10 MINS) * >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: At the November, 2012 meeting, Council requested that Co-Chairs >> Kamran & Michael, return with an itemized budget to support their budget >> request of $500 over a 6-month period. The itemized budget is as follows? >> >> >> >> WorldFest Booth Registration on Sunday May 19th, 2013 = $250 (Early Bird >> Special Price) >> >> 3 new folding tables = $75 (sale price) >> >> New Signage = $100 >> >> Support materials = $75 (i.e. new tablecloths, sunflowers, weights, wheeled >> carts for on-site mobility & set-up). >> >> Budget Request Total = $500 for expenses until August 2013. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council approve the Tabling/Voter >> Registration Committee budget request? >> NOTE: Items 10-a and 10-b are Sponsored by McCue/Presenters: M. McCue & >> Kamran Ghasri >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 10-c) - INSTRUCTIONS TO GPLACC VOTER REGISTRATION COMMITTEE CO-CHAIRS FOR A >> NEW PROCESS IN HANDLING NEW VOTER REGISTRATIONS *(15 MINS)*** >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: While the GPLAC has seen a strong performance in registering >> new Green Party members in 2012 and 2013, there is no organized effort to >> ensure entry of these new registrants in the GPCA and GPLAC's voter >> registration data base and no organized follow up to our new members, many >> of which are interested in becoming involved now that they have joined the >> GPCA. >> >> >> >> PROPOSAL: That the County Council? >> >> >> >> (1) gives direction to the GPLAC Tabling Committee and other GPLAC members >> doing voter registration in LA County to create a record of new voter >> registrations via digital photographs where possible (through digital >> cameras or cell phones), and where not possible, through photocopies of the >> voter registration forms, for which the copies of photocopies would be >> reimbursed by the County Council; that >> >> >> >> (2) the information on new registrations is sent to the GPCA's email >> gpca at cagreens.org for entrance in the GPCA voter registration data base and >> >> >> >> (3) the information on new registrations is sent to the GPLAC data base >> committee co-coordinators for entrance in the GPLAC's data base; and that >> >> >> >> (4) an email that includes links to the GPLAC's and GPCA Facebook pages, >> the GPLAC-Forum email list and the GPCA Twitter page be sent to each to >> registrant by the GPLAC data base co-coordinators, in order to make it easy >> for new party registrants to connect to the party in these ways. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council so instruct the Co-Chairs of the >> Voter Registration Committee? Sponsor/Presenter: Mike Feinstein >> >> >> >> *************************************************(2 >> HOURS)************************************************************* >> >> >> >> 10-d) ? SFV GREENS LOCAL REPORT: OFFICIAL GREEN OUTREACH TO PEACE & FREEDOM >> VOTERS ~ *(15 min)* >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: The Peace & Freedom Party, a Progressive Party consisting of >> mostly Socialist voters, has made internal proposals that would recommend >> their voters join the Green Party should they lose their ballot status in >> California, which seems imminent, due to their low numbers. SFV Greens >> Facilitator, Eugene Hernandez, will make a report of his outreach efforts, >> and submits a ?welcoming statement? intended for P&F voters, to be made >> publicly and shared with the P&F leadership throughout California. >> >> >> >> PROPOSED GPLACC STATEMENT: ?*The Green Party Los Angeles County Council >> officially welcomes all Peace & Freedom voters who are seeking a ?new, >> progressive, political home,? especially in the event that the P&F party >> loses their ballot status in California. We LA Greens welcome voters of >> all political stripes, but especially our Progressive and Socialist >> brothers and sisters, and all those voters who believe in our Green Party?s >> 10 Key Values, values that we Greens believe will create a stronger >> democracy, a healthier planet, and a society that creates economic justice >> for all, especially when our Key Values are >> applied in legislative policy. The >> Green Party of Los Angeles welcomes all Peace & Freedom-registered voters >> to our ranks and asks them to help us unify the Political Left in the State >> of California*.? >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall the GPLACC endorse & support the SFV >> Greens? proposed statement being made public to the officers and voters of >> the Peace & Freedom Party? >> >> >> >> Sponsor/Presenter: Eugene Hernandez & the SFV Greens local. >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 11) - GPLACC MEETING SCHEDULE CONCERNS ~ *(35 MINS Total) * >> >> >> >> >> >> 11-a) STARTING TIMES FOR GPLAC MEETINGS ~ *(10 MINS)* >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: After years of starting meetings at 4pm on Sundays, and after >> two County Council members indicated at the first meeting of the 2012-2014 >> Council that they have commitments on Sundays that make attending meetings >> very difficult that start earlier than 4pm, the GPLAC Co-coordinator has >> unilaterally declared that meetings start earlier than 4pm, and at varying >> times. This has created unnecessary difficulties and tension among County >> Council members. >> >> >> >> PROPOSAL: That the County Council clarify that County Council meetings >> begin at 4pm on Sundays. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council commit to 4pm starting times for >> each monthly meeting? >> >> >> >> Sponsor/Presenter: Mike Feinstein >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 11-b) OUTREACH/NEW LOCATIONS FOR GPLACC MEETINGS ~ *(15 MINS)* >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: Several Council members have requested new venues for our >> meetings, asking if Council could meet in various locations throughout LA >> County, to improve attendance and make it easier for those Greens who are >> not living nearby the Peace Center. >> >> >> >> RATIONALE: A majority of Council members have a long drive, especially our >> car-poolers, and many members have over an hour drive one-way, just to make >> our meetings. Rotating meeting locations would give our long-distance >> Greens a break now and then in terms of their personal costs in time and >> gas expenses, and thus, making a rotating meeting location schedule a more >> just and equitable one for all members concerned. Some Greens would travel >> further one month, others further the next month, etc? >> >> >> >> DISCUSSION: Is a rotating meeting location schedule feasible for the GPLACC? >> What are the benefits? What are the drawbacks? And?What alternative >> locations would make ideal meeting sites for the GPLACC? >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council commit to a Green Outreach >> Program for LA County Greens, by holding/conducting GPLACC meetings in the >> various districts represented by our Council members? >> >> >> >> Sponsors/Presenters: Deacon Alexander, E.B. Gendel, Eugene Hernandez, Edy >> Alvarez, Anthony Vierya & Alphonso Garcia >> >> >> >> *************************************************(3 >> HOURS)************************************************************* >> >> >> >> 11-c) CHANGING THE GPLAC?S APRIL 2013 BUSINESS MEETING TO A GREEN GATHERING >> >> * >> >> >> (15 >> MINS)* >> >> >> >> Changing the GPLAC's April County Council meeting from a regular business >> meeting to a call for GPLAC County Council members and others to attend the >> GPCA's Southern California Gathering scheduled for Los Angeles the weekend >> of April 6/7. >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: The GPCA will be hosting two gatherings in April, one in >> Northern California and one in Southern California. The GPCA is expected to >> send a request to all County Councils in late January to ask them to cancel >> their regular meetings in April, in order to make it easier for all active >> party members across the state to attend either/both the Northern and >> Southern California Gatherings and participate in these needed skills >> sharing and strategic discussions for our party. >> >> >> >> RATIONALE: The rationale is that most party members have a limited amount >> of time to devote to meetings, and by not having to attend a business >> meeting that month, party members can more easily participate in these >> one-a-year regional gatherings and meet and work with more Greens from >> their county, region and state in a non-business meeting setting that will >> allow for more issue and skill-based organizing and interaction. In this >> case for the Southern California gathering, this would remove a conflict >> between County Council members wanting to attend the gathering and wanting >> to attend the County Council meeting. As a specific way of the GPLAC >> sharing its skills with attendees at the Southern California Gathering, >> this proposal also recommends that the GPLAC Tabling Committee do a >> workshop as per below. >> >> >> >> PROPOSAL: That the GPLAC change its April meeting from a business meeting >> on Sunday, April 7th, to a call for GPLAC County Council members and others >> to attend the GPCA's Southern California Gathering scheduled for Los >> Angeles during the weekend of April 6/7; and that the GPLAC Tabling >> Committee commit to doing a voter registration workshop/training at said >> Gathering. Sponsor/Presenter: Mike Feinstein >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council adopt the proposal for a meeting >> change in April, 2013? >> >> >> >> Sponsor/Presenter: Mike Feinstein >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 12) ? ISSUES OF CONCERN TO LA GREENS >> >> >> >> 12-a) ? THE SOUTH LOS ANGELES DECLARATION OF HEALTH & HUMAN RIGHTS *(15 >> MINS)* >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: In late 2012, the *South LA Declaration of Health & Human Rights >> * was sent to our list-serve to be agendized, but was delayed because of >> our cancelled December meeting. Kamran & Michael attended the 3rd Annual >> South Central Health & Human Rights Conference on December 7th, in an >> all-day event, to 1) register new Green voters, and 2) to support the >> Conference. The Declaration, which is intended to create social and >> economic justice for those under-served citizens of limited resources >> experiencing difficulties with finding jobs, quality/affordable health >> care, fresh produce, etc?in the South Central area of Los Angeles, seeks >> the support of all Angelenos and progressive organizations in LA County. >> >> The full Declaration can be reviewed here? >> http://www.southlahealthandhumanrights.org/declaration.html >> >> Hard copies of the Declaration will be provided at the meeting. >> >> >> >> PROPOSAL: The South Los Angeles Declaration of Health and Human Rights is >> an important document that emphasizes the Right to Health, Behavorial >> Health, Education & Employment, Housing & a Safe Environment, Fresh Food & >> Food Sovereignty, and the Right to Dignity and Safety. The Declaration is >> supported by our 10 Key Values and deserves the County Council?s support >> and official endorsement. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council officially endorse the South Los >> Angeles Declaration of Health and Human Rights? >> >> >> >> Sponsors/Presenters: Deacon Alexander & Michael McCue >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> 12-b) ? UPDATE: THE ?IDLE NO MORE? MOVEMENT - *(5 MINS)* >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: At the January 2013 meeting, Council endorsed the ?Idle No >> More? Movement. A rally was held since then. >> >> >> >> Sponsor/Presenter: Linda Piera-Avila >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> 13) ? PUBLIC COMMENTS ~ Opportunity for visiting Greens and GPLACC guests >> in attendance to be heard on non-agenda items by council members. NOTE: >> Public comments only! No council members? comments allowed during this item. >> (Flexible time allowed, preferring 10 MINS TOTAL / 1 MIN per comment?) >> Sponsor: Deacon Alexander >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> 14) ? ANNOUNCEMENTS ~ *(1 min per announcement)* NOTE: No comments! >> Announcements only! >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 15) - CLOSING CIRCLE ~ ADJOURNMENT ? *(2 min)* >> >> >> >> Post Meeting Actions >> >> ? Standing Committee members may meet in their groups to organize >> their committee projects. >> >> ? Clean Up of Space >> >> >> >> *BACKGROUND NOTE FROM SECRETARY YEAGER REGARDING AGENDA ITEM #7: >> >> >> >> *In speaking with the FPPC today they had no action pending but referred me >> to the Sec of State. It turns out that there is a new annual $50 >> requirement for registering a committee. Please see the attached letter and >> the below CA government code section that it referred to:* >> >> >> >> 84101.5. >> >> (a) >> >> Notwithstanding Section 81006, the Secretary of State shall charge each >> committee that is required to file a statement of organization pursuant to >> subdivision (a) of Section 84101, and each committee that is required to >> file a statement of organization pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section >> 84101 shall pay, a fee of >> >> fifty dollars ($50) per year until the committee is terminated pursuant to >> Section 84214. >> >> >> >> (b) >> >> A committee shall pay the fee prescribed in subdivision (a) no later than >> 15 days after filing its statement of organization. >> >> >> >> (c) >> >> (1) A committee annually shall pay the fee prescribed in subdivision (a) no >> later than January 15 of each year. >> >> >> >> (2) A committee that is created and pays the initial fee pursuant to >> subdivision (b) in the final three months of a calendar year is not subject >> to the annual fee pursuant to paragraph (1) for the following calendar year. >> >> >> >> (3) A committee that existed prior to January 1, 2013, shall pay the fee >> prescribed in subdivision (a) no later than February 15, 2013, and in >> accordance with paragraph (1) in each year thereafter. A committee that >> terminates pursuant to Section 84214 prior to January 31, 2013, is not >> required to pay a fee pursuant to this paragraph. >> >> (d) >> >> (1) A committee that fails to timely pay a fee required by this section is >> subject to a penalty equal to three times the amount of the fee. >> >> >> >> (2) The Commission shall enforce the requirements of this section. >> -- >> In your service, >> >> Michael McCue >> Green Party Los Angeles County >> County Council Coordinator >> -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com From pagesincolor at yahoo.com Mon Jan 21 16:19:15 2013 From: pagesincolor at yahoo.com (John Thielking) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:19:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Fwd: SUPPORT: Lynne Stewart (2013-01-18) Message-ID: <1358813955.14966.YahooMailClassic@web122902.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Check this out.? There are some audio links to listen to at the bottom of the e-mail. Thanks. ? Sincerely, ? John Thielking --- On Mon, 1/21/13, Donna Wallach wrote: From: Donna Wallach Subject: Fwd: SUPPORT: Lynne Stewart (2013-01-18) To: "SBM" , "South_Bay_Activists" Date: Monday, January 21, 2013, 12:14 PM ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Uncle Don B Fanning Date: Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:29 AM Subject: [south_bay_activists] SUPPORT: Lynne Stewart (2013-01-18) To: "[south_bay_activists]" ? SUPPORT: Lynne Stewart (2013-01-18) From: Jeff Mackler jmackler at lmi.net> To: mumia-alerts at mailman.lmi.net Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2013 00:17:37 -0800 Subject: [unac] Urgent! Lynne Stewart's illness returns and legal update Please forward widely Lynne Stewart Emergency Alert! Dear Friends, Below you will find today's critical communication from longtime Lynne Stewart supporter, Betty Davis. The information concerns Lynne's health and her legal status. As you will read below Lynne's breast cancer has returned. Lynne was successfully treated, we had hoped, two years ago and given a clean bill of health, as much as such diagnoses can be counted on. But a single spot was found on one lung a few months ago. Now another has appeared on the other lung and others in her upper back, all associated with her original breast cancer. Her husband Ralph Poynter told me today that Lynne's condition was still very treatable and that a cure was not at all to be ruled out and especially so if prison officials allowed her the expert treatment afforded her previously in a prominent New York City hospital. Lynne's request to be moved to that facility was denied. She is to be treated in a prison related facility, but fortunately under the direction of and using the protocols of her doctor/daughter, who is expected to be with Lynne at any moment. We are still hopeful for a positive outcome, even under the most difficult conditions. Meanwhile, Lynne's appeal preparations for a hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court are now in progress, with Lynne having assembled a first rate team of attorneys including members of the Center for Constitutional Rights and the National Lawyers Guild. Lynne campaigned for Mumia's freedom for the several years that she was free on bail and traveling the country in her own defense. She was present at Mumia's court hearing in Philadelphia and appeared on Democracy Now!, with Mumia phoning in in her defense. I urge you to carefully read the material below and lend a hand. The stakes are high. We will continue to demand the finest medical treatment for Lynne and, of course, continue to campaign for her freedom and immediate release. Lynne, a prominent civil rights attorney of 30 years, was the victim of a government-orchestrated 2005 frame-up trial that was riddled with violations of fundamental legal principles. She was convicted on five counts of conspiracy to aid and abet terrorism. This was based on the government's charge that her public issuance a press release on behalf of her client, the "blind sheik" Omar Abdel Rachman, an Egyptian cleric who was similarly framed up and imprisoned for life on "terrorism" charges, was illegal. Ironically, Rachman's freedom is today being demanded by Egypt's new President Mohamed Morsi. Lynne, 72, was originally convicted and sentenced to 28 months in prison, but this "light" sentence was contested by the reactionary U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and her sentence was outrageously increased to 10 years, by the compliant Federal District Court trial judge, John Koeltl. I urge you to write to Lynne and convey your love and solidarity. She toured the Bay Area several times in previous years, always speaking to admiring and stunned audiences, who realized that Lynne's case was central to everyone's civil liberties. Lynne's conviction was a message to all attorneys that defense of the unpopular, defense of democratic rights and especially defense of Muslim victims of government persecution, was dangerous. Lynne's conviction and extended sentence served to massively chill the defense bar. Lynne's freedom and life itself in large part depends on our solidarity. Write Lynne at: Lynne Stewart 53504-054 Federal Medical Center Carswell P.O. Box 27137 Fort Worth, Texas 76127 Send your generous contribution payable to: Lynne Stewart Organization 1070 Dean Street Brooklyn, New York 11216 In solidarity, Jeff Mackler, West Coast Coordinator Lynne Stewart Defense Committee 510-268-9429 jmackler at lmi.net - - - URGENT MESSAGE OF APPEAL FOR LYNNE STEWART- THE PEOPLE'S ATTORNEY Greetings It is urgent that you listen to the audio email below. It is the latest update from Ralph Poynter, Mya Shone & Ralph Schonmann about LYNNE STEWARTS fate in prison. Lynne Stewart's breast cancer is spreading to her lungs and shoulders. She needs immediate treatment NOW. The prison authorities have known this since September. WE ARE ALSO IN THE PROCESS OF LAUNCHING HER APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT. DEADLINE FEBRUARY 21, 2013. All we are asking you to: Listen to the audio below and update yourself on the facts. Check out the website as well. Write a letter of support to Lynne Stewart- 53504 - 054, FEDERAL MEDICAL CNTR, CARSWELL, P.O. BOX 27137, FT. WORTH, TEXAS 76127. You don't have to write the prison authorities because THEY READ EVERYTHING WE SEND AND TELL HER SO. Send this email out to all your listservs, especially to LAWYERS because we are asking ALL ATTORNEYS SUPPORT HER CERT , (A REQUEST FOR THE SUPREME COURT TO HEAR HER CASE.) When it comes to the oppressed, there is no such thing as law or justice. THEREFORE, the movement determines the argument before the courts, not this myth of justice before the law. We need attorneys who understand this and understand that LYNNE STEWART was one of the very few attorneys who understood this. She never had her political prisoners surrender their right to self defense or self determination. In her trial when questioned she still defended this human right and her right to give her clients the best defense possible. When she was resentenced from 28 months to ten years, one of the reasons was that SHE "SHOWED NO REMORSE." SHE DOES NOT FEEL REMORSE FOR DEFENDING THE BILL OF RIGHTS, therefore, we should defend her and all POLITICAL PRISONERS. BETTY DAVIS NEW ABOLITIONIST MOVEMENT -----Original Message--- But, to listen to the report, go to: 128 kbps version (hi fi): http://www.takebackwbai.org/lynnestewart/2013-01-16.LynneStewartReport-128.mp3 32 kbps version (lo fi): http://www.takebackwbai.org/lynnestewart/2013-01-16.LynneStewartReport-32.mp3 Please listen from the links here in this email. Let me know what you think. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Abdel-Rahman ### __._,_.___ Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1) Recent Activity: Visit Your Group Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest ? Unsubscribe ? Terms of Use ? Send us Feedback . __,_._,___ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tnharter at aceweb.com Tue Jan 22 11:20:54 2013 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 11:20:54 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] test message Message-ID: <50FEE696.9010907@aceweb.com> please reply if you see this! -- Tian http://tian.greens.org Latest change: Found lots of change stories in John Cage's biography. The Kiwi Green pin I got in Baltimore is now on a 1994 quarter. From spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com Tue Jan 22 11:22:58 2013 From: spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com (Spencer Graves) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 11:22:58 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] test message In-Reply-To: <50FEE696.9010907@aceweb.com> References: <50FEE696.9010907@aceweb.com> Message-ID: <50FEE712.1030002@structuremonitoring.com> seen. sg On 1/22/2013 11:20 AM, Tian Harter wrote: > please reply if you see this! > -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com From pagesincolor at yahoo.com Tue Jan 22 13:18:31 2013 From: pagesincolor at yahoo.com (John Thielking) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:18:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] test message In-Reply-To: <50FEE712.1030002@structuremonitoring.com> Message-ID: <1358889511.89365.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Seen.? And the message about Lynne Stewart that I sent more than 24 hours ago finally showed up... --- On Tue, 1/22/13, Spencer Graves wrote: From: Spencer Graves Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] test message To: "Tian Harter" Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Tuesday, January 22, 2013, 11:22 AM seen.? sg On 1/22/2013 11:20 AM, Tian Harter wrote: > please reply if you see this! > -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph:? 408-655-4567 web:? www.structuremonitoring.com _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 22 14:21:56 2013 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 14:21:56 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] $50 fee for committees such as ours Message-ID: <50FF1104.2050805@sbcglobal.net> The check for the $50 fee is in the mail. In November, as treasurer, I received a letter from the Secretary of State, Debra Bowen, notifying us of legislation passed in 2011(?) that took effect on 1 Jan 2013. Each qualified committee that has filed a Form 410, as we have, is required to pay an annual fee on time, terminate, or be fined What is Form 410? Form 410 Statement of Organisation - Recipient Committee is filed (FPPC and ROV) upon original organisation of a group that accepts monies or donates money to candidates or ballot measures, etc.. It includes names and addresses of Treasurer and other princiipal officers. When changes take place an amended Form 410 is filed Once January rolled around I chose continued operation for the Green Party of Santa Clara County and wrote the check for $50 and mailed it So that is one more item that is easy enough to remember. Just send it in with the semi annual report (Form 460) that details income and expenses of $100 or more. And yes, the January semi annual report (Form 460) was submitted on time. From spencer.graves at prodsyse.com Tue Jan 22 23:04:05 2013 From: spencer.graves at prodsyse.com (Spencer Graves) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 23:04:05 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Ask Obama to pardon John Kiriakou, who blew the whistle on torture In-Reply-To: <584d55ac4b513800dbfc3330f856f118@bounce.bluestatedigital.com> References: <584d55ac4b513800dbfc3330f856f118@bounce.bluestatedigital.com> Message-ID: <50FF8B65.6010609@prodsyse.com> Hello, All: Please click on " http://action.firedoglake.com/page/s/pardon-kiriakou" to sign a petition to ask Obama to pardon John Kiriakou, a former CIA agent "who helped expose and end waterboarding - the very inhumane treatment Obama campaigned against in 2008." (See "www.scribd.com/doc/55315362/Remarks-of-Senator-Barack-Obama-the-War-We-Need-to-Win-Wednesday-August-1-2007-Washington-DC" for a 2007 campaign speech in which Obama, "When I am President, America will reject torture without exception. America is the country that stood against that kind of behavior, and we will do so again." We must ask him to finally fulfill his pledge at least by pardoning those who exposed gross criminality in high places. Thanks, Spencer -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Fwd: this is not right Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 17:17:14 -0500 From: Brian, Firedoglake.com Reply-To: act at firedoglake.com To: Spencer Graves Dear Spencer, More than 10,000 people have signed our petition demanding President Obama pardon CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou - join them now! If President Obama wants to claim he is against torture, he should not be imprisoning whistleblowers like John Kiriakou. It's time he end the war on whistleblowers, beginning with pardoning the man who helped expose and end waterboarding - the very inhumane treatment Obama campaigned against in 2008.1 Tell President Obama to pardon CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou. Click here to read and sign the petition: http://action.firedoglake.com/page/s/pardon-kiriakou Kiriakou is expected to be sentenced to 30 months in prison this week. With time running out, we need to bring the public's attention to this absolute injustice and call on President Obama to pardon this important torture whistleblower. For more information on this campaign, see my original email below. In Solidarity, Brian Sonenstein Campaign Director, Firedoglake.com 1. The War We Need to Win, Barack Obama, 8/1/2007: http://www.scribd.com/doc/55315362/Remarks-of-Senator-Barack-Obama-the-War-We-Need-to-Win-Wednesday-August-1-2007-Washington-DC ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Brian, Firedoglake.com Date: Fri. Jan. 18, 2013 Subject: this is not right Tell Obama: Pardon CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou Dear Spencer, President Obama has opposed waterboarding as torture since the 2008 campaign - so why is he sending the man who helped end that practice to prison? Former CIA officer John Kiriakou, who helped expose the Bush administration's torture program, recently plead guilty to sharing the name of a colleague to journalists to use as a source. He is expected to receive a sentence of 30 months in prison.1 It's a cruel irony that the first agent connected to the CIA torture program to go to prison is the whistleblower who spoke out against the heinous practices of our government. From Bradley Manning to Aaron Swartz to John Kiriakou, the government's pattern of overzealously prosecuting activists and whistleblowers has ruined too many lives already. If President Obama wants to show he opposes torture and supports government transparency he should pardon Kiriakou immediately. Tell President Obama to pardon CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou. Click here to read and sign the petition: http://action.firedoglake.com/page/s/pardon-kiriakou In fact, the Justice Department has refused to pursue any of the people who sanctioned and carried out the torture Kiriakou helped expose. Yet they have gone after whistleblowers and activists with a zeal unmatched by any administration in history. Bradley Manning faces life in prison. Aaron Swartz took his life to avoid prosecution. Thomas Drake, Shamai Leibowitz, the list goes on and on. Kiriakou is the sixth person to be indicted under the Espionage Act by the Obama administration.3 It's time the president end this war on whistleblowers. He can start by pardoning John Kiriakou. Sign our petition demanding President Obama pardon CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou. http://action.firedoglake.com/page/s/pardon-kiriakou Kiriakou served his country in the CIA for over 15 years, risking his life as an undercover agent chasing Al-Qaeda overseas -- he does not deserve this treatment. Kiriakou says he engaged in rendition that resulted in the torture of detainees. He did not personally carry out torture. His leak was not even made public and presented no harm the country. Compare this to the reckless and very public outing of Valerie Plame -- a case that resulted in four felony convictions for Scooter Libby, but not a single day in jail. It is unconscionable that Libby could avoid punishment, while Kiriakou must face years in prison for exposing the illegal and inhumane actions of the government -- actions the Obama administration claims to oppose. President Obama should not punish, but pardon John Kiriakou for his exceptional patriotism in speaking out against torture. Sign our petition demanding President Obama pardon CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou. http://action.firedoglake.com/page/s/pardon-kiriakou Thank you for standing up for transparency and fighting to protect whistleblowers. In Solidarity, Brian Sonenstein Campaign Director, Firedoglake.com Sources: 1. Pardon John Kiriakou, CIA Whistleblower Convicted of Classified Leak, Kevin Gosztola, The Dissenter, 1/15/2013. http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2013/01/15/pardon-john-kiriakou-cia-whistleblower-convicted-of-classified-leak/ 2. The Only CIA Officer Scheduled to Go to Jail Over Torture Never Tortured Anybody, Kevin Gosztola, The Dissenter, 1/6/2013. http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2013/01/06/the-only-cia-officer-scheduled-to-go-to-jail-over-torture-never-tortured-anybody/ 3. Obama's War on Whistleblowing: Ex-CIA Agent Indicted Under Espionage Act, Kevin Gosztola, The Dissenter, 4/6/2012. http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2012/04/06/obamas-war-on-whistleblowing-ex-cia-agent-indicted-under-espionage-act/ ----------------------------------------------------------------- Contribute to Firedoglake to support our activism: https://secure.firedoglake.com/page/contribute/fdl_donate?source=email&subsource=email_footer This email was sent to: spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com To unsubscribe, go to: http://action.firedoglake.com/unsubscribe -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com From spencer.graves at prodsyse.com Tue Jan 22 23:16:14 2013 From: spencer.graves at prodsyse.com (Spencer Graves) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 23:16:14 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Please peruse: and Agenda Items Request For Jan 2013 GPSCC Meeting In-Reply-To: <1358870356.59769.YahooMailClassic@web122903.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1358870356.59769.YahooMailClassic@web122903.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <50FF8E3E.5040400@prodsyse.com> PROPOSED AGENDA ITEMS FOR OUR NEXT MEETING, THIS THURSDAY, JANUARY 24: 1. Obtaining other people for the County Council and to represent Santa Clara County on the statewide Standing General Assembly. 1.1. Santa Clara County is allowed 5 representatives on the statewide Standing General Assembly. We currently have only 3. John Thielking is currently not on that list; we should put him on. That would bring us to 4, consisting entirely of our current County Council. 2.2 Drew noted that our County Council is currently all male. Number 7 of the 10 key values of the Green Party is "Feminism and Gender Equity" (www.gp.org/tenkey.php). We could use some females. 2. PROPOSED: The Green Party of Santa Clara County will endorse the presentation of the movie "Enemy Alien" at the Peace Center, Saturday evening, March 23. DISCUSSION: "Enemy Alien" is a documentary describing the persecution of a Palestinian-American, Farouk Abdel-Muhti, essentially for being Palestinian and refusing to remain silent. The film was produced by a Japanese American, Konrad Aderer, whose parents had spent World War II in a concentration camp in the US (www.lifeorliberty.org/enemy-alien). The South Bay Committee Against Political Repression is organizing a presentation of this movie to be followed by a panel discussion featuring a Japanese-American and an Arab-American. Spencer On 1/22/2013 7:59 AM, John Thielking wrote: > Since no one else has taken on this task yet, I am requesting everyone submit agenda items for the Jan 24th GPSCC meeting to pagesincolor at yahoo.com . The deadline is Wednesday at 5PM, after which time I will publish the final agenda. > > Is something wrong with the GPSCC chat e-mail again? I sent a message to it yesterday and so far there is not even a "rejected by the moderator" response. > > Also, do we have to pay a fee for any of our committees per the item at the bottom of this e-mail? I think our central committee/county council might qualify as a committee that has to pay the fee. > > John Thielking > > --- On Tue, 1/22/13, Caroline Yacoub wrote: > > > From: Caroline Yacoub > Subject: Please peruse > To: "Dana St. George" , "Gerry Gras" , "Andrea Dorey" , "fred Duperrault" , WSB3ATTYCA at aol.com, "Jim Doyle" , "Drew" , "Tian Harter" , "Valerie D. Face" , "Brian Good" , "Jules Brouillet" , "Spencer Graves" , "sandy perry" , "John Thielking" > Date: Tuesday, January 22, 2013, 2:54 AM > > > > > > > > I don't know whether you are on Shane's list or not, butI thought it would be instructive to look at this agenda. Just glance at it. Did you think our meetings were long and boring? Want to rethink that? > > > > ----- Forwarded Message ---- > From: shane que hee > Sent: Mon, January 21, 2013 9:18:03 PM > Subject: ** Agenda for February 3rd, 2013 meeting of the Los Angeles Green Party County Council (fwd) > > >> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 11:41:55 -0800 >> From: Michael McCue >> Subject: ** Agenda for February 3rd, 2013 >> meeting of the Los Angeles Green Party County Council >> >> Dear Los Angeles-Area Greens, >> Both below and attached you will find the agenda for the next LA Assembly >> of Greens and the following County Council meeting for the representatives >> of the Green Party of Los Angeles. County >> >> We ask our Green locals in Long Beach, SF Valley, LA, Redondo Beach, Harbor >> Area, Mid-City, Skid Row and East Side Greens to share this agenda with >> their locals and with every Green you can reach. >> >> When you review the agenda, you will see that we are conducting important >> discussions about our brothers and sisters in the Peace & Freedom Party, >> and many other important issues, including the Redondo Beach elections, the >> Community College Elections, the South Los Angeles Declaration for Health >> and Human Rights, reviewing our voter registration procedures, as well as >> many other topics of vital interest to all Greens in LA County. >> >> We urge our locals to send representatives to this meeting, and we ask all >> concerned Green Party-registered voters to attend as well. We are >> competing against the Super Bowl on Sunday, Feb. 3rd, so we need your >> support to make this County-wide Assembly of Greens a success that helps us >> to unify the Political Left in California. >> >> Peace and Freedome voters are especially encouraged to attend. >> >> If you have any questions, please email me at sfvgreens at gmail.com >> >> Thank you for your support of our 10 Key Values. >> >> Here's the agenda...(a copy is attached for printing purposes if you need >> it...)...and please bring a vegetarian dish to the potluck! >> >> Let's make 2013 a rear when true progressives roar in Los Angeles and in >> California! >> >> Thank you! >> >> *COUNTYWIDE ASSEMBLY OF LOS ANGELES GREENS* >> >> Sunday, February 3rd, 2013, at The Peace Center, 8124 West 3rd Street, Los >> Angeles, CA 90048 >> >> >> >> 2:00 -3:00pm Countywide Assembly of Greens w/Vegetarian Potluck! >> >> >> >> ? MLK/Black History Month Appreciation ? ?I Have a Dream? speech by >> Dr. Martin Luther King. Council member, Deacon Alexander, will play MLK?s >> speech to inspire our LA-area Greens. (20 mins) >> >> ? Discussion of possibility of Peace & Freedom voters joining the >> Green Party. Discussion led by San Fernando Valley Greens Facilitator, >> Eugene Hernandez, and former P&F voter (now a Green voter & Table Leader), >> Dennis Terill. All interested LA-area Greens and Peace & Freedom voters >> are invited to attend and join this discussion. (20 mins) >> >> ? COMMITTEE MEETING OF VOTER REGISTRATION COMMITTEE?S TABLE LEADERS >> (Tables #1 - #4), Kamran Ghasri, Dorothy Kemeny, Michael McCue & Dennis >> Terill (20 mins) >> >> ? Please contact Will Yeager or Ara Bedian for Potluck >> Coordination. Everyone >> bring a veggie dish! >> >> >> >> >> >> 3:00pm >> >> GPLACC Meeting Agenda ~ Monthly Meeting of Los Angeles County Green Party >> State Senate District Reps, Locals & Green voters >> >> >> >> 1) - Opening Meditation ~ *TBA** **(2 min)*** >> >> >> >> 2) - Call to Order ~ Roll Call ~ Introduction of New Attendees ~ (*Alternates >> Announcement-if any)** **(5 min)*** >> >> o Facilitator: *E.B. Gendel * >> >> o Timekeeper & Vibes Monitor*: Michael McCue * >> >> o Notes*: Will Yeager* >> >> >> >> 3) - Approval of (or Amendments to) the Agenda ~ *Council members** **(5 >> min) 2/3 approval required to make agenda changes* >> >> >> >> 4) - Approval of previous meetings? minutes ~*1) November, 2012 meeting >> minutes & 2) January 2013 meeting minutes (minutes previously submitted >> to list-serve)** **(5 min)* >> >> >> >> 5) ?LOS ANGELES COUNTY-AREA 2013 ELECTIONS >> >> >> >> 5-a) AD HOC DEBATE COMMITTEE UPDATE ~ *(5 mins.)* >> >> >> >> UPDATE: A progress report on planning made during the last month for a City >> of LA mayoral debate, as per Council?s request from Deacon Alexander at the >> January 2013 meeting. >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: In January, Deacon asked the GPLACC to host a mayoral debate >> that he plans to organize with other Greens. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall the GPLACC host a mayoral debate for the >> City of LA elections? Sponsor/Presenter, Deacon Alexander. >> >> 5-b) LA COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT BOARD ELECTIONS ~ Request for Council >> Recommendation from Candidate, Nancy Pearlman. (10 mins.) >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: Former Green, Nancy Pearlman, is running for her fourth term on >> the Board of Trustees of the Los Angeles Community College District. Nancy >> has been an environmentalist for 43 years, is a television documentarian, >> radio broadcaster, anthropologist, educator, and community college >> instructor. Her bio is at www.NancyPearlman.net >> . >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #1: Shall the GPLACC recommend LA County voters >> to support Nancy Pearlman? >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #2: Shall the GPLAC authorize use of its Voter >> Registration Database to campaign for Nancy Pearlman of LACCD? Campaign >> uses include: walk, call, mail and email lists w/mailings & emails. >> >> Sponsor: Michael McCue/Presenter: Nancy Pearlman. >> >> >> >> 5-c) CITY OF REDONDO BEACH MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS, March 5, 2013 (20 mins.) >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #1: Shall the GPLAC endorse Yes on Measure A, >> the ?Redondo Beach Power Plant Phase-Out Initiative Measure? aka the ?No >> Power Plant? Measure? >> >> BACKGROUND: http://nopowerplant.com/npp/ >> >> Full Text of Measure A: http://nopowerplant.com/resources/Initiative.pdf >> >> Redondo Beach City Attorney's Non Partisan Summary: >> http://nopowerplant.com/npp/city-attorneys-summary/ >> >> Sierra Club letter opposing Power Plant: >> http://www.nopowerplant.com/resources/SierraClub2012letter.pdf >> >> Retire Redondo's Power Plant: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGHX_EEdyhk >> >> Sponsor: Ian Sachs, Michael McCue, John Wenger/Presenters: Ian Sachs & Will >> Yeager (10 mins.) >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #2: Shall the GPLAC recommend Bill Brand for >> City Council District 2? >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: Bill Brand Campaign Website: http://billbrandrb.wordpress.com/ >> >> Bill Brand on the AES Power Plant/Time Warner Cable: >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnzjHFcLnFs >> >> Sponsor: Ian Sachs, Michael McCue, John Wenger/Presenter: Bill Brand. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #3: Shall the GPLAC recommend Jim Light for >> City Council District 1? >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: Jim Light Campaign Website: http://jimlightforcouncil.com/ >> >> Jim Light for Redondo Beach Man of the Year: >> http://billbrandrb.wordpress.com/2012/12/31/happy-new-year-jim-light-for-man-of-the-year/ >> Sponsors: Ian Sachs, Michael McCue, John Wenger/Presenter: Jim Light. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #4: Shall the GPLAC authorize use of its Voter >> Registration Database to campaign in Redondo Beach for ?Yes on Measure A?? >> >> Sponsors: Ian Sachs, Michael McCue, John Wenger/Presenter: Will Yeager. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #5: Shall the GPLAC authorize use of its Voter >> Registration Database to campaign in Redondo Beach for Bill Brand for City >> Council, District #2? >> >> Sponsors: Ian Sachs, Michael McCue, John Wenger/Presenter: Will Yeager. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION #6: Shall the GPLAC authorize use of its Voter >> Registration Database to campaign in Redondo Beach for Jim Light for City >> Council, District #1? Sponsors: Ian Sachs, Michael McCue, John >> Wenger/Presenter: Will Yeager. >> >> >> >> *************************************************(1 >> HOUR)*************************************************************** >> >> >> >> 6) - FILLING VACANT SEATS ON THE LA COUNTY COUNCIL ~ Confirmation of Greens >> nominated to be Seated on the GPLACC *(15 min, if needed)* BYLAW-REQUIRED >> ACTION - Relevant Bylaw: 5-2.4 Internal Elections - Elect Officers of the >> County Council?.and new County Council members to fill vacant County >> Council seats. NOTE: ANY LA COUNTY GREEN PARTY-REGISTERED VOTER IN ANY >> DISTRICT IN LA COUNTY MAY SUBMIT AN OPEN SEAT NOMINATING PETITION TO THE >> GPLACC OFFICERS FOR VERIFICATION AT ANY TIME BEFORE THE MEETING AND/OR AT >> THE MEETING ITSELF FOR COUNCIL?S CONSIDERATION. >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 7) ? APPROVAL OF $50 EXPENDITURE TO ACCOMPANY THE FILING OF FORM 410* (5 >> mins.) >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: Former Green, Ross Frankel, a former GPLACC Treasurer from >> years ago, informed our current County Coordinator that the CA Secretary of >> State had repeatedly been trying to notify our Council by mail of a filing >> deadline and fee for Form 410. No notification letter from the CA Sec of >> State was forwarded by our PO Box mailbox key-holders to our officers. Our >> timely filing by Feb. 15th, will prevent our Council from being liable for >> a $150 fine for late filings of active political committees. *(See note at >> bottom?) >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall the GPLACC instruct our Treasurer to >> authorize the expenditure of the $50 filing fee to accompany Form 410, made >> payable to the Secretary of State for the State of California? >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 8) ? ESTABLISH A NEW, SECURE, MAILING ADDRESS FOR ALL COUNCIL BUSINESS ~ *(10 >> min) * >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: Our Mailbox contract expires in March. Aside from the failed >> Form 410 notification, there have been multiple instances of our official >> mail not being forwarded to our Council officers in a timely manner, or not >> at all. As a result, our Council?s official business is not being >> conducted in a timely manner with potentially expensive repercussions for >> our Council. A new, permanent mailing address would stabilize this >> situation and save our Council $120 in additional expenses?the benefits of >> which would be not only savings to our Council Treasury, but to insure that >> our officers are able to conduct our Council?s business in a timely, >> professional manner. Our Council?s credibility is at stake. Sponsor: >> GPLACC officers /Presenter: Secretary, Will Yeager >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall the GPLACC establish a new mailing >> address, using GPLACC Treasurer, Dorothy Kemeny?s address, 3521 Monogram >> Ave. Long Beach, CA 90808?or locate a new post office mail box in March >> when Council?s current contract runs out? >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 9) ? NAME CHANGE FOR TWO GPLACC STANDING COMMITTEES *(10 MINS)* >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: At the January 2013 meeting, several Council members mentioned >> that some of our standing committees had inappropriate names, or that our >> members were referring to them incorrectly, or misunderstanding those >> committees? duties because of the committees lacking better, more specific >> names. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council officially change the name of >> the GPLAC ?Finance? Committee to the ?Budget, Finance & Fundraising? (BFF) >> Committee? >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council officially change the name of >> the GPLAC ?Tabling? Committee to the ?Voter Registration? Committee? >> Sponsors/Presenters: >> Deacon Alexander & Michael McCue >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 10) ? VOTER REGISTRATION CONCERNS FOR LA GREENS/P&F VOTERS *(45 MINS total)* >> >> >> >> 10-a) END-OF-YEAR REPORT ~ BRIEF UPDATE plus Q & A w/Committeee Co-Chairs *(5 >> MINS)* >> >> >> >> DISCUSSION: What are council?s reactions to the 2012 End-of-Year report? What >> will be our Council?s goals for the Los Angeles Green Party in 2013? What >> does Council wish to accomplish in 2013 specifically? >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> 10-b) - VOTER REGISTRATION COMMITTEE BUDGET REQUEST *(10 MINS) * >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: At the November, 2012 meeting, Council requested that Co-Chairs >> Kamran & Michael, return with an itemized budget to support their budget >> request of $500 over a 6-month period. The itemized budget is as follows? >> >> >> >> WorldFest Booth Registration on Sunday May 19th, 2013 = $250 (Early Bird >> Special Price) >> >> 3 new folding tables = $75 (sale price) >> >> New Signage = $100 >> >> Support materials = $75 (i.e. new tablecloths, sunflowers, weights, wheeled >> carts for on-site mobility & set-up). >> >> Budget Request Total = $500 for expenses until August 2013. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council approve the Tabling/Voter >> Registration Committee budget request? >> NOTE: Items 10-a and 10-b are Sponsored by McCue/Presenters: M. McCue & >> Kamran Ghasri >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 10-c) - INSTRUCTIONS TO GPLACC VOTER REGISTRATION COMMITTEE CO-CHAIRS FOR A >> NEW PROCESS IN HANDLING NEW VOTER REGISTRATIONS *(15 MINS)*** >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: While the GPLAC has seen a strong performance in registering >> new Green Party members in 2012 and 2013, there is no organized effort to >> ensure entry of these new registrants in the GPCA and GPLAC's voter >> registration data base and no organized follow up to our new members, many >> of which are interested in becoming involved now that they have joined the >> GPCA. >> >> >> >> PROPOSAL: That the County Council? >> >> >> >> (1) gives direction to the GPLAC Tabling Committee and other GPLAC members >> doing voter registration in LA County to create a record of new voter >> registrations via digital photographs where possible (through digital >> cameras or cell phones), and where not possible, through photocopies of the >> voter registration forms, for which the copies of photocopies would be >> reimbursed by the County Council; that >> >> >> >> (2) the information on new registrations is sent to the GPCA's email >> gpca at cagreens.org for entrance in the GPCA voter registration data base and >> >> >> >> (3) the information on new registrations is sent to the GPLAC data base >> committee co-coordinators for entrance in the GPLAC's data base; and that >> >> >> >> (4) an email that includes links to the GPLAC's and GPCA Facebook pages, >> the GPLAC-Forum email list and the GPCA Twitter page be sent to each to >> registrant by the GPLAC data base co-coordinators, in order to make it easy >> for new party registrants to connect to the party in these ways. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council so instruct the Co-Chairs of the >> Voter Registration Committee? Sponsor/Presenter: Mike Feinstein >> >> >> >> *************************************************(2 >> HOURS)************************************************************* >> >> >> >> 10-d) ? SFV GREENS LOCAL REPORT: OFFICIAL GREEN OUTREACH TO PEACE & FREEDOM >> VOTERS ~ *(15 min)* >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: The Peace & Freedom Party, a Progressive Party consisting of >> mostly Socialist voters, has made internal proposals that would recommend >> their voters join the Green Party should they lose their ballot status in >> California, which seems imminent, due to their low numbers. SFV Greens >> Facilitator, Eugene Hernandez, will make a report of his outreach efforts, >> and submits a ?welcoming statement? intended for P&F voters, to be made >> publicly and shared with the P&F leadership throughout California. >> >> >> >> PROPOSED GPLACC STATEMENT: ?*The Green Party Los Angeles County Council >> officially welcomes all Peace & Freedom voters who are seeking a ?new, >> progressive, political home,? especially in the event that the P&F party >> loses their ballot status in California. We LA Greens welcome voters of >> all political stripes, but especially our Progressive and Socialist >> brothers and sisters, and all those voters who believe in our Green Party?s >> 10 Key Values, values that we Greens believe will create a stronger >> democracy, a healthier planet, and a society that creates economic justice >> for all, especially when our Key Values are >> applied in legislative policy. The >> Green Party of Los Angeles welcomes all Peace & Freedom-registered voters >> to our ranks and asks them to help us unify the Political Left in the State >> of California*.? >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall the GPLACC endorse & support the SFV >> Greens? proposed statement being made public to the officers and voters of >> the Peace & Freedom Party? >> >> >> >> Sponsor/Presenter: Eugene Hernandez & the SFV Greens local. >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 11) - GPLACC MEETING SCHEDULE CONCERNS ~ *(35 MINS Total) * >> >> >> >> >> >> 11-a) STARTING TIMES FOR GPLAC MEETINGS ~ *(10 MINS)* >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: After years of starting meetings at 4pm on Sundays, and after >> two County Council members indicated at the first meeting of the 2012-2014 >> Council that they have commitments on Sundays that make attending meetings >> very difficult that start earlier than 4pm, the GPLAC Co-coordinator has >> unilaterally declared that meetings start earlier than 4pm, and at varying >> times. This has created unnecessary difficulties and tension among County >> Council members. >> >> >> >> PROPOSAL: That the County Council clarify that County Council meetings >> begin at 4pm on Sundays. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council commit to 4pm starting times for >> each monthly meeting? >> >> >> >> Sponsor/Presenter: Mike Feinstein >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 11-b) OUTREACH/NEW LOCATIONS FOR GPLACC MEETINGS ~ *(15 MINS)* >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: Several Council members have requested new venues for our >> meetings, asking if Council could meet in various locations throughout LA >> County, to improve attendance and make it easier for those Greens who are >> not living nearby the Peace Center. >> >> >> >> RATIONALE: A majority of Council members have a long drive, especially our >> car-poolers, and many members have over an hour drive one-way, just to make >> our meetings. Rotating meeting locations would give our long-distance >> Greens a break now and then in terms of their personal costs in time and >> gas expenses, and thus, making a rotating meeting location schedule a more >> just and equitable one for all members concerned. Some Greens would travel >> further one month, others further the next month, etc? >> >> >> >> DISCUSSION: Is a rotating meeting location schedule feasible for the GPLACC? >> What are the benefits? What are the drawbacks? And?What alternative >> locations would make ideal meeting sites for the GPLACC? >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council commit to a Green Outreach >> Program for LA County Greens, by holding/conducting GPLACC meetings in the >> various districts represented by our Council members? >> >> >> >> Sponsors/Presenters: Deacon Alexander, E.B. Gendel, Eugene Hernandez, Edy >> Alvarez, Anthony Vierya & Alphonso Garcia >> >> >> >> *************************************************(3 >> HOURS)************************************************************* >> >> >> >> 11-c) CHANGING THE GPLAC?S APRIL 2013 BUSINESS MEETING TO A GREEN GATHERING >> >> * >> >> >> (15 >> MINS)* >> >> >> >> Changing the GPLAC's April County Council meeting from a regular business >> meeting to a call for GPLAC County Council members and others to attend the >> GPCA's Southern California Gathering scheduled for Los Angeles the weekend >> of April 6/7. >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: The GPCA will be hosting two gatherings in April, one in >> Northern California and one in Southern California. The GPCA is expected to >> send a request to all County Councils in late January to ask them to cancel >> their regular meetings in April, in order to make it easier for all active >> party members across the state to attend either/both the Northern and >> Southern California Gatherings and participate in these needed skills >> sharing and strategic discussions for our party. >> >> >> >> RATIONALE: The rationale is that most party members have a limited amount >> of time to devote to meetings, and by not having to attend a business >> meeting that month, party members can more easily participate in these >> one-a-year regional gatherings and meet and work with more Greens from >> their county, region and state in a non-business meeting setting that will >> allow for more issue and skill-based organizing and interaction. In this >> case for the Southern California gathering, this would remove a conflict >> between County Council members wanting to attend the gathering and wanting >> to attend the County Council meeting. As a specific way of the GPLAC >> sharing its skills with attendees at the Southern California Gathering, >> this proposal also recommends that the GPLAC Tabling Committee do a >> workshop as per below. >> >> >> >> PROPOSAL: That the GPLAC change its April meeting from a business meeting >> on Sunday, April 7th, to a call for GPLAC County Council members and others >> to attend the GPCA's Southern California Gathering scheduled for Los >> Angeles during the weekend of April 6/7; and that the GPLAC Tabling >> Committee commit to doing a voter registration workshop/training at said >> Gathering. Sponsor/Presenter: Mike Feinstein >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council adopt the proposal for a meeting >> change in April, 2013? >> >> >> >> Sponsor/Presenter: Mike Feinstein >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 12) ? ISSUES OF CONCERN TO LA GREENS >> >> >> >> 12-a) ? THE SOUTH LOS ANGELES DECLARATION OF HEALTH & HUMAN RIGHTS *(15 >> MINS)* >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: In late 2012, the *South LA Declaration of Health & Human Rights >> * was sent to our list-serve to be agendized, but was delayed because of >> our cancelled December meeting. Kamran & Michael attended the 3rd Annual >> South Central Health & Human Rights Conference on December 7th, in an >> all-day event, to 1) register new Green voters, and 2) to support the >> Conference. The Declaration, which is intended to create social and >> economic justice for those under-served citizens of limited resources >> experiencing difficulties with finding jobs, quality/affordable health >> care, fresh produce, etc?in the South Central area of Los Angeles, seeks >> the support of all Angelenos and progressive organizations in LA County. >> >> The full Declaration can be reviewed here? >> http://www.southlahealthandhumanrights.org/declaration.html >> >> Hard copies of the Declaration will be provided at the meeting. >> >> >> >> PROPOSAL: The South Los Angeles Declaration of Health and Human Rights is >> an important document that emphasizes the Right to Health, Behavorial >> Health, Education & Employment, Housing & a Safe Environment, Fresh Food & >> Food Sovereignty, and the Right to Dignity and Safety. The Declaration is >> supported by our 10 Key Values and deserves the County Council?s support >> and official endorsement. >> >> >> >> DECISION/CONSENSUS QUESTION: Shall Council officially endorse the South Los >> Angeles Declaration of Health and Human Rights? >> >> >> >> Sponsors/Presenters: Deacon Alexander & Michael McCue >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> 12-b) ? UPDATE: THE ?IDLE NO MORE? MOVEMENT - *(5 MINS)* >> >> >> >> BACKGROUND: At the January 2013 meeting, Council endorsed the ?Idle No >> More? Movement. A rally was held since then. >> >> >> >> Sponsor/Presenter: Linda Piera-Avila >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> 13) ? PUBLIC COMMENTS ~ Opportunity for visiting Greens and GPLACC guests >> in attendance to be heard on non-agenda items by council members. NOTE: >> Public comments only! No council members? comments allowed during this item. >> (Flexible time allowed, preferring 10 MINS TOTAL / 1 MIN per comment?) >> Sponsor: Deacon Alexander >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> 14) ? ANNOUNCEMENTS ~ *(1 min per announcement)* NOTE: No comments! >> Announcements only! >> >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> 15) - CLOSING CIRCLE ~ ADJOURNMENT ? *(2 min)* >> >> >> >> Post Meeting Actions >> >> ? Standing Committee members may meet in their groups to organize >> their committee projects. >> >> ? Clean Up of Space >> >> >> >> *BACKGROUND NOTE FROM SECRETARY YEAGER REGARDING AGENDA ITEM #7: >> >> >> >> *In speaking with the FPPC today they had no action pending but referred me >> to the Sec of State. It turns out that there is a new annual $50 >> requirement for registering a committee. Please see the attached letter and >> the below CA government code section that it referred to:* >> >> >> >> 84101.5. >> >> (a) >> >> Notwithstanding Section 81006, the Secretary of State shall charge each >> committee that is required to file a statement of organization pursuant to >> subdivision (a) of Section 84101, and each committee that is required to >> file a statement of organization pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section >> 84101 shall pay, a fee of >> >> fifty dollars ($50) per year until the committee is terminated pursuant to >> Section 84214. >> >> >> >> (b) >> >> A committee shall pay the fee prescribed in subdivision (a) no later than >> 15 days after filing its statement of organization. >> >> >> >> (c) >> >> (1) A committee annually shall pay the fee prescribed in subdivision (a) no >> later than January 15 of each year. >> >> >> >> (2) A committee that is created and pays the initial fee pursuant to >> subdivision (b) in the final three months of a calendar year is not subject >> to the annual fee pursuant to paragraph (1) for the following calendar year. >> >> >> >> (3) A committee that existed prior to January 1, 2013, shall pay the fee >> prescribed in subdivision (a) no later than February 15, 2013, and in >> accordance with paragraph (1) in each year thereafter. A committee that >> terminates pursuant to Section 84214 prior to January 31, 2013, is not >> required to pay a fee pursuant to this paragraph. >> >> (d) >> >> (1) A committee that fails to timely pay a fee required by this section is >> subject to a penalty equal to three times the amount of the fee. >> >> >> >> (2) The Commission shall enforce the requirements of this section. >> -- >> In your service, >> >> Michael McCue >> Green Party Los Angeles County >> County Council Coordinator >> -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com From snug.bug at hotmail.com Wed Jan 23 01:42:00 2013 From: snug.bug at hotmail.com (Brian Good) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 01:42:00 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Agenda Message-ID: I'd like a few minutes to talk about the third-generation California Disclose Act, SB52. Democrats hold 2/3 majorities in both Assembly and Senate so this year is likely to be the year we win. So join us! Also, I'd like to briefly express my enthusiasm for developing new technologies. 1. Many years I have been unhappy that there has been no high-tech reinvention of a Commodore 64, Texas Instruments 99, Radio Shack TRS-80, or Atari 800 that could plug into our TVs. 2. For many years I have wanted a belt-pack flash-drive video recorder so I can plug my flaky old mini-DV video cameras into a tapeless recorder. 3. Smart phone tech is bringing us a computing reinvention without Windows, without Apple, without Intel or AMD. It runs Linux, it's thumb-drive or credit card sized, it's cheap, and it's here. Google A10, A31, Raspberry Pi. Brian -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 23 11:58:26 2013 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 11:58:26 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] agenda items Message-ID: <510040E2.20600@sbcglobal.net> 1) invited speakers, criteria for 2) organised ongoing campaigns 3) udel - unincorporated district elections e.g., school, water, and fire districts 4) web site improvements 5) making meetings interesting, efficient, and enjoyable 6) establishing a social media committee 7) recruiting with emphasis on females Jim Doyle From pagesincolor at yahoo.com Wed Jan 23 18:24:14 2013 From: pagesincolor at yahoo.com (John Thielking) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 18:24:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Draft Agenda For The GPSCC Meeting 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 Message-ID: <1358994254.15468.YahooMailClassic@web122903.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> ? Draft Agenda for Thursday, January 24, 2013 Green Party of Santa Clara County GA meeting to be held at San Jose Peace Center 48 S 7th St, San Jose, CA. Final Agenda will be published at 9AM Thursday. 7:00PM -7:30PM Arrive, socialize. Guest speaker Brian Good on: A. developing new technologies. 1. Many years I have been unhappy that there has been no high-tech reinvention of a Commodore 64, Texas Instruments 99, Radio Shack TRS-80, or Atari 800 that could plug into our TVs. 2. For many years I have wanted a belt-pack flash-drive video recorder so I can plug my flaky old mini-DV video cameras into a tapeless recorder. 3. Smart phone tech is bringing us a computing reinvention without Windows, without Apple, without Intel or AMD. It runs Linux, it's thumb-drive or credit card sized, it's cheap, and it's here. Google A10, A31, Raspberry Pi. B. third-generation California Disclose Act, SB52. Democrats hold 2/3 majorities in both Assembly and Senate so this year is likely to be the year we win. So join us! 7:30 Meeting begins. Identify facilitator, note taker, time keeper,vibes watcher and agenda preparer for next meeting. 7:35 Introductions and announcements. Changes to agenda. 7:50 treasurer's report. Jim Doyle. Hat passing. 7:55 Report back on events that happened since the last meeting. Anti SS cuts protest in front of Lofgren's office, etc. 8:00 invited speakers, criteria for. Sandy Perry, Jim Doyle 8:10 organised ongoing campaigns Jim Doyle, Sandy Perry 8:20 udel - unincorporated district elections e.g., school, water, and fire districts Jim Doyle 8:30 web site improvements Jim Doyle 8:35 making meetings interesting, efficient, and enjoyable Jim Doyle, Drew Johnson 8:50 establishing a social media committee Jim Doyle 8:55recruiting with emphasis on females Jim Doyle 9:00 Obtaining other people for the County Council and to represent Santa Clara County on the statewide Standing General Assembly. Santa Clara County is allowed 5 representatives on the statewide Standing General Assembly. We currently have only 3. John Thielking is currently not on that list; we should put him on. That would bring us to 4, consisting entirely of our current County Council. Drew noted that our County Council is currently all male. Number 7 of the 10 key values of the Green Party is "Feminism and Gender Equity" (www.gp.org/tenkey.php). We could use some females. 9:05 PROPOSED: The Green Party of Santa Clara County will endorse the presentation of the movie "Enemy Alien" at the Peace Center, Saturday evening, March 23. Spencer DISCUSSION: "Enemy Alien" is a documentary describing the persecution of a Palestinian-American, Farouk Abdel-Muhti, essentially for being Palestinian and refusing to remain silent. The film was produced by a Japanese American, Konrad Aderer, whose parents had spent World War II in a concentration camp in the US (www.lifeorliberty.org/enemy-alien). The South Bay Committee Against Political Repression is organizing a presentation of this movie to be followed by a panel discussion featuring a Japanese-American and an Arab-American. 9:10 Proposal to invite Peace and Freedom people to participate in our meetings and events. Caroline 9:15 There is also a Latino activity going on on Friday that I will send you details of so it can go on the agenda as well. Caroline 9:20 propose a doing a cost benefit analysis of how we can make use of a new voters list. Jim Doyle 9:25 propose that we invite the Jill Stein team to put on a Green Campaign School in our area.? Jim Doyle, Caroline 9:30 Meeting ends. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolineyacoub at att.net Wed Jan 23 19:55:42 2013 From: carolineyacoub at att.net (Caroline Yacoub) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 19:55:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: Governor Brown's State of the State Message-ID: <1358999742.82110.YahooMailRC@web181305.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> ----- Forwarded Message ---- From: HHS Network of California To: carolineyacoub at att.net Sent: Wed, January 23, 2013 2:34:55 PM Subject: Governor Brown's State of the State Dear Allies, This Thursday, January 24th at 9:00am, Governor Jerry Brown will be delivering his annual "State of the State" speech on his vision for California for the coming year. We think this is an excellent opportunity for us to show our strong support throughout the state for vital health and human services in California. We want the Governor - and the legislators who will be working on the 2013 - 2014 California Budget - to know that the Governor's new budget lacks a vision for helping the millions of Californians who are unemployed or living in poverty despite working. We must work for a budget that will restore, rebuild and reinvest so that families, children, seniors, and people with disabilities are a part of our economic recovery moving forward - not left behind in poverty. You can watch the Governor's speech online on the Cal Channel. Please join our social media storm and tweet or post the following messages! ?? Twitter We need a #CABudget that will restore, reinvest, and rebuild our social safety net for our families. @JerryBrownGov #CAGov In yr State of the State speech, we'd like to hear a plan for restoring our social safety net for families! @JerryBrownGov #CABudget CA families, kids, seniors, & people w/disabilities must be part of yr vision for CA. Restore our social safety net @JerryBrownGov #CABudget ? Facebook Governor Brown's "State of the State" must include a vision for helping the millions of Californians who are unemployed or living in poverty despite working. California needs a budget that will restore, rebuild and reinvest in our social safety net. California legislators, we're calling on you to make sure that families, children, seniors, and people with disabilities are a part of our economic recovery moving forward - not left behind in poverty. You can also read the HHS Network's official statement on the Governor's budget on our website. And if you'd like follow our day-to-day activities and posts, visit us on Facebook! Feel free to share our event photos and news clips on your organization's social media pages. Sincerely, The HHS Network of CA Visit us online at HHS Network of California "Like Us" on Facebook! Follow Us on Twitter! This message was sent to carolineyacoub at att.net from: Full Court Press | 409 Thirteenth Street, 13th Floor | Oakland, CA 94612 Email Marketing by Manage Your Subscription ?|? Forward To a Friend -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pagesincolor at yahoo.com Thu Jan 24 09:10:11 2013 From: pagesincolor at yahoo.com (John Thielking) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 09:10:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Final Agenda For The GPSCC Meeting 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 In-Reply-To: <1358994254.15468.YahooMailClassic@web122903.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1359047411.80743.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> This is now the final agenda.? I will print copies to bring to the meeting. ? John Thielking --- On Wed, 1/23/13, John Thielking wrote: From: John Thielking Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Draft Agenda For The GPSCC Meeting 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 To: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Wednesday, January 23, 2013, 6:24 PM ? Draft Agenda for Thursday, January 24, 2013 Green Party of Santa Clara County GA meeting to be held at San Jose Peace Center 48 S 7th St, San Jose, CA. Final Agenda will be published at 9AM Thursday. 7:00PM -7:30PM Arrive, socialize. Guest speaker Brian Good on: A. developing new technologies. 1. Many years I have been unhappy that there has been no high-tech reinvention of a Commodore 64, Texas Instruments 99, Radio Shack TRS-80, or Atari 800 that could plug into our TVs. 2. For many years I have wanted a belt-pack flash-drive video recorder so I can plug my flaky old mini-DV video cameras into a tapeless recorder. 3. Smart phone tech is bringing us a computing reinvention without Windows, without Apple, without Intel or AMD. It runs Linux, it's thumb-drive or credit card sized, it's cheap, and it's here. Google A10, A31, Raspberry Pi. B. third-generation California Disclose Act, SB52. Democrats hold 2/3 majorities in both Assembly and Senate so this year is likely to be the year we win. So join us! 7:30 Meeting begins. Identify facilitator, note taker, time keeper,vibes watcher and agenda preparer for next meeting. 7:35 Introductions and announcements. Changes to agenda. 7:50 treasurer's report. Jim Doyle. Hat passing. 7:55 Report back on events that happened since the last meeting. Anti SS cuts protest in front of Lofgren's office, etc. 8:00 invited speakers, criteria for. Sandy Perry, Jim Doyle 8:10 organised ongoing campaigns Jim Doyle, Sandy Perry 8:20 udel - unincorporated district elections e.g., school, water, and fire districts Jim Doyle 8:30 web site improvements Jim Doyle 8:35 making meetings interesting, efficient, and enjoyable Jim Doyle, Drew Johnson 8:50 establishing a social media committee Jim Doyle 8:55recruiting with emphasis on females Jim Doyle 9:00 Obtaining other people for the County Council and to represent Santa Clara County on the statewide Standing General Assembly. Santa Clara County is allowed 5 representatives on the statewide Standing General Assembly. We currently have only 3. John Thielking is currently not on that list; we should put him on. That would bring us to 4, consisting entirely of our current County Council. Drew noted that our County Council is currently all male. Number 7 of the 10 key values of the Green Party is "Feminism and Gender Equity" (www.gp.org/tenkey.php). We could use some females. 9:05 PROPOSED: The Green Party of Santa Clara County will endorse the presentation of the movie "Enemy Alien" at the Peace Center, Saturday evening, March 23. Spencer DISCUSSION: "Enemy Alien" is a documentary describing the persecution of a Palestinian-American, Farouk Abdel-Muhti, essentially for being Palestinian and refusing to remain silent. The film was produced by a Japanese American, Konrad Aderer, whose parents had spent World War II in a concentration camp in the US (www.lifeorliberty.org/enemy-alien). The South Bay Committee Against Political Repression is organizing a presentation of this movie to be followed by a panel discussion featuring a Japanese-American and an Arab-American. 9:10 Proposal to invite Peace and Freedom people to participate in our meetings and events. Caroline 9:15 There is also a Latino activity going on on Friday that I will send you details of so it can go on the agenda as well. Caroline 9:20 propose a doing a cost benefit analysis of how we can make use of a new voters list. Jim Doyle 9:25 propose that we invite the Jill Stein team to put on a Green Campaign School in our area.? Jim Doyle, Caroline 9:30 Meeting ends. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com Thu Jan 24 13:08:57 2013 From: rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com (Drew) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 13:08:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] 2 Day Community Organizing training class Message-ID: <1359061737.62558.YahooMailNeo@web125406.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> If anyone takes this class (which always gets rave reviews btw) they will qualify as De Anza students and they can help us meet the requirements to have an official De Anza Green Party club on campus.? Please let me know if you're planning to take the class. Green is GO! Drew You are invited to attend a leadership training for upcoming social justice activists: ? Community and student organizing skills are a vital part of building a socially just society. At this training you?ll learn how to... ??????? Cultivate and appreciate different styles of leadership ??????? Tell a compelling story and develop effective media messaging ??????? Use power strategically to get the maximum effect for your effort ??????? Build stronger relationships as a tool for organizing ??????? Recruit and grow your volunteer base ??????? Effectively combine different approaches to political change -? electoral, policy development, grassroots organizing ? What: ????? Campus Camp Wellstone Training (2 units college credit) Who: ? ? ? ?De Anza College Student Leaders, Organizers & Emerging Activists When: ?????Fri Feb 8 (noon) to Sat Feb 9 (until 5 PM) & Fri March 15 (1-?10 PM) Where: ????The Sequoia Retreat Center in the Santa Cruz Mountains Cost: ? ? ? ??In addition to the unit costs we ask that you pay$30-??$100 to help cover food, lodging and material fees. If you cannot afford it, scholarships are available. (Fee must be paid in advance and is non-? refundable) Enroll:? ????Log-in to My Portal and register for SOCS 97X.? The call number is 31899 Note: ? ? ? ?The First two days are led by the trainers at Wellstone Action, a nationally renowned training institute for students and working people. The follow-up day is for participants to continue building their skills and community bonds. It will be led by Nicky Gonzalez Yuen and a special guest team of trainers. This class is worth two units at De Anza College. ? ?If you have any question please contact:Ashley Snyder, 408-??887-??7368, Ashley... at gmail.com ? ~*~*~*~ Jill Stein for President -- A Green New Deal for America Campaign website:? http://www.jillstein.org/ ? ? First TV Ad?http://tinyurl.com/JillStein1stAd -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spencer.graves at prodsyse.com Thu Jan 24 21:19:08 2013 From: spencer.graves at prodsyse.com (Spencer Graves) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 21:19:08 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 In-Reply-To: <1359047411.80743.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1359047411.80743.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <510215CC.3050000@prodsyse.com> On 1/24/2013 9:10 AM, John Thielking wrote: > This is now the final agenda. I will print copies to bring to the meeting. > > John Thielking > > --- On Wed, 1/23/13, John Thielking wrote: > > > From: John Thielking > Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Draft Agenda For The GPSCC Meeting 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 > To: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > Date: Wednesday, January 23, 2013, 6:24 PM > > > > > > > > Draft Agenda for Thursday, January 24, 2013 Green Party of Santa Clara County > GA meeting to be held at San Jose Peace Center 48 S 7th St, San Jose, CA. > Final Agenda will be published at 9AM Thursday. > > > > 7:00PM -7:30PM Arrive, socialize. Guest speaker Brian Good on: > > > A. developing new technologies. > > > 1. Many years I have been unhappy that there has been no high-tech reinvention of a Commodore 64, Texas Instruments 99, Radio Shack TRS-80, or Atari 800 that could plug into our TVs. > > > 2. For many years I have wanted a belt-pack flash-drive video recorder so I can plug my flaky old mini-DV video cameras into a tapeless recorder. > > > 3. Smart phone tech is bringing us a computing reinvention without Windows, without Apple, without Intel or AMD. It runs Linux, it's thumb-drive or credit card sized, it's cheap, and it's here. Google A10, A31, Raspberry Pi. > > > B. third-generation California Disclose Act, SB52. Democrats hold 2/3 majorities in both Assembly and Senate so this year is likely to be the year we win. So join us! > > > > > 7:30 Meeting begins. Identify facilitator: Jim Doyle > note taker: Spencer > time keeper: John Thielking > vibes watcher: self monitoring > and agenda preparer: Caroline > for next meeting. > > > 7:35 Introductions and announcements. Changes to agenda. Caroline, Drew: Working on Brian Good, Jim Doyle, John Thielking, Spencer Graves: Paul Rea, Newark: Works with Sharat on a film series: How to contact Greens near Newark? **** (Drew can help make contact with other Greens in Alameda County) (tri city area: Newark, Union City, Fremont). Ed Campbell. Lives in Willow Glen, retired chiropractor, coach basketball. Feb. 9: Bowling for Columbine in Newark. > 7:50 treasurer's report. $1,686.38 + $55 from November minus $50 to Secretary of State > Jim Doyle. Hat passing. * Propose that we invite the Jill Stein team to put on a Green Campaign School in our area. Jim Doyle, Caroline *** Caroline to contact Jill Stein's team to get info about cost, etc., and post to the discussion list. After we get the cost, we need to make a decision on whether, when, where. Wellstone Foundation: Feb. 8-9 (Friday noon to Saturday "Camp Wellstone" at Sequoia Retreat Center $30 - $100 (sliding scale) plus DeAnza tuition (2 credit units at DeAnza?) Drew will attend. How to facilitate a group? Strategy for approaching a community? See Drew's email on this on the discussion list > > 7:55 Report back on events that happened since the last meeting. Anti SS cuts protest in front of Lofgren's office, etc. > > > 8:00 invited speakers, criteria for. Sandy Perry, Jim Doyle Currently, we have no criteria. Sandy: Invite speakers related to on-going campaigns. Campaigns: Single Payer (Sandy, Caroline), DeAnza (Sandy, Drew), How does CA Single Payer differ from "Health Care for All"? Campaign for a Healthy California is a coalition driven by nurses. Health Care for All is their own organization, initiated in the 1990s. Their drawback is mostly all white, ... . Caroline: We also need "climate" and 350.org. Caroline, Sandy, Brian Jim, Spencer to form a committee to select topics for major campaigns: phone conference? Sandy has free conference calling. Sandy to send email with suggested times. > 8:10 organised ongoing campaigns Jim Doyle, Sandy Perry > > > 8:20 udel - unincorporated district elections e.g., school, water, and fire districts Jim Doyle Jim will bring the list of elections to the next elections. Unincorporated districts come up in odd years. > > > 8:30 web site improvements Jim Doyle Drew has already studied CiviCRM by Campaign Foundations, built on Drupal: Also need training on CMS (Content Management System) Drupal(?) > > 8:35 making meetings interesting, efficient, and enjoyable Jim Doyle, Drew Johnson Starting to invite speakers. Good. We operate too much as a committee as a whole. We would be better, Drew believes, if we came together, broke into committees, and then came back together. Sponsorship of events should be delegated to the County Council. We could use Google Hangout to make our meetings virtual, so people can attend without traveling. The exercise should be fun, energizing and productive. Drew to propose more material and send to the email list and report a summary at the next meeting. For sponsorship, Drew suggests it gets posted and it passes if no one objects. > > 8:50 establishing a social media committee Jim Doyle > > > 8:55 recruiting with emphasis on females Jim Doyle Betsy Wolf-Graves is now on the County Council. > > > > > 9:00 Obtaining other people for the County Council and to represent Santa Clara County on the statewide Standing General Assembly. > > > Santa Clara County is allowed 5 representatives on the statewide Standing General Assembly. We currently have only 3. John Thielking is currently not on that list; we should put him on. That > would bring us to 4, consisting entirely of our current County Council. > > > Drew noted that our County Council is currently all male. Number 7 of the 10 key values of the Green Party is "Feminism and Gender Equity" (www.gp.org/tenkey.php). We could use some females. John Thielking and Betsy Wolf-Graves will be added to the "sga". * Endorse California Disclose Act (Brian), SB52. Approved. Brian to provide us with the info on what we have to do to get listed as an official endorser. > 9:05 PROPOSED: The Green Party of Santa Clara County will endorse the presentation of the movie "Enemy Alien" at the Peace Center, Saturday evening, March 23. Spencer > > > DISCUSSION: "Enemy Alien" is a documentary describing the persecution of a Palestinian-American, Farouk Abdel-Muhti, essentially for being Palestinian and refusing to remain silent. The film was produced by a Japanese American, Konrad Aderer, whose parents had spent World War II in a concentration camp in the US (www.lifeorliberty.org/enemy-alien). The South Bay Committee Against Political Repression is organizing a presentation of this movie to be followed by a panel discussion > featuring a Japanese-American and an Arab-American. > > > 9:10 Proposal to invite Peace and Freedom people to participate in our meetings and events. Caroline Add to discussion of "on-going campaigns". > 9:15 There is also a Latino activity going on on Friday that I will send you details of so it can go on the agenda as well. Caroline > > > 9:20 propose a doing a cost benefit analysis of how we can make use of a new voters list. > Jim Doyle > Endorse: Dalit Baum presentation, Feb. 15. > > > 9:30 Meeting ends. > -----Inline Attachment Follows----- > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pagesincolor at yahoo.com Thu Jan 24 22:46:50 2013 From: pagesincolor at yahoo.com (John Thielking) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 22:46:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 In-Reply-To: <510215CC.3050000@prodsyse.com> Message-ID: <1359096410.74364.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> A few clarifications: ? When Drew proposed the County Council decision mechanism where if no one objects to a sponsorship proposal, it passes, both John and Spencer objected to that.? Spencer objected generally and John objected specifically citing how the default decision? making process was already attempted for the planning of the Iran-Syria talk and failed miserably. It was my understanding that the proposal WAS DROPPED after that discussion and is not now in force.? Drew and others were tasked with making more specific proposals regarding how to make the meetings better? I'm not sure. ? Post meeting discussions with Peace and Freedom Party member Pete O'Reilly yielded the following points and suggestions re: plans to "work with" the Peace and Freedom Party: ? 1) It is not good politics to raid the list of Peace and Freedom Party members and attempt to recruit them to join the Green Party. ? 2) Pete is well aware of opposing points of view and while he did raise his voice in a way that may only end up breeding contempt from people who don't share his point of view, he at no point sought to exclude Sharat Lin from the Iran-Syria talk.? So to say that he is disrespectful of other's points of view is accurate only from the point of having his voice raised and not from the words that came out of his mouth. You should take a step back and try to percieve the difference. Pete has heard Sharat Lin speak many times on many topics, but Sharat Lin has not heard Pete speak on anything yet.? Pete would like it better to have a debate with Sharat and Answer about Iran and Syria that is a serious debate, as was promissed awhile ago (before John and Drew's most recent attempt at organizing an event). ? John Thielking --- On Thu, 1/24/13, Spencer Graves wrote: From: Spencer Graves Subject: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 To: "John Thielking" Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Thursday, January 24, 2013, 9:19 PM On 1/24/2013 9:10 AM, John Thielking wrote: This is now the final agenda.? I will print copies to bring to the meeting. ? John Thielking --- On Wed, 1/23/13, John Thielking wrote: From: John Thielking Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Draft Agenda For The GPSCC Meeting 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 To: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Wednesday, January 23, 2013, 6:24 PM ? Draft Agenda for Thursday, January 24, 2013 Green Party of Santa Clara County GA meeting to be held at San Jose Peace Center 48 S 7th St, San Jose, CA. Final Agenda will be published at 9AM Thursday. 7:00PM -7:30PM Arrive, socialize. Guest speaker Brian Good on: A. developing new technologies. 1. Many years I have been unhappy that there has been no high-tech reinvention of a Commodore 64, Texas Instruments 99, Radio Shack TRS-80, or Atari 800 that could plug into our TVs. 2. For many years I have wanted a belt-pack flash-drive video recorder so I can plug my flaky old mini-DV video cameras into a tapeless recorder. 3. Smart phone tech is bringing us a computing reinvention without Windows, without Apple, without Intel or AMD. It runs Linux, it's thumb-drive or credit card sized, it's cheap, and it's here. Google A10, A31, Raspberry Pi. B. third-generation California Disclose Act, SB52. Democrats hold 2/3 majorities in both Assembly and Senate so this year is likely to be the year we win. So join us! 7:30 Meeting begins. Identify facilitator: Jim Doyle note taker: Spencer time keeper: John Thielking vibes watcher: self monitoring and agenda preparer: Caroline for next meeting. 7:35 Introductions and announcements. Changes to agenda. Caroline, Drew:? Working on Brian Good, Jim Doyle, John Thielking, Spencer Graves:? Paul Rea, Newark:? Works with Sharat on a film series:? How to contact Greens near Newark?? **** (Drew can help make contact with other Greens in Alameda County)? (tri city area:? Newark, Union City, Fremont).? Ed Campbell.? Lives in Willow Glen, retired chiropractor, coach basketball.? Feb. 9:? Bowling for Columbine in Newark.? 7:50 treasurer's report. ????? $1,686.38? + $55 from November minus $50 to Secretary of State? Jim Doyle. Hat passing. * Propose that we invite the Jill Stein team to put on a Green Campaign School in our area.? Jim Doyle, Caroline ??? ??? *** Caroline to contact Jill Stein's team to get info about cost, etc., and post to the discussion list.? After we get the cost, we need to make a decision on whether, when, where.? Wellstone Foundation:? Feb. 8-9 (Friday noon to Saturday "Camp Wellstone" at Sequoia Retreat Center $30 - $100 (sliding scale) plus DeAnza tuition (2 credit units at DeAnza?)? Drew will attend.? How to facilitate a group?? Strategy for approaching a community?? See Drew's email on this on the discussion list 7:55 Report back on events that happened since the last meeting. Anti SS cuts protest in front of Lofgren's office, etc. ???? 8:00 invited speakers, criteria for. Sandy Perry, Jim Doyle ????? Currently, we have no criteria.? ????? Sandy:? Invite speakers related to on-going campaigns.? Campaigns:? Single Payer (Sandy, Caroline), DeAnza (Sandy, Drew), How does CA Single Payer differ from "Health Care for All"?? Campaign for a Healthy California is a coalition driven by nurses.? Health Care for All is their own organization, initiated in the 1990s.? Their drawback is mostly all white, ... .? ????? Caroline:? We also need "climate" and 350.org.? ????? Caroline, Sandy, Brian Jim, Spencer to form a committee to select topics for major campaigns:? phone conference?? Sandy has free conference calling.? Sandy to send email with suggested times.? 8:10 organised ongoing campaigns Jim Doyle, Sandy Perry 8:20 udel - unincorporated district elections e.g., school, water, and fire districts Jim Doyle ????? Jim will bring the list of elections to the next elections.? Unincorporated districts come up in odd years.? 8:30 web site improvements Jim Doyle ??? ? Drew has already studied CiviCRM by Campaign Foundations, built on Drupal:? Also need training on CMS (Content Management System) Drupal(?) 8:35 making meetings interesting, efficient, and enjoyable Jim Doyle, Drew Johnson ????? Starting to invite speakers.? Good.? ????? We operate too much as a committee as a whole.? We would be better, Drew believes, if we came together, broke into committees, and then came back together.? ????? Sponsorship of events should be delegated to the County Council.? ????? We could use Google Hangout to make our meetings virtual, so people can attend without traveling.? ????? The exercise should be fun, energizing and productive.? ????? Drew to propose more material and send to the email list and report a summary at the next meeting.? ????? For sponsorship, Drew suggests it gets posted and it passes if no one objects.? 8:50 establishing a social media committee Jim Doyle 8:55 recruiting with emphasis on females Jim Doyle ????? Betsy Wolf-Graves is now on the County Council.? 9:00 Obtaining other people for the County Council and to represent Santa Clara County on the statewide Standing General Assembly. Santa Clara County is allowed 5 representatives on the statewide Standing General Assembly. We currently have only 3. John Thielking is currently not on that list; we should put him on. That would bring us to 4, consisting entirely of our current County Council. Drew noted that our County Council is currently all male. Number 7 of the 10 key values of the Green Party is "Feminism and Gender Equity" (www.gp.org/tenkey.php). We could use some females. John Thielking and Betsy Wolf-Graves will be added to the "sga".? * Endorse California Disclose Act (Brian), SB52.? Approved.? Brian to provide us with the info on what we have to do to get listed as an official endorser.? 9:05 PROPOSED: The Green Party of Santa Clara County will endorse the presentation of the movie "Enemy Alien" at the Peace Center, Saturday evening, March 23. Spencer DISCUSSION: "Enemy Alien" is a documentary describing the persecution of a Palestinian-American, Farouk Abdel-Muhti, essentially for being Palestinian and refusing to remain silent. The film was produced by a Japanese American, Konrad Aderer, whose parents had spent World War II in a concentration camp in the US (www.lifeorliberty.org/enemy-alien). The South Bay Committee Against Political Repression is organizing a presentation of this movie to be followed by a panel discussion featuring a Japanese-American and an Arab-American. 9:10 Proposal to invite Peace and Freedom people to participate in our meetings and events. Caroline ????? Add to discussion of "on-going campaigns".? 9:15 There is also a Latino activity going on on Friday that I will send you details of so it can go on the agenda as well. Caroline 9:20 propose a doing a cost benefit analysis of how we can make use of a new voters list. Jim Doyle Endorse:? Dalit Baum presentation, Feb. 15.? 9:30 Meeting ends. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com Fri Jan 25 00:20:32 2013 From: rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com (Drew) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 00:20:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 In-Reply-To: <1359096410.74364.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <510215CC.3050000@prodsyse.com> <1359096410.74364.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1359102032.46864.YahooMailNeo@web125406.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Yes I never actually made a real proposal about the "no brainer" event endorsements, etc. -- I merely raised the question and so no of course I didn't reply to the conversation that followed. Also: 1) Note that at no point did anyone suggest we attempt to "raid" the Peace and Freedom Party member and at no point did anyone suggest we try to recruit them to the Green Party.? People we're only talking about inviting them to participate as allies. 2) I'm not sure anyone said that Pete was disrespectful of other's points of view, so I'm not sure where you (John) are getting that. However the problem I believe was that Pete's outburst where he implied that (newly joined Green Party member) Dr. Sharat Lin was an "imperialist" came across to many witnesses as being entirely unreasonable, illogical, without evidence, disruptive and entirely without merit..? That is not a way to win friends and influence people -- or frankly to demonstrate emotional safeness to be participating as a guest at Green Party events.? I don't think any of the rest of us Greens (besides maybe you John) had any doubt about Dr. Lin's credibility since after all he has a very long track record that many of us have observed, whereas we are unfamiliar with Pete.? In my opinion it was Pete that undermined his welcome by his loss of temper. And to the point that the communist party front group (that hides their affiliation) A.N.S.W.E.R. asserts that we should not criticize Iran -- who is A.N.S.W.E.R. anyway and why should anyone take such a rigid and doctrinaire tack.? That's not much different from progressive Dems who say we should not criticize President Obama because he's so much better than the Repuglicans.? Sorry I don't by the idea that any government is above criticism. Green is GO! Drew ~*~*~*~ Jill Stein for President -- A Green New Deal for America Campaign website:? http://www.jillstein.org/ ? ? First TV Ad?http://tinyurl.com/JillStein1stAd >________________________________ > From: John Thielking >To: Spencer Graves >Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 10:46 PM >Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 > > >A few clarifications: >? >When Drew proposed the County Council decision mechanism where if no one objects to a sponsorship proposal, it passes, both John and Spencer objected to that.? Spencer objected generally and John objected specifically citing how the default decision? making process was already attempted for the planning of the Iran-Syria talk and failed miserably. >It was my understanding that the proposal WAS DROPPED after that discussion and is not now in force.? Drew and others were tasked with making more specific proposals regarding how to make the meetings better? I'm not sure. >? >Post meeting discussions with Peace and Freedom Party member Pete O'Reilly yielded the following points and suggestions re: plans to "work with" the Peace and Freedom Party: >? >1) It is not good politics to raid the list of Peace and Freedom Party members and attempt to recruit them to join the Green Party. >? >2) Pete is well aware of opposing points of view and while he did raise his voice in a way that may only end up breeding contempt from people who don't share his point of view, he at no point sought to exclude Sharat Lin from the Iran-Syria talk.? So to say that he is disrespectful of other's points of view is accurate only from the point of having his voice raised and not from the words that came out of his mouth. You should take a step back and try to percieve the difference. Pete has heard Sharat Lin speak many times on many topics, but Sharat Lin has not heard Pete speak on anything yet.? Pete would like it better to have a debate with Sharat and Answer about Iran and Syria that is a serious debate, as was promissed awhile ago (before John and Drew's most recent attempt at organizing an event). >? >John Thielking > >--- On Thu, 1/24/13, Spencer Graves wrote: > > >>From: Spencer Graves >>Subject: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 >>To: "John Thielking" >>Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >>Date: Thursday, January 24, 2013, 9:19 PM >> >> >>On 1/24/2013 9:10 AM, John Thielking wrote: >> >>This is now the final agenda.? I will print copies to bring to the meeting. ? John Thielking --- On Wed, 1/23/13, John Thielking wrote: From: John Thielking Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Draft Agenda For The GPSCC Meeting 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 To: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Wednesday, January 23, 2013, 6:24 PM ? Draft Agenda for Thursday, January 24, 2013 Green Party of Santa Clara County GA meeting to be held at San Jose Peace Center 48 S 7th St, San Jose, CA. Final Agenda will be published at 9AM Thursday. 7:00PM -7:30PM Arrive, socialize. Guest speaker Brian Good on: A. developing new technologies. 1. Many years I have been unhappy that there has been no high-tech reinvention of a Commodore 64, Texas Instruments 99, Radio Shack TRS-80, or Atari 800 that could plug into our TVs. 2. For many years I have wanted a belt-pack flash-drive video recorder so I can plug my flaky old mini-DV video cameras into a tapeless recorder. 3. Smart phone tech is bringing us a computing reinvention without Windows, without Apple, without Intel or AMD. It runs Linux, it's thumb-drive or credit card sized, it's cheap, and it's here. Google A10, A31, Raspberry Pi. B. third-generation California Disclose Act, SB52. Democrats hold 2/3 majorities in both Assembly and Senate so this year is likely to be the year we win. So join us! 7:30 Meeting begins. Identify facilitator: Jim Doyle >> >> >>note taker: Spencer >> >> >>time keeper: John Thielking >> >>vibes watcher: self monitoring >> >> >>and agenda preparer: Caroline >> >> >>for next meeting. 7:35 Introductions and announcements. Changes to agenda. >>Caroline, >> >> >>Drew:? Working on >> >> >>Brian Good, Jim Doyle, John Thielking, >> >> >>Spencer Graves:? >> >> >>Paul Rea, Newark:? Works with Sharat on a film series:? How to contact Greens near Newark?? **** (Drew can help make contact with other Greens in Alameda County)? (tri city area:? Newark, Union City, Fremont).? >> >> >>Ed Campbell.? Lives in Willow Glen, retired chiropractor, coach basketball.? >> >> >>Feb. 9:? Bowling for Columbine in Newark.? >> >> >>7:50 treasurer's report. >>????? $1,686.38? + $55 from November minus $50 to Secretary of State? >> >> >>Jim Doyle. Hat passing. >> >>* Propose that we invite the Jill Stein team to put on a Green Campaign School in our area.? Jim Doyle, Caroline >>??? ??? *** Caroline to contact Jill Stein's team to get info about cost, etc., and post to the discussion list.? After we get the cost, we need to make a decision on whether, when, where.? >> >> >>Wellstone Foundation:? Feb. 8-9 (Friday noon to Saturday >>"Camp Wellstone" at Sequoia Retreat Center >>$30 - $100 (sliding scale) plus DeAnza tuition (2 credit units at DeAnza?)? Drew will attend.? >>How to facilitate a group?? Strategy for approaching a community?? See Drew's email on this on the discussion list >> >>7:55 Report back on events that happened since the last meeting. Anti SS cuts protest in front of Lofgren's office, etc. ???? 8:00 invited speakers, criteria for. Sandy Perry, Jim Doyle >> >>????? Currently, we have no criteria.? >> >> >>????? Sandy:? Invite speakers related to on-going campaigns.? >> >> >>Campaigns:? Single Payer (Sandy, Caroline), DeAnza (Sandy, Drew), >> >> >>How does CA Single Payer differ from "Health Care for All"?? Campaign for a Healthy California is a coalition driven by nurses.? Health Care for All is their own organization, initiated in the 1990s.? Their drawback is mostly all white, ... .? >> >> >>????? Caroline:? We also need "climate" and 350.org.? >> >> >>????? Caroline, Sandy, Brian Jim, Spencer to form a committee to select topics for major campaigns:? phone conference?? Sandy has free conference calling.? Sandy to send email with suggested times.? >> >> >>8:10 organised ongoing campaigns Jim Doyle, Sandy Perry 8:20 udel - unincorporated district elections e.g., school, water, and fire districts Jim Doyle >> >>????? Jim will bring the list of elections to the next elections.? Unincorporated districts come up in odd years.? >> >>8:30 web site improvements Jim Doyle >> >>??? ? Drew has already studied CiviCRM by Campaign Foundations, built on Drupal:? >> >> >>Also need training on CMS (Content Management System) Drupal(?) >> >>8:35 making meetings interesting, efficient, and enjoyable Jim Doyle, Drew Johnson >>????? Starting to invite speakers.? Good.? >> >> >>????? We operate too much as a committee as a whole.? We would be better, Drew believes, if we came together, broke into committees, and then came back together.? >> >> >>????? Sponsorship of events should be delegated to the County Council.? >> >> >>????? We could use Google Hangout to make our meetings virtual, so people can attend without traveling.? >> >> >>????? The exercise should be fun, energizing and productive.? >> >> >>????? Drew to propose more material and send to the email list and report a summary at the next meeting.? >> >> >>????? For sponsorship, Drew suggests it gets posted and it passes if no one objects.? >> >>8:50 establishing a social media committee Jim Doyle 8:55 recruiting with emphasis on females Jim Doyle >> >>????? Betsy Wolf-Graves is now on the County Council.? >> >>9:00 Obtaining other people for the County Council and to represent Santa Clara County on the statewide Standing General Assembly. Santa Clara County is allowed 5 representatives on the statewide Standing General Assembly. We currently have only 3. John Thielking is currently not on that list; we should put him on. That would bring us to 4, consisting entirely of our current County Council. Drew noted that our County Council is currently all male. Number 7 of the 10 key values of the Green Party is "Feminism and Gender Equity" (www.gp.org/tenkey.php). We could use some females. >>John Thielking and Betsy Wolf-Graves will be added to the "sga".? >> >> >>* Endorse California Disclose Act (Brian), SB52.? Approved.? Brian to provide us with the info on what we have to do to get listed as an official endorser.? >> >> >> >>9:05 PROPOSED: The Green Party of Santa Clara County will endorse the presentation of the movie "Enemy Alien" at the Peace Center, Saturday evening, March 23. Spencer DISCUSSION: "Enemy Alien" is a documentary describing the persecution of a Palestinian-American, Farouk Abdel-Muhti, essentially for being Palestinian and refusing to remain silent. The film was produced by a Japanese American, Konrad Aderer, whose parents had spent World War II in a concentration camp in the US (www.lifeorliberty.org/enemy-alien). The South Bay Committee Against Political Repression is organizing a presentation of this movie to be followed by a panel discussion featuring a Japanese-American and an Arab-American. 9:10 Proposal to invite Peace and Freedom people to participate in our meetings and events. Caroline >> >>????? Add to discussion of "on-going campaigns".? >> >>9:15 There is also a Latino activity going on on Friday that I will send you details of so it can go on the agenda as well. Caroline 9:20 propose a doing a cost benefit analysis of how we can make use of a new voters list. Jim Doyle >>Endorse:? Dalit Baum presentation, Feb. 15.? >> >>9:30 Meeting ends. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss >> >>> >>> >>>_______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss >> >> >>-- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com >_______________________________________________ >sosfbay-discuss mailing list >sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Fri Jan 25 13:56:07 2013 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 13:56:07 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] GPSCC expenses Message-ID: <5102FF77.7020701@sbcglobal.net> At last night's monthly meeting Caroline asked how did the Green Party account fall below the more than $2,000 she remembered being in the account. The big expenses were for the hall rental for the Jill Stein event $510 net ($690 payment less $180 security deposit refund that was a part of the $690) and Jill Stein T-shirts $250. Proceeds from T-shirt sales have not been kept separately. Jim Doyle From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Fri Jan 25 14:09:47 2013 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 14:09:47 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Green Party bank account Message-ID: <510302AB.5070502@sbcglobal.net> I have prepared an edited - annotated - version of the Green Party's online bank account wich I can send to anyone who requests a copy. Jim Doyle From perrysandy at aol.com Fri Jan 25 16:52:58 2013 From: perrysandy at aol.com (perrysandy at aol.com) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:52:58 -0500 (EST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 In-Reply-To: <1359102032.46864.YahooMailNeo@web125406.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <510215CC.3050000@prodsyse.com> <1359096410.74364.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1359102032.46864.YahooMailNeo@web125406.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8CFC9769E6B9B61-B34-18521@webmail-m064.sysops.aol.com> Hi Everyone, I have two cents to add to this discussion. 1) I think everyone, including Pete himself, would admit that his outburst was not constructive and did not help him win friends and influence people. To tell the truth, I can't remember exactly what he said or who he insulted, but I definitely remember it was not pretty. 2) I believe we were absolutely right to refuse to sponsor a debate between Pete and Sharat. I have been asked to work with a committee to help formulate plans for campaigns to build the Green Party, and IMHO hosting debates between different trends in the left or in the peace movement is definitely not the best way to bring in the masses. 3) I strongly object to labeling any group a "communist front group". This was a term developed by J. Edgar Hoover to discredit a whole generation of courageous Americans who fought for social justice in the 1930s, 40s, and 50s, led to the ugly purges of Hollywood and the AFL-CIO, and crippled progressive politics in America for eighty years. Red-baiting has a nasty way of being turned around and used against us. Besides, I (and many of San Jose's best activists that I know) are very rose-colored ourselves, so I don't think this is a good road to go down. 4) I am not a member of ANSWER and do not agree with some of their positions (although I am not well-versed in them all). I have worked with John Bretton in the Hyatt boycott support work and have found him to be cordial, hard-working, and cooperative. If we have disagreements with a group I believe we should just leave it at that, agree to disagree, work together where possible and go our separate ways where not. Peace! Sandy -----Original Message----- From: Drew To: sosfbay discussion group Sent: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 12:20 am Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 Yes I never actually made a real proposal about the "no brainer" event endorsements, etc. -- I merely raised the question and so no of course I didn't reply to the conversation that followed. Also: 1) Note that at no point did anyone suggest we attempt to "raid" the Peace and Freedom Party member and at no point did anyone suggest we try to recruit them to the Green Party. People we're only talking about inviting them to participate as allies. 2) I'm not sure anyone said that Pete was disrespectful of other's points of view, so I'm not sure where you (John) are getting that. However the problem I believe was that Pete's outburst where he implied that (newly joined Green Party member) Dr. Sharat Lin was an "imperialist" came across to many witnesses as being entirely unreasonable, illogical, without evidence, disruptive and entirely without merit.. That is not a way to win friends and influence people -- or frankly to demonstrate emotional safeness to be participating as a guest at Green Party events. I don't think any of the rest of us Greens (besides maybe you John) had any doubt about Dr. Lin's credibility since after all he has a very long track record that many of us have observed, whereas we are unfamiliar with Pete. In my opinion it was Pete that undermined his welcome by his loss of temper. And to the point that the communist party front group (that hides their affiliation) A.N.S.W.E.R. asserts that we should not criticize Iran -- who is A.N.S.W.E.R. anyway and why should anyone take such a rigid and doctrinaire tack. That's not much different from progressive Dems who say we should not criticize President Obama because he's so much better than the Repuglicans. Sorry I don't by the idea that any government is above criticism. Green is GO! Drew ~*~*~*~ Jill Stein for President -- A Green New Deal for America Campaign website: http://www.jillstein.org/ First TV Ad http://tinyurl.com/JillStein1stAd From: John Thielking To: Spencer Graves Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 10:46 PM Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 A few clarifications: When Drew proposed the County Council decision mechanism where if no one objects to a sponsorship proposal, it passes, both John and Spencer objected to that. Spencer objected generally and John objected specifically citing how the default decision making process was already attempted for the planning of the Iran-Syria talk and failed miserably. It was my understanding that the proposal WAS DROPPED after that discussion and is not now in force. Drew and others were tasked with making more specific proposals regarding how to make the meetings better? I'm not sure. Post meeting discussions with Peace and Freedom Party member Pete O'Reilly yielded the following points and suggestions re: plans to "work with" the Peace and Freedom Party: 1) It is not good politics to raid the list of Peace and Freedom Party members and attempt to recruit them to join the Green Party. 2) Pete is well aware of opposing points of view and while he did raise his voice in a way that may only end up breeding contempt from people who don't share his point of view, he at no point sought to exclude Sharat Lin from the Iran-Syria talk. So to say that he is disrespectful of other's points of view is accurate only from the point of having his voice raised and not from the words that came out of his mouth. You should take a step back and try to percieve the difference. Pete has heard Sharat Lin speak many times on many topics, but Sharat Lin has not heard Pete speak on anything yet. Pete would like it better to have a debate with Sharat and Answer about Iran and Syria that is a serious debate, as was promissed awhile ago (before John and Drew's most recent attempt at organizing an event). John Thielking --- On Thu, 1/24/13, Spencer Graves wrote: From: Spencer Graves Subject: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 To: "John Thielking" Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Thursday, January 24, 2013, 9:19 PM On 1/24/2013 9:10 AM, John Thielking wrote: This is now the final agenda. I will print copies to bring to the meeting. John Thielking --- On Wed, 1/23/13, John Thielking wrote: From: John Thielking Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Draft Agenda For The GPSCC Meeting 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 To: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Wednesday, January 23, 2013, 6:24 PM Draft Agenda for Thursday, January 24, 2013 Green Party of Santa Clara County GA meeting to be held at San Jose Peace Center 48 S 7th St, San Jose, CA. Final Agenda will be published at 9AM Thursday. 7:00PM -7:30PM Arrive, socialize. Guest speaker Brian Good on: A. developing new technologies. 1. Many years I have been unhappy that there has been no high-tech reinvention of a Commodore 64, Texas Instruments 99, Radio Shack TRS-80, or Atari 800 that could plug into our TVs. 2. For many years I have wanted a belt-pack flash-drive video recorder so I can plug my flaky old mini-DV video cameras into a tapeless recorder. 3. Smart phone tech is bringing us a computing reinvention without Windows, without Apple, without Intel or AMD. It runs Linux, it's thumb-drive or credit card sized, it's cheap, and it's here. Google A10, A31, Raspberry Pi. B. third-generation California Disclose Act, SB52. Democrats hold 2/3 majorities in both Assembly and Senate so this year is likely to be the year we win. So join us! 7:30 Meeting begins. Identify facilitator: Jim Doyle note taker: Spencer time keeper: John Thielking vibes watcher: self monitoring and agenda preparer: Caroline for next meeting. 7:35 Introductions and announcements. Changes to agenda. Caroline, Drew: Working on Brian Good, Jim Doyle, John Thielking, Spencer Graves: Paul Rea, Newark: Works with Sharat on a film series: How to contact Greens near Newark? **** (Drew can help make contact with other Greens in Alameda County) (tri city area: Newark, Union City, Fremont). Ed Campbell. Lives in Willow Glen, retired chiropractor, coach basketball. Feb. 9: Bowling for Columbine in Newark. 7:50 treasurer's report. $1,686.38 + $55 from November minus $50 to Secretary of State Jim Doyle. Hat passing. * Propose that we invite the Jill Stein team to put on a Green Campaign School in our area. Jim Doyle, Caroline *** Caroline to contact Jill Stein's team to get info about cost, etc., and post to the discussion list. After we get the cost, we need to make a decision on whether, when, where. Wellstone Foundation: Feb. 8-9 (Friday noon to Saturday "Camp Wellstone" at Sequoia Retreat Center $30 - $100 (sliding scale) plus DeAnza tuition (2 credit units at DeAnza?) Drew will attend. How to facilitate a group? Strategy for approaching a community? See Drew's email on this on the discussion list 7:55 Report back on events that happened since the last meeting. Anti SS cuts protest in front of Lofgren's office, etc. 8:00 invited speakers, criteria for. Sandy Perry, Jim Doyle Currently, we have no criteria. Sandy: Invite speakers related to on-going campaigns. Campaigns: Single Payer (Sandy, Caroline), DeAnza (Sandy, Drew), How does CA Single Payer differ from "Health Care for All"? Campaign for a Healthy California is a coalition driven by nurses. Health Care for All is their own organization, initiated in the 1990s. Their drawback is mostly all white, ... . Caroline: We also need "climate" and 350.org. Caroline, Sandy, Brian Jim, Spencer to form a committee to select topics for major campaigns: phone conference? Sandy has free conference calling. Sandy to send email with suggested times. 8:10 organised ongoing campaigns Jim Doyle, Sandy Perry 8:20 udel - unincorporated district elections e.g., school, water, and fire districts Jim Doyle Jim will bring the list of elections to the next elections. Unincorporated districts come up in odd years. 8:30 web site improvements Jim Doyle Drew has already studied CiviCRM by Campaign Foundations, built on Drupal: Also need training on CMS (Content Management System) Drupal(?) 8:35 making meetings interesting, efficient, and enjoyable Jim Doyle, Drew Johnson Starting to invite speakers. Good. We operate too much as a committee as a whole. We would be better, Drew believes, if we came together, broke into committees, and then came back together. Sponsorship of events should be delegated to the County Council. We could use Google Hangout to make our meetings virtual, so people can attend without traveling. The exercise should be fun, energizing and productive. Drew to propose more material and send to the email list and report a summary at the next meeting. For sponsorship, Drew suggests it gets posted and it passes if no one objects. 8:50 establishing a social media committee Jim Doyle 8:55 recruiting with emphasis on females Jim Doyle Betsy Wolf-Graves is now on the County Council. 9:00 Obtaining other people for the County Council and to represent Santa Clara County on the statewide Standing General Assembly. Santa Clara County is allowed 5 representatives on the statewide Standing General Assembly. We currently have only 3. John Thielking is currently not on that list; we should put him on. That would bring us to 4, consisting entirely of our current County Council. Drew noted that our County Council is currently all male. Number 7 of the 10 key values of the Green Party is "Feminism and Gender Equity" (www.gp.org/tenkey.php). We could use some females. John Thielking and Betsy Wolf-Graves will be added to the "sga". * Endorse California Disclose Act (Brian), SB52. Approved. Brian to provide us with the info on what we have to do to get listed as an official endorser. 9:05 PROPOSED: The Green Party of Santa Clara County will endorse the presentation of the movie "Enemy Alien" at the Peace Center, Saturday evening, March 23. Spencer DISCUSSION: "Enemy Alien" is a documentary describing the persecution of a Palestinian-American, Farouk Abdel-Muhti, essentially for being Palestinian and refusing to remain silent. The film was produced by a Japanese American, Konrad Aderer, whose parents had spent World War II in a concentration camp in the US (www.lifeorliberty.org/enemy-alien). The South Bay Committee Against Political Repression is organizing a presentation of this movie to be followed by a panel discussion featuring a Japanese-American and an Arab-American. 9:10 Proposal to invite Peace and Freedom people to participate in our meetings and events. Caroline Add to discussion of "on-going campaigns". 9:15 There is also a Latino activity going on on Friday that I will send you details of so it can go on the agenda as well. Caroline 9:20 propose a doing a cost benefit analysis of how we can make use of a new voters list. Jim Doyle Endorse: Dalit Baum presentation, Feb. 15. 9:30 Meeting ends. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolineyacoub at att.net Fri Jan 25 19:01:09 2013 From: carolineyacoub at att.net (Caroline Yacoub) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 19:01:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 In-Reply-To: <8CFC9769E6B9B61-B34-18521@webmail-m064.sysops.aol.com> References: <510215CC.3050000@prodsyse.com> <1359096410.74364.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1359102032.46864.YahooMailNeo@web125406.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <8CFC9769E6B9B61-B34-18521@webmail-m064.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <1359169269.72150.YahooMailRC@web181302.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> I like the way this is going --not painting people or groups with broad brushes, but identifying points where we can agree to disagree and looking for ways to work together. Just what I had in mind when I brought up the LA Greens inviting Peace and Freedom people to their meeting. Who said we need a Vibes Watcher? Caroline ________________________________ From: "perrysandy at aol.com" To: rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com; sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Sent: Fri, January 25, 2013 4:53:07 PM Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 Hi Everyone, I have two cents to add to this discussion. 1) I think everyone, including Pete himself, would admit that his outburst was not constructive and did not help him win friends and influence people. To tell the truth, I can't remember exactly what he said or who he insulted, but I definitely remember it was not pretty. 2) I believe we were absolutely right to refuse to sponsor a debate between Pete and Sharat. I have been asked to work with a committee to help formulate plans for campaigns to build the Green Party, and IMHO hosting debates between different trends in the left or in the peace movement is definitely not the best way to bring in the masses. 3) I strongly object to labeling any group a "communist front group". This was a term developed by J. Edgar Hoover to discredit a whole generation of courageous Americans who fought for social justice in the 1930s, 40s, and 50s, led to the ugly purges of Hollywood and the AFL-CIO, and crippled progressive politics in America for eighty years.?Red-baiting has a nasty way of being turned around and used against us. Besides, I (and many of San Jose's best activists that I know) are very rose-colored ourselves, so I don't think this is a good road to go down. 4) I am not a member of ANSWER and do not agree with some of their positions (although I am not well-versed in them all). I have worked with John Bretton in the Hyatt boycott support work and have found him to be cordial, hard-working, and cooperative. If we have disagreements with a group I believe we should just leave it at that, agree to disagree, work together where possible and go our separate ways where not. Peace! Sandy -----Original Message----- From: Drew To: sosfbay discussion group Sent: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 12:20 am Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 Yes I never actually made a real proposal about the "no brainer" event endorsements, etc. -- I merely raised the question and so no of course I didn't reply to the conversation that followed. Also: 1) Note that at no point did anyone suggest we attempt to "raid" the Peace and Freedom Party member and at no point did anyone suggest we try to recruit them to the Green Party.? People we're only talking about inviting them to participate as allies. 2) I'm not sure anyone said that Pete was disrespectful of other's points of view, so I'm not sure where you (John) are getting that. However the problem I believe was that Pete's outburst where he implied that (newly joined Green Party member) Dr. Sharat Lin was an "imperialist" came across to many witnesses as being entirely unreasonable, illogical, without evidence, disruptive and entirely without merit..? That is not a way to win friends and influence people -- or frankly to demonstrate emotional safeness to be participating as a guest at Green Party events.? I don't think any of the rest of us Greens (besides maybe you John) had any doubt about Dr. Lin's credibility since after all he has a very long track record that many of us have observed, whereas we are unfamiliar with Pete.? In my opinion it was Pete that undermined his welcome by his loss of temper. And to the point that the communist party front group (that hides their affiliation) A.N.S.W.E.R. asserts that we should not criticize Iran -- who is A.N.S.W.E.R. anyway and why should anyone take such a rigid and doctrinaire tack.? That's not much different from progressive Dems who say we should not criticize President Obama because he's so much better than the Repuglicans.? Sorry I don't by the idea that any government is above criticism. Green is GO! Drew ~*~*~*~ Jill Stein for President -- A Green New Deal for America Campaign website:? http://www.jillstein.org/ ? ? First TV Ad?http://tinyurl.com/JillStein1stAd ________________________________ From: John Thielking >To: Spencer Graves >Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 10:46 PM >Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 > > >A few clarifications: > >When Drew proposed the County Council decision mechanism where if no one objects >to a sponsorship proposal, it passes, both John and Spencer objected to that.? >Spencer objected generally and John objected specifically citing how the default >decision? making process was already attempted for the planning of the >Iran-Syria talk and failed miserably. >It was my understanding that the proposal WAS DROPPED after that discussion and >is not now in force.? Drew and others were tasked with making more specific >proposals regarding how to make the meetings better? I'm not sure. > >Post meeting discussions with Peace and Freedom Party member Pete O'Reilly >yielded the following points and suggestions re: plans to "work with" the Peace >and Freedom Party: > > >1) It is not good politics to raid the list of Peace and Freedom Party members >and attempt to recruit them to join the Green Party. > >2) Pete is well aware of opposing points of view and while he did raise his >voice in a way that may only end up breeding contempt from people who don't >share his point of view, he at no point sought to exclude Sharat Lin from the >Iran-Syria talk.? So to say that he is disrespectful of other's points of view >is accurate only from the point of having his voice raised and not from the >words that came out of his mouth. You should take a step back and try to >percieve the difference. Pete has heard Sharat Lin speak many times on many >topics, but Sharat Lin has not heard Pete speak on anything yet.? Pete would >like it better to have a debate with Sharat and Answer about Iran and Syria that >is a serious debate, as was promissed awhile ago (before John and Drew's most >recent attempt at organizing an event). > >John Thielking > >--- On Thu, 1/24/13, Spencer Graves wrote: > > >>From: Spencer Graves >>Subject: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 >>To: "John Thielking" >>Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >>Date: Thursday, January 24, 2013, 9:19 PM >> >> >>On 1/24/2013 9:10 AM, John Thielking wrote: >> >>This is now the final agenda.? I will print copies to bring to the meeting. ? >>John Thielking --- On Wed, 1/23/13, John Thielking >>wrote: From: John Thielking Subject: [GPSCC-chat] >>Draft Agenda For The GPSCC Meeting 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 To: >>sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Wednesday, January 23, 2013, 6:24 PM ? >>Draft Agenda for Thursday, January 24, 2013 Green Party of Santa Clara County >>GA meeting to be held at San Jose Peace Center 48 S 7th St, San Jose, CA. Final >>Agenda will be published at 9AM Thursday. 7:00PM -7:30PM Arrive, socialize. >>Guest speaker Brian Good on: A. developing new technologies. 1. Many years >>I have been unhappy that there has been no high-tech reinvention of a Commodore >>64, Texas Instruments 99, Radio Shack TRS-80, or Atari 800 that could plug into >>our TVs. 2. For many years I have wanted a belt-pack flash-drive video >>recorder so I can plug my flaky old mini-DV video cameras into a tapeless >>recorder. 3. Smart phone tech is bringing us a computing reinvention without >>Windows, without Apple, without Intel or AMD. It runs Linux, it's thumb-drive or >>credit card sized, it's cheap, and it's here. Google A10, A31, Raspberry Pi. >>B. third-generation California Disclose Act, SB52. Democrats hold 2/3 majorities >>in both Assembly and Senate so this year is likely to be the year we win. So >>join us! 7:30 Meeting begins. Identify facilitator: Jim Doyle >> > > >note taker: Spencer time keeper: John Thielking vibes watcher: self monitoring and agenda preparer: Caroline for next meeting. 7:35 Introductions and announcements. Changes to agenda. Caroline, Drew:? Working on Brian Good, Jim Doyle, John Thielking, Spencer Graves:? Paul Rea, Newark:? Works with Sharat on a film series:? How to contact Greens near Newark?? **** (Drew can help make contact with other Greens in Alameda County)? (tri city area:? Newark, Union City, Fremont).? Ed Campbell.? Lives in Willow Glen, retired chiropractor, coach basketball.? Feb. 9:? Bowling for Columbine in Newark.? 7:50 treasurer's report. ????? $1,686.38? + $55 from November minus $50 to Secretary of State? Jim Doyle. Hat passing. * Propose that we invite the Jill Stein team to put on a Green Campaign School in our area.? Jim Doyle, Caroline ??? ??? *** Caroline to contact Jill Stein's team to get info about cost, etc., and post to the discussion list.? After we get the cost, we need to make a decision on whether, when, where.? Wellstone Foundation:? Feb. 8-9 (Friday noon to Saturday "Camp Wellstone" at Sequoia Retreat Center $30 - $100 (sliding scale) plus DeAnza tuition (2 credit units at DeAnza?)? Drew will attend.? How to facilitate a group?? Strategy for approaching a community?? See Drew's email on this on the discussion list 7:55 Report back on events that happened since the last meeting. Anti SS cuts protest in front of Lofgren's office, etc. ???? 8:00 invited speakers, criteria for. Sandy Perry, Jim Doyle ????? Currently, we have no criteria.? ????? Sandy:? Invite speakers related to on-going campaigns.? Campaigns:? Single Payer (Sandy, Caroline), DeAnza (Sandy, Drew), How does CA Single Payer differ from "Health Care for All"?? Campaign for a Healthy California is a coalition driven by nurses.? Health Care for All is their own organization, initiated in the 1990s.? Their drawback is mostly all white, ... .? ????? Caroline:? We also need "climate" and 350.org.? ????? Caroline, Sandy, Brian Jim, Spencer to form a committee to select topics for major campaigns:? phone conference?? Sandy has free conference calling.? Sandy to send email with suggested times.? 8:10 organised ongoing campaigns Jim Doyle, Sandy Perry 8:20 udel - unincorporated district elections e.g., school, water, and fire districts Jim Doyle ????? Jim will bring the list of elections to the next elections.? Unincorporated districts come up in odd years.? 8:30 web site improvements Jim Doyle ??? ? Drew has already studied CiviCRM by Campaign Foundations, built on Drupal:? Also need training on CMS (Content Management System) Drupal(?) 8:35 making meetings interesting, efficient, and enjoyable Jim Doyle, Drew Johnson ????? Starting to invite speakers.? Good.? ????? We operate too much as a committee as a whole.? We would be better, Drew believes, if we came together, broke into committees, and then came back together.? ????? Sponsorship of events should be delegated to the County Council.? ????? We could use Google Hangout to make our meetings virtual, so people can attend without traveling.? ????? The exercise should be fun, energizing and productive.? ????? Drew to propose more material and send to the email list and report a summary at the next meeting.? ????? For sponsorship, Drew suggests it gets posted and it passes if no one objects.? 8:50 establishing a social media committee Jim Doyle 8:55 recruiting with emphasis on females Jim Doyle ????? Betsy Wolf-Graves is now on the County Council.? 9:00 Obtaining other people for the County Council and to represent Santa Clara County on the statewide Standing General Assembly. Santa Clara County is allowed 5 representatives on the statewide Standing General Assembly. We currently have only 3. John Thielking is currently not on that list; we should put him on. That would bring us to 4, consisting entirely of our current County Council. Drew noted that our County Council is currently all male. Number 7 of the 10 key values of the Green Party is "Feminism and Gender Equity" (www.gp.org/tenkey.php). We could use some females. John Thielking and Betsy Wolf-Graves will be added to the "sga".? * Endorse California Disclose Act (Brian), SB52.? Approved.? Brian to provide us with the info on what we have to do to get listed as an official endorser.? 9:05 PROPOSED: The Green Party of Santa Clara County will endorse the presentation of the movie "Enemy Alien" at the Peace Center, Saturday evening, March 23. Spencer DISCUSSION: "Enemy Alien" is a documentary describing the persecution of a Palestinian-American, Farouk Abdel-Muhti, essentially for being Palestinian and refusing to remain silent. The film was produced by a Japanese American, Konrad Aderer, whose parents had spent World War II in a concentration camp in the US (www.lifeorliberty.org/enemy-alien). The South Bay Committee Against Political Repression is organizing a presentation of this movie to be followed by a panel discussion featuring a Japanese-American and an Arab-American. 9:10 Proposal to invite Peace and Freedom people to participate in our meetings and events. Caroline ????? Add to discussion of "on-going campaigns".? 9:15 There is also a Latino activity going on on Friday that I will send you details of so it can go on the agenda as well. Caroline 9:20 propose a doing a cost benefit analysis of how we can make use of a new voters list. Jim Doyle Endorse:? Dalit Baum presentation, Feb. 15.? 9:30 Meeting ends. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > >_______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list >sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com >_______________________________________________ >sosfbay-discuss mailing list >sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com Sat Jan 26 03:59:22 2013 From: rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com (Drew) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 03:59:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] ANSWER is indeed a communist front group (was Re: Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013) In-Reply-To: <8CFC9769E6B9B61-B34-18521@webmail-m064.sysops.aol.com> References: <510215CC.3050000@prodsyse.com> <1359096410.74364.YahooMailClassic@web122906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1359102032.46864.YahooMailNeo@web125406.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <8CFC9769E6B9B61-B34-18521@webmail-m064.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <1359201562.76820.YahooMailNeo@web125403.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> I feel extremely annoyed about the fact the ANSWER Coalition is not a coalition at all and conceals its leadership by the Party for Socialism and Liberation (ie. a communist party). A group that is not honest enough to be upfront with who they are can be called a "front group" and that term is actually from the communists themselves, not Hoover (although Hoover certainly took it and fear mongered with it, no doubt).? The creation of front groups that hide their affiliation with the communist organizers is a very deliberate tactic that is widely and openly discussed among communist party strategists.? So I see no reason to avoid the term. ( for more on fronts see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_group). From wikipedia re: the (communist) World Worker's Party and ANSWER: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers_World_Party In 2004,[21] the WWP suffered its most serious split when a few dozen members of WWP left to form the Party for Socialism and Liberation. The ANSWER coalition aligned itself with the PSL and Workers World Party then founded the Troops Out Now Coalition. The split included many of the top leaders of the WWP which included most of the membership of the WWP on the West Coast. Although I am not one I do not object to working with socialists and communists.? There are many folks of these persuasions within the Green Party. What I object to is dishonesty by people and groups who try to decieve others about their identity.? This is why I have such strong objections to ANSWER. For thes reasons I do not care about their opinion and I resent the way they constantly glom onto and hijack other group's events, such as the MLK march last Monday that I was at.? They've been showin up with their mass-manufactured pre-printed protest signs to the MLK march and other events that they had no hand in organizing and trying to use it as a platform for their own agenda.? If they want to organize their own events (and they do hold their own events, yes its true) then fine.? But don't go and try to dominate a civil rights march that others carefully constructed. Green is GO! Drew ? ~*~*~*~ Jill Stein for President -- A Green New Deal for America Campaign website:? http://www.jillstein.org/ ? ? First TV Ad?http://tinyurl.com/JillStein1stAd >________________________________ > From: "perrysandy at aol.com" >To: rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com; sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 4:52 PM >Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 > > >Hi Everyone, >? >I have two cents to add to this discussion. >? >1) I think everyone, including Pete himself, would admit that his outburst was not constructive and did not help him win friends and influence people. To tell the truth, I can't remember exactly what he said or who he insulted, but I definitely remember it was not pretty. >? >2) I believe we were absolutely right to refuse to sponsor a debate between Pete and Sharat. I have been asked to work with a committee to help formulate plans for campaigns to build the Green Party, and IMHO hosting debates between different trends in the left or in the peace movement is definitely not the best way to bring in the masses. >? >3) I strongly object to labeling any group a "communist front group". This was a term developed by J. Edgar Hoover to discredit a whole generation of courageous Americans who fought for social justice in the 1930s, 40s, and 50s, led to the ugly purges of Hollywood and the AFL-CIO, and crippled progressive politics in America for eighty years.?Red-baiting has a nasty way of being turned around and used against us. Besides, I (and many of San Jose's best activists that I know) are very rose-colored ourselves, so I don't think this is a good road to go down. >? >4) I am not a member of ANSWER and do not agree with some of their positions (although I am not well-versed in them all). I have worked with John Bretton in the Hyatt boycott support work and have found him to be cordial, hard-working, and cooperative. If we have disagreements with a group I believe we should just leave it at that, agree to disagree, work together where possible and go our separate ways where not. >? >Peace! >? >? >Sandy >-----Original Message----- >From: Drew >To: sosfbay discussion group >Sent: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 12:20 am >Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 > > >Yes I never actually made a real proposal about the "no brainer" event endorsements, etc. -- I merely raised the question and so no of course I didn't reply to the conversation that followed. > > >Also: > >1) Note that at no point did anyone suggest we attempt to "raid" the Peace and Freedom Party member and at no point did anyone suggest we try to recruit them to the Green Party.? People we're only talking about inviting them to participate as allies. > > >2) I'm not sure anyone said that Pete was disrespectful of other's points of view, so I'm not sure where you (John) are getting that. > >However the problem I believe was that Pete's outburst where he implied that (newly joined Green Party member) Dr. Sharat Lin was an "imperialist" came across to many witnesses as being entirely unreasonable, illogical, without evidence, disruptive and entirely without merit..? That is not a way to win friends and influence people -- or frankly to demonstrate > >emotional safeness to be participating as a guest at Green Party events.? I don't think any of the rest of us Greens (besides maybe you John) had any doubt about Dr. Lin's credibility since >after all he has a very long track record that many of us have observed, whereas we are unfamiliar with Pete.? In my opinion it was Pete that undermined his welcome by his loss of temper. > > >And to the point that the communist party front group (that hides their affiliation) A.N.S.W.E.R. asserts that we should not criticize Iran -- who is A.N.S.W.E.R. anyway and why should anyone take such a rigid and doctrinaire tack.? That's not much > >different from progressive Dems who say we should not criticize President Obama because he's so much better than the Repuglicans.? Sorry I don't by the idea that any government is above > >criticism. > > >Green is GO! > >Drew > > >~*~*~*~ >Jill Stein for President -- A Green New Deal for America >Campaign website:? http://www.jillstein.org/ >? ? First TV Ad?http://tinyurl.com/JillStein1stAd > > > > >>________________________________ >> From: John Thielking >>To: Spencer Graves >>Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >>Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 10:46 PM >>Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 >> >> >>A few clarifications: >>? >>When Drew proposed the County Council decision mechanism where if no one objects to a sponsorship proposal, it passes, both John and Spencer objected to that.? Spencer objected generally and John objected specifically citing how the default decision? making process was already attempted for the planning of the Iran-Syria talk and failed miserably. >>It was my understanding that the proposal WAS DROPPED after that discussion and is not now in force.? Drew and others were tasked with making more specific proposals regarding how to make the meetings better? I'm not sure. >>? >>Post meeting discussions with Peace and Freedom Party member Pete O'Reilly yielded the following points and suggestions re: plans to "work with" the Peace and Freedom Party: >>? >>1) It is not good politics to raid the list of Peace and Freedom Party members and attempt to recruit them to join the Green Party. >>? >>2) Pete is well aware of opposing points of view and while he did raise his voice in a way that may only end up breeding contempt from people who don't share his point of view, he at no point sought to exclude Sharat Lin from the Iran-Syria talk.? So to say that he is disrespectful of other's points of view is accurate only from the point of having his voice raised and not from the words that came out of his mouth. You should take a step back and try to percieve the difference. Pete has heard Sharat Lin speak many times on many topics, but Sharat Lin has not heard Pete speak on anything yet.? Pete would like it better to have a debate with Sharat and Answer about Iran and Syria that is a serious debate, as was promissed awhile ago (before John and Drew's most recent attempt at organizing an event). >>? >>John Thielking >> >>--- On Thu, 1/24/13, Spencer Graves wrote: >> >> >>>From: Spencer Graves >>>Subject: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 >>>To: "John Thielking" >>>Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >>>Date: Thursday, January 24, 2013, 9:19 PM >>> >>> >>>On 1/24/2013 9:10 AM, John Thielking wrote: >>> >>>This is now the final agenda.? I will print copies to bring to the meeting. ? John Thielking --- On Wed, 1/23/13, John Thielking wrote: From: John Thielking Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Draft Agenda For The GPSCC Meeting 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 To: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Wednesday, January 23, 2013, 6:24 PM ? Draft Agenda for Thursday, January 24, 2013 Green Party of Santa Clara County GA meeting to be held at San Jose Peace Center 48 S 7th St, San Jose, CA. Final Agenda will be published at 9AM Thursday. 7:00PM -7:30PM Arrive, socialize. Guest speaker Brian Good on: A. developing new technologies. 1. Many years I have been unhappy that there has been no high-tech reinvention of a Commodore 64, Texas Instruments 99, Radio Shack TRS-80, or Atari 800 that could plug into our TVs. 2. For many years I have wanted a belt-pack flash-drive video recorder so I can plug my flaky old mini-DV video cameras into a tapeless recorder. 3. Smart phone tech is bringing us a computing reinvention without Windows, without Apple, without Intel or AMD. It runs Linux, it's thumb-drive or credit card sized, it's cheap, and it's here. Google A10, A31, Raspberry Pi. B. third-generation California Disclose Act, SB52. Democrats hold 2/3 majorities in both Assembly and Senate so this year is likely to be the year we win. So join us! 7:30 Meeting begins. Identify facilitator: Jim Doyle >>> >>> >>>note taker: Spencer >>> >>> >>>time keeper: John Thielking >>> >>>vibes watcher: self monitoring >>> >>> >>>and agenda preparer: Caroline >>> >>> >>>for next meeting. 7:35 Introductions and announcements. Changes to agenda. >>>Caroline, >>> >>> >>>Drew:? Working on >>> >>> >>>Brian Good, Jim Doyle, John Thielking, >>> >>> >>>Spencer Graves:? >>> >>> >>>Paul Rea, Newark:? Works with Sharat on a film series:? How to contact Greens near Newark?? **** (Drew can help make contact with other Greens in Alameda County)? (tri city area:? Newark, Union City, Fremont).? >>> >>> >>>Ed Campbell.? Lives in Willow Glen, retired chiropractor, coach basketball.? >>> >>> >>>Feb. 9:? Bowling for Columbine in Newark.? >>> >>> >>>7:50 treasurer's report. >>>????? $1,686.38? + $55 from November minus $50 to Secretary of State? >>> >>> >>>Jim Doyle. Hat passing. >>> >>>* Propose that we invite the Jill Stein team to put on a Green Campaign School in our area.? Jim Doyle, Caroline >>>??? ??? *** Caroline to contact Jill Stein's team to get info about cost, etc., and post to the discussion list.? After we get the cost, we need to make a decision on whether, when, where.? >>> >>> >>>Wellstone Foundation:? Feb. 8-9 (Friday noon to Saturday >>>"Camp Wellstone" at Sequoia Retreat Center >>>$30 - $100 (sliding scale) plus DeAnza tuition (2 credit units at DeAnza?)? Drew will attend.? >>>How to facilitate a group?? Strategy for approaching a community?? See Drew's email on this on the discussion list >>> >>>7:55 Report back on events that happened since the last meeting. Anti SS cuts protest in front of Lofgren's office, etc. ???? 8:00 invited speakers, criteria for. Sandy Perry, Jim Doyle >>> >>>????? Currently, we have no criteria.? >>> >>> >>>????? Sandy:? Invite speakers related to on-going campaigns.? >>> >>> >>>Campaigns:? Single Payer (Sandy, Caroline), DeAnza (Sandy, Drew), >>> >>> >>>How does CA Single Payer differ from "Health Care for All"?? Campaign for a Healthy California is a coalition driven by nurses.? Health Care for All is their own organization, initiated in the 1990s.? Their drawback is mostly all white, ... .? >>> >>> >>>????? Caroline:? We also need "climate" and 350.org.? >>> >>> >>>????? Caroline, Sandy, Brian Jim, Spencer to form a committee to select topics for major campaigns:? phone conference?? Sandy has free conference calling.? Sandy to send email with suggested times.? >>> >>> >>>8:10 organised ongoing campaigns Jim Doyle, Sandy Perry 8:20 udel - unincorporated district elections e.g., school, water, and fire districts Jim Doyle >>> >>>????? Jim will bring the list of elections to the next elections.? Unincorporated districts come up in odd years.? >>> >>>8:30 web site improvements Jim Doyle >>> >>>??? ? Drew has already studied CiviCRM by Campaign Foundations, built on Drupal:? >>> >>> >>>Also need training on CMS (Content Management System) Drupal(?) >>> >>>8:35 making meetings interesting, efficient, and enjoyable Jim Doyle, Drew Johnson >>>????? Starting to invite speakers.? Good.? >>> >>> >>>????? We operate too much as a committee as a whole.? We would be better, Drew believes, if we came together, broke into committees, and then came back together.? >>> >>> >>>????? Sponsorship of events should be delegated to the County Council.? >>> >>> >>>????? We could use Google Hangout to make our meetings virtual, so people can attend without traveling.? >>> >>> >>>????? The exercise should be fun, energizing and productive.? >>> >>> >>>????? Drew to propose more material and send to the email list and report a summary at the next meeting.? >>> >>> >>>????? For sponsorship, Drew suggests it gets posted and it passes if no one objects.? >>> >>>8:50 establishing a social media committee Jim Doyle 8:55 recruiting with emphasis on females Jim Doyle >>> >>>????? Betsy Wolf-Graves is now on the County Council.? >>> >>>9:00 Obtaining other people for the County Council and to represent Santa Clara County on the statewide Standing General Assembly. Santa Clara County is allowed 5 representatives on the statewide Standing General Assembly. We currently have only 3. John Thielking is currently not on that list; we should put him on. That would bring us to 4, consisting entirely of our current County Council. Drew noted that our County Council is currently all male. Number 7 of the 10 key values of the Green Party is "Feminism and Gender Equity" (www.gp.org/tenkey.php). We could use some females. >>>John Thielking and Betsy Wolf-Graves will be added to the "sga".? >>> >>> >>>* Endorse California Disclose Act (Brian), SB52.? Approved.? Brian to provide us with the info on what we have to do to get listed as an official endorser.? >>> >>> >>> >>>9:05 PROPOSED: The Green Party of Santa Clara County will endorse the presentation of the movie "Enemy Alien" at the Peace Center, Saturday evening, March 23. Spencer DISCUSSION: "Enemy Alien" is a documentary describing the persecution of a Palestinian-American, Farouk Abdel-Muhti, essentially for being Palestinian and refusing to remain silent. The film was produced by a Japanese American, Konrad Aderer, whose parents had spent World War II in a concentration camp in the US (www.lifeorliberty.org/enemy-alien). The South Bay Committee Against Political Repression is organizing a presentation of this movie to be followed by a panel discussion featuring a Japanese-American and an Arab-American. 9:10 Proposal to invite Peace and Freedom people to participate in our meetings and events. Caroline >>> >>>????? Add to discussion of "on-going campaigns".? >>> >>>9:15 There is also a Latino activity going on on Friday that I will send you details of so it can go on the agenda as well. Caroline 9:20 propose a doing a cost benefit analysis of how we can make use of a new voters list. Jim Doyle >>>Endorse:? Dalit Baum presentation, Feb. 15.? >>> >>>9:30 Meeting ends. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>_______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss >>> >>> >>>-- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com >>_______________________________________________ >>sosfbay-discuss mailing list >>sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org >>http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss >> >> >_______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pagesincolor at yahoo.com Sat Jan 26 07:03:44 2013 From: pagesincolor at yahoo.com (John Thielking) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 07:03:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] ANSWER is indeed a communist front group (was Re: Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013) In-Reply-To: <1359201562.76820.YahooMailNeo@web125403.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1359212624.62349.YahooMailClassic@web122902.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Drew, ? Since you decided to use wikipedia as a source, please be aware that there are other tidbits of information available on there that contradict your position about the PSL vs ANSWER. ? First, ANSWER was denied a permit to hold a speakout on the national mall at the same time as the inaguration so I don't know the significance of your claim that ANSWER was hijacking someone else's protest, since their only remaining alternative was to go on someone else's march that already had a permit.? For background on this see: http://www.answercoalition.org/national/index.html ? While the ANSWER web site does not appear to have a direct link to PSL or any other backing organizations, that doesn't mean a whole lot if the PSL is not the entire source of their organization as implied here: ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_for_Socialism_and_Liberation where it is stated: ? Antiwar movement The PSL is a member of the steering committee of the Act Now to Stop War and End Racism Coalition (A.N.S.W.E.R.). As one of the most active members of the coalition, PSL has gained notice for successfully forging ties with Arab and Muslim American groups such as the Muslim American Society, Al-Awda and the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. ? ? and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_organization ? More recently, the Workers' World Party (WWP)[32] set up an anti-war front group, International ANSWER. (ANSWER is no longer closely associated with WWP; it is closely associated with a WWP splinter, the Party for Socialism and Liberation, but PSL plays a more open role in the organization.) ? I agree with Sandy Perry that your characterization of the current version of ANSWER as a communist front group and your desire to shun them because of this idea is nothing less than Mcarthyism.? I will continue to work with the Green party for now, but don't expect me to work?with you on any of your pet projects.? I may still go ahead with organizing a debate or panel discussion on Iran-Syria-Palestine, but it won't be done under the Green Party umbrella or at your church or in any way involving Drew Johnson.? ? John Thielking --- On Sat, 1/26/13, Drew wrote: From: Drew Subject: [GPSCC-chat] ANSWER is indeed a communist front group (was Re: Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013) To: "perrysandy at aol.com" , "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" Date: Saturday, January 26, 2013, 3:59 AM I feel extremely annoyed about the fact the ANSWER Coalition is not a coalition at all and conceals its leadership by the Party for Socialism and Liberation (ie. a communist party). A group that is not honest enough to be upfront with who they are can be called a "front group" and that term is actually from the communists themselves, not Hoover (although Hoover certainly took it and fear mongered with it, no doubt).? The creation of front groups that hide their affiliation with the communist organizers is a very deliberate tactic that is widely and openly discussed among communist party strategists.? So I see no reason to avoid the term. ( for more on fronts see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_group). >From wikipedia re: the (communist) World Worker's Party and ANSWER: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers_World_Party In 2004,[21] the WWP suffered its most serious split when a few dozen members of WWP left to form the Party for Socialism and Liberation. The ANSWER coalition aligned itself with the PSL and Workers World Party then founded the Troops Out Now Coalition. The split included many of the top leaders of the WWP which included most of the membership of the WWP on the West Coast. Although I am not one I do not object to working with socialists and communists.? There are many folks of these persuasions within the Green Party. What I object to is dishonesty by people and groups who try to decieve others about their identity.? This is why I have such strong objections to ANSWER. For thes reasons I do not care about their opinion and I resent the way they constantly glom onto and hijack other group's events, such as the MLK march last Monday that I was at.? They've been showin up with their mass-manufactured pre-printed protest signs to the MLK march and other events that they had no hand in organizing and trying to use it as a platform for their own agenda.? If they want to organize their own events (and they do hold their own events, yes its true) then fine.? But don't go and try to dominate a civil rights march that others carefully constructed. Green is GO! Drew ? ~*~*~*~ Jill Stein for President -- A Green New Deal for America Campaign website:? http://www.jillstein.org/ ? ? First TV Ad?http://tinyurl.com/JillStein1stAd From: "perrysandy at aol.com" To: rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com; sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 4:52 PM Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 Hi Everyone, ? I have two cents to add to this discussion. ? 1) I think everyone, including Pete himself, would admit that his outburst was not constructive and did not help him win friends and influence people. To tell the truth, I can't remember exactly what he said or who he insulted, but I definitely remember it was not pretty. ? 2) I believe we were absolutely right to refuse to sponsor a debate between Pete and Sharat. I have been asked to work with a committee to help formulate plans for campaigns to build the Green Party, and IMHO hosting debates between different trends in the left or in the peace movement is definitely not the best way to bring in the masses. ? 3) I strongly object to labeling any group a "communist front group". This was a term developed by J. Edgar Hoover to discredit a whole generation of courageous Americans who fought for social justice in the 1930s, 40s, and 50s, led to the ugly purges of Hollywood and the AFL-CIO, and crippled progressive politics in America for eighty years.?Red-baiting has a nasty way of being turned around and used against us. Besides, I (and many of San Jose's best activists that I know) are very rose-colored ourselves, so I don't think this is a good road to go down. ? 4) I am not a member of ANSWER and do not agree with some of their positions (although I am not well-versed in them all). I have worked with John Bretton in the Hyatt boycott support work and have found him to be cordial, hard-working, and cooperative. If we have disagreements with a group I believe we should just leave it at that, agree to disagree, work together where possible and go our separate ways where not. ? Peace! ? ? Sandy -----Original Message----- From: Drew To: sosfbay discussion group Sent: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 12:20 am Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 Yes I never actually made a real proposal about the "no brainer" event endorsements, etc. -- I merely raised the question and so no of course I didn't reply to the conversation that followed. Also: 1) Note that at no point did anyone suggest we attempt to "raid" the Peace and Freedom Party member and at no point did anyone suggest we try to recruit them to the Green Party.? People we're only talking about inviting them to participate as allies. 2) I'm not sure anyone said that Pete was disrespectful of other's points of view, so I'm not sure where you (John) are getting that. However the problem I believe was that Pete's outburst where he implied that (newly joined Green Party member) Dr. Sharat Lin was an "imperialist" came across to many witnesses as being entirely unreasonable, illogical, without evidence, disruptive and entirely without merit..? That is not a way to win friends and influence people -- or frankly to demonstrate emotional safeness to be participating as a guest at Green Party events.? I don't think any of the rest of us Greens (besides maybe you John) had any doubt about Dr. Lin's credibility since after all he has a very long track record that many of us have observed, whereas we are unfamiliar with Pete.? In my opinion it was Pete that undermined his welcome by his loss of temper. And to the point that the communist party front group (that hides their affiliation) A.N.S.W.E.R. asserts that we should not criticize Iran -- who is A.N.S.W.E.R. anyway and why should anyone take such a rigid and doctrinaire tack.? That's not much different from progressive Dems who say we should not criticize President Obama because he's so much better than the Repuglicans.? Sorry I don't by the idea that any government is above criticism. Green is GO! Drew ~*~*~*~ Jill Stein for President -- A Green New Deal for America Campaign website:? http://www.jillstein.org/ ? ? First TV Ad?http://tinyurl.com/JillStein1stAd From: John Thielking To: Spencer Graves Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 10:46 PM Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 A few clarifications: ? When Drew proposed the County Council decision mechanism where if no one objects to a sponsorship proposal, it passes, both John and Spencer objected to that.? Spencer objected generally and John objected specifically citing how the default decision? making process was already attempted for the planning of the Iran-Syria talk and failed miserably. It was my understanding that the proposal WAS DROPPED after that discussion and is not now in force.? Drew and others were tasked with making more specific proposals regarding how to make the meetings better? I'm not sure. ? Post meeting discussions with Peace and Freedom Party member Pete O'Reilly yielded the following points and suggestions re: plans to "work with" the Peace and Freedom Party: ? 1) It is not good politics to raid the list of Peace and Freedom Party members and attempt to recruit them to join the Green Party. ? 2) Pete is well aware of opposing points of view and while he did raise his voice in a way that may only end up breeding contempt from people who don't share his point of view, he at no point sought to exclude Sharat Lin from the Iran-Syria talk.? So to say that he is disrespectful of other's points of view is accurate only from the point of having his voice raised and not from the words that came out of his mouth. You should take a step back and try to percieve the difference. Pete has heard Sharat Lin speak many times on many topics, but Sharat Lin has not heard Pete speak on anything yet.? Pete would like it better to have a debate with Sharat and Answer about Iran and Syria that is a serious debate, as was promissed awhile ago (before John and Drew's most recent attempt at organizing an event). ? John Thielking --- On Thu, 1/24/13, Spencer Graves wrote: From: Spencer Graves Subject: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 To: "John Thielking" Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Thursday, January 24, 2013, 9:19 PM On 1/24/2013 9:10 AM, John Thielking wrote: This is now the final agenda.? I will print copies to bring to the meeting. ? John Thielking --- On Wed, 1/23/13, John Thielking wrote: From: John Thielking Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Draft Agenda For The GPSCC Meeting 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 To: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Wednesday, January 23, 2013, 6:24 PM ? Draft Agenda for Thursday, January 24, 2013 Green Party of Santa Clara County GA meeting to be held at San Jose Peace Center 48 S 7th St, San Jose, CA. Final Agenda will be published at 9AM Thursday. 7:00PM -7:30PM Arrive, socialize. Guest speaker Brian Good on: A. developing new technologies. 1. Many years I have been unhappy that there has been no high-tech reinvention of a Commodore 64, Texas Instruments 99, Radio Shack TRS-80, or Atari 800 that could plug into our TVs. 2. For many years I have wanted a belt-pack flash-drive video recorder so I can plug my flaky old mini-DV video cameras into a tapeless recorder. 3. Smart phone tech is bringing us a computing reinvention without Windows, without Apple, without Intel or AMD. It runs Linux, it's thumb-drive or credit card sized, it's cheap, and it's here. Google A10, A31, Raspberry Pi. B. third-generation California Disclose Act, SB52. Democrats hold 2/3 majorities in both Assembly and Senate so this year is likely to be the year we win. So join us! 7:30 Meeting begins. Identify facilitator: Jim Doyle note taker: Spencer time keeper: John Thielking vibes watcher: self monitoring and agenda preparer: Caroline for next meeting. 7:35 Introductions and announcements. Changes to agenda. Caroline, Drew:? Working on Brian Good, Jim Doyle, John Thielking, Spencer Graves:? Paul Rea, Newark:? Works with Sharat on a film series:? How to contact Greens near Newark?? **** (Drew can help make contact with other Greens in Alameda County)? (tri city area:? Newark, Union City, Fremont).? Ed Campbell.? Lives in Willow Glen, retired chiropractor, coach basketball.? Feb. 9:? Bowling for Columbine in Newark.? 7:50 treasurer's report. ????? $1,686.38? + $55 from November minus $50 to Secretary of State? Jim Doyle. Hat passing. * Propose that we invite the Jill Stein team to put on a Green Campaign School in our area.? Jim Doyle, Caroline ??? ??? *** Caroline to contact Jill Stein's team to get info about cost, etc., and post to the discussion list.? After we get the cost, we need to make a decision on whether, when, where.? Wellstone Foundation:? Feb. 8-9 (Friday noon to Saturday "Camp Wellstone" at Sequoia Retreat Center $30 - $100 (sliding scale) plus DeAnza tuition (2 credit units at DeAnza?)? Drew will attend.? How to facilitate a group?? Strategy for approaching a community?? See Drew's email on this on the discussion list 7:55 Report back on events that happened since the last meeting. Anti SS cuts protest in front of Lofgren's office, etc. ???? 8:00 invited speakers, criteria for. Sandy Perry, Jim Doyle ????? Currently, we have no criteria.? ????? Sandy:? Invite speakers related to on-going campaigns.? Campaigns:? Single Payer (Sandy, Caroline), DeAnza (Sandy, Drew), How does CA Single Payer differ from "Health Care for All"?? Campaign for a Healthy California is a coalition driven by nurses.? Health Care for All is their own organization, initiated in the 1990s.? Their drawback is mostly all white, ... .? ????? Caroline:? We also need "climate" and 350.org.? ????? Caroline, Sandy, Brian Jim, Spencer to form a committee to select topics for major campaigns:? phone conference?? Sandy has free conference calling.? Sandy to send email with suggested times.? 8:10 organised ongoing campaigns Jim Doyle, Sandy Perry 8:20 udel - unincorporated district elections e.g., school, water, and fire districts Jim Doyle ????? Jim will bring the list of elections to the next elections.? Unincorporated districts come up in odd years.? 8:30 web site improvements Jim Doyle ??? ? Drew has already studied CiviCRM by Campaign Foundations, built on Drupal:? Also need training on CMS (Content Management System) Drupal(?) 8:35 making meetings interesting, efficient, and enjoyable Jim Doyle, Drew Johnson ????? Starting to invite speakers.? Good.? ????? We operate too much as a committee as a whole.? We would be better, Drew believes, if we came together, broke into committees, and then came back together.? ????? Sponsorship of events should be delegated to the County Council.? ????? We could use Google Hangout to make our meetings virtual, so people can attend without traveling.? ????? The exercise should be fun, energizing and productive.? ????? Drew to propose more material and send to the email list and report a summary at the next meeting.? ????? For sponsorship, Drew suggests it gets posted and it passes if no one objects.? 8:50 establishing a social media committee Jim Doyle 8:55 recruiting with emphasis on females Jim Doyle ????? Betsy Wolf-Graves is now on the County Council.? 9:00 Obtaining other people for the County Council and to represent Santa Clara County on the statewide Standing General Assembly. Santa Clara County is allowed 5 representatives on the statewide Standing General Assembly. We currently have only 3. John Thielking is currently not on that list; we should put him on. That would bring us to 4, consisting entirely of our current County Council. Drew noted that our County Council is currently all male. Number 7 of the 10 key values of the Green Party is "Feminism and Gender Equity" (www.gp.org/tenkey.php). We could use some females. John Thielking and Betsy Wolf-Graves will be added to the "sga".? * Endorse California Disclose Act (Brian), SB52.? Approved.? Brian to provide us with the info on what we have to do to get listed as an official endorser.? 9:05 PROPOSED: The Green Party of Santa Clara County will endorse the presentation of the movie "Enemy Alien" at the Peace Center, Saturday evening, March 23. Spencer DISCUSSION: "Enemy Alien" is a documentary describing the persecution of a Palestinian-American, Farouk Abdel-Muhti, essentially for being Palestinian and refusing to remain silent. The film was produced by a Japanese American, Konrad Aderer, whose parents had spent World War II in a concentration camp in the US (www.lifeorliberty.org/enemy-alien). The South Bay Committee Against Political Repression is organizing a presentation of this movie to be followed by a panel discussion featuring a Japanese-American and an Arab-American. 9:10 Proposal to invite Peace and Freedom people to participate in our meetings and events. Caroline ????? Add to discussion of "on-going campaigns".? 9:15 There is also a Latino activity going on on Friday that I will send you details of so it can go on the agenda as well. Caroline 9:20 propose a doing a cost benefit analysis of how we can make use of a new voters list. Jim Doyle Endorse:? Dalit Baum presentation, Feb. 15.? 9:30 Meeting ends. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 26 18:27:07 2013 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 18:27:07 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] publicly generated electricity Message-ID: <5104907B.1060506@sbcglobal.net> Good Folks, I am the treasurer of the Green Party of the Pikes Peak Region (in central Colorado). The largest city in our area is Colorado Springs (330 k people). That city recently decided to change from a City Manager (directed by the City Council that included the Mayor) to a "Strong Mayor" form of government. This is a very conservative area. So they elected a real estate developer to be their first Strong Mayor. Within a year Mayor Bach proposed that our city should get out of the electricity generating business. He said that the city owned, coal burning, Drake Power-plant was ugly, old and sitting on valuable land. He suggests dismantling Drake and buying electricity from private generators. I moved from California in 2009. While there I remember an extended, sad episode that probably embarrassed most Californians. This was the decision of that state to get out the generating business and buy electricity from private suppliers. County and state leaders told us that electricity rates would decline. The state would also reap a windfall from the sale of all its generating stations. As you know, Enron and other private electricity suppliers proceeded to brutally rape CA ratepayers. Black-outs rolled repeatedly across most of our major cities. Investigations showed that many key decision makers had been bought off (many with offers of extremely lucrative jobs after the transfer to private suppliers). *This is where (hopefully) you come in. I expect that you are all handy with a pen. Also you probably have a keen eye for powerful prose. Can you please send me the hardest hitting short essays that you know of lambasting those key CA decision makers that sold out their fellow citizens for big $ with the private electric generators?* Out here, we don't know for certain that Mayor Bach is trying to pull the same stunt . . . but it sure looks and smells like it! Thanks for your time and consideration, Joseph Mitchener 11285 Black Forest Rd Colorado Springs, CO. 80908 From perrysandy at aol.com Sat Jan 26 19:39:07 2013 From: perrysandy at aol.com (perrysandy at aol.com) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 22:39:07 -0500 (EST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] ANSWER is indeed a communist front group (was Re: Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013) In-Reply-To: <1359212624.62349.YahooMailClassic@web122902.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1359212624.62349.YahooMailClassic@web122902.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8CFCA56FE8DB1D2-C60-24F4C@webmail-m046.sysops.aol.com> I do not think this is a good venue to discuss this issue further. I would be happy to discuss it personally with either of you or both. I stand by my comments, but I want to make it clear that I never accused my colleague Drew of engaging in "nothing less than McCarthyism." Sandy -----Original Message----- From: John Thielking To: Drew Cc: sosfbay-discuss Sent: Sat, Jan 26, 2013 7:03 am Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] ANSWER is indeed a communist front group (was Re: Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013) Drew, Since you decided to use wikipedia as a source, please be aware that there are other tidbits of information available on there that contradict your position about the PSL vs ANSWER. First, ANSWER was denied a permit to hold a speakout on the national mall at the same time as the inaguration so I don't know the significance of your claim that ANSWER was hijacking someone else's protest, since their only remaining alternative was to go on someone else's march that already had a permit. For background on this see: http://www.answercoalition.org/national/index.html While the ANSWER web site does not appear to have a direct link to PSL or any other backing organizations, that doesn't mean a whole lot if the PSL is not the entire source of their organization as implied here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_for_Socialism_and_Liberation where it is stated: Antiwar movement The PSL is a member of the steering committee of the Act Now to Stop War and End Racism Coalition (A.N.S.W.E.R.). As one of the most active members of the coalition, PSL has gained notice for successfully forging ties with Arab and Muslim American groups such as the Muslim American Society, Al-Awda and the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_organization More recently, the Workers' World Party (WWP)[32] set up an anti-war front group, International ANSWER. (ANSWER is no longer closely associated with WWP; it is closely associated with a WWP splinter, the Party for Socialism and Liberation, but PSL plays a more open role in the organization.) I agree with Sandy Perry that your characterization of the current version of ANSWER as a communist front group and your desire to shun them because of this idea is nothing less than Mcarthyism. I will continue to work with the Green party for now, but don't expect me to work with you on any of your pet projects. I may still go ahead with organizing a debate or panel discussion on Iran-Syria-Palestine, but it won't be done under the Green Party umbrella or at your church or in any way involving Drew Johnson. John Thielking --- On Sat, 1/26/13, Drew wrote: From: Drew Subject: [GPSCC-chat] ANSWER is indeed a communist front group (was Re: Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013) To: "perrysandy at aol.com" , "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" Date: Saturday, January 26, 2013, 3:59 AM I feel extremely annoyed about the fact the ANSWER Coalition is not a coalition at all and conceals its leadership by the Party for Socialism and Liberation (ie. a communist party). A group that is not honest enough to be upfront with who they are can be called a "front group" and that term is actually from the communists themselves, not Hoover (although Hoover certainly took it and fear mongered with it, no doubt). The creation of front groups that hide their affiliation with the communist organizers is a very deliberate tactic that is widely and openly discussed among communist party strategists. So I see no reason to avoid the term. ( for more on fronts see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_group). >From wikipedia re: the (communist) World Worker's Party and ANSWER: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers_World_Party In 2004,[21] the WWP suffered its most serious split when a few dozen members of WWP left to form the Party for Socialism and Liberation. The ANSWER coalition aligned itself with the PSL and Workers World Party then founded the Troops Out Now Coalition. The split included many of the top leaders of the WWP which included most of the membership of the WWP on the West Coast. Although I am not one I do not object to working with socialists and communists. There are many folks of these persuasions within the Green Party. What I object to is dishonesty by people and groups who try to decieve others about their identity. This is why I have such strong objections to ANSWER. For thes reasons I do not care about their opinion and I resent the way they constantly glom onto and hijack other group's events, such as the MLK march last Monday that I was at. They've been showin up with their mass-manufactured pre-printed protest signs to the MLK march and other events that they had no hand in organizing and trying to use it as a platform for their own agenda. If they want to organize their own events (and they do hold their own events, yes its true) then fine. But don't go and try to dominate a civil rights march that others carefully constructed. Green is GO! Drew ~*~*~*~ Jill Stein for President -- A Green New Deal for America Campaign website: http://www.jillstein.org/ First TV Ad http://tinyurl.com/JillStein1stAd From: "perrysandy at aol.com" To: rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com; sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 4:52 PM Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 Hi Everyone, I have two cents to add to this discussion. 1) I think everyone, including Pete himself, would admit that his outburst was not constructive and did not help him win friends and influence people. To tell the truth, I can't remember exactly what he said or who he insulted, but I definitely remember it was not pretty. 2) I believe we were absolutely right to refuse to sponsor a debate between Pete and Sharat. I have been asked to work with a committee to help formulate plans for campaigns to build the Green Party, and IMHO hosting debates between different trends in the left or in the peace movement is definitely not the best way to bring in the masses. 3) I strongly object to labeling any group a "communist front group". This was a term developed by J. Edgar Hoover to discredit a whole generation of courageous Americans who fought for social justice in the 1930s, 40s, and 50s, led to the ugly purges of Hollywood and the AFL-CIO, and crippled progressive politics in America for eighty years. Red-baiting has a nasty way of being turned around and used against us. Besides, I (and many of San Jose's best activists that I know) are very rose-colored ourselves, so I don't think this is a good road to go down. 4) I am not a member of ANSWER and do not agree with some of their positions (although I am not well-versed in them all). I have worked with John Bretton in the Hyatt boycott support work and have found him to be cordial, hard-working, and cooperative. If we have disagreements with a group I believe we should just leave it at that, agree to disagree, work together where possible and go our separate ways where not. Peace! Sandy -----Original Message----- From: Drew To: sosfbay discussion group Sent: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 12:20 am Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 Yes I never actually made a real proposal about the "no brainer" event endorsements, etc. -- I merely raised the question and so no of course I didn't reply to the conversation that followed. Also: 1) Note that at no point did anyone suggest we attempt to "raid" the Peace and Freedom Party member and at no point did anyone suggest we try to recruit them to the Green Party. People we're only talking about inviting them to participate as allies. 2) I'm not sure anyone said that Pete was disrespectful of other's points of view, so I'm not sure where you (John) are getting that. However the problem I believe was that Pete's outburst where he implied that (newly joined Green Party member) Dr. Sharat Lin was an "imperialist" came across to many witnesses as being entirely unreasonable, illogical, without evidence, disruptive and entirely without merit.. That is not a way to win friends and influence people -- or frankly to demonstrate emotional safeness to be participating as a guest at Green Party events. I don't think any of the rest of us Greens (besides maybe you John) had any doubt about Dr. Lin's credibility since after all he has a very long track record that many of us have observed, whereas we are unfamiliar with Pete. In my opinion it was Pete that undermined his welcome by his loss of temper. And to the point that the communist party front group (that hides their affiliation) A.N.S.W.E.R. asserts that we should not criticize Iran -- who is A.N.S.W.E.R. anyway and why should anyone take such a rigid and doctrinaire tack. That's not much different from progressive Dems who say we should not criticize President Obama because he's so much better than the Repuglicans. Sorry I don't by the idea that any government is above criticism. Green is GO! Drew ~*~*~*~ Jill Stein for President -- A Green New Deal for America Campaign website: http://www.jillstein.org/ First TV Ad http://tinyurl.com/JillStein1stAd From: John Thielking To: Spencer Graves Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 10:46 PM Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 A few clarifications: When Drew proposed the County Council decision mechanism where if no one objects to a sponsorship proposal, it passes, both John and Spencer objected to that. Spencer objected generally and John objected specifically citing how the default decision making process was already attempted for the planning of the Iran-Syria talk and failed miserably. It was my understanding that the proposal WAS DROPPED after that discussion and is not now in force. Drew and others were tasked with making more specific proposals regarding how to make the meetings better? I'm not sure. Post meeting discussions with Peace and Freedom Party member Pete O'Reilly yielded the following points and suggestions re: plans to "work with" the Peace and Freedom Party: 1) It is not good politics to raid the list of Peace and Freedom Party members and attempt to recruit them to join the Green Party. 2) Pete is well aware of opposing points of view and while he did raise his voice in a way that may only end up breeding contempt from people who don't share his point of view, he at no point sought to exclude Sharat Lin from the Iran-Syria talk. So to say that he is disrespectful of other's points of view is accurate only from the point of having his voice raised and not from the words that came out of his mouth. You should take a step back and try to percieve the difference. Pete has heard Sharat Lin speak many times on many topics, but Sharat Lin has not heard Pete speak on anything yet. Pete would like it better to have a debate with Sharat and Answer about Iran and Syria that is a serious debate, as was promissed awhile ago (before John and Drew's most recent attempt at organizing an event). John Thielking --- On Thu, 1/24/13, Spencer Graves wrote: From: Spencer Graves Subject: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 To: "John Thielking" Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Thursday, January 24, 2013, 9:19 PM On 1/24/2013 9:10 AM, John Thielking wrote: This is now the final agenda. I will print copies to bring to the meeting. John Thielking --- On Wed, 1/23/13, John Thielking wrote: From: John Thielking Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Draft Agenda For The GPSCC Meeting 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 To: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Wednesday, January 23, 2013, 6:24 PM Draft Agenda for Thursday, January 24, 2013 Green Party of Santa Clara County GA meeting to be held at San Jose Peace Center 48 S 7th St, San Jose, CA. Final Agenda will be published at 9AM Thursday. 7:00PM -7:30PM Arrive, socialize. Guest speaker Brian Good on: A. developing new technologies. 1. Many years I have been unhappy that there has been no high-tech reinvention of a Commodore 64, Texas Instruments 99, Radio Shack TRS-80, or Atari 800 that could plug into our TVs. 2. For many years I have wanted a belt-pack flash-drive video recorder so I can plug my flaky old mini-DV video cameras into a tapeless recorder. 3. Smart phone tech is bringing us a computing reinvention without Windows, without Apple, without Intel or AMD. It runs Linux, it's thumb-drive or credit card sized, it's cheap, and it's here. Google A10, A31, Raspberry Pi. B. third-generation California Disclose Act, SB52. Democrats hold 2/3 majorities in both Assembly and Senate so this year is likely to be the year we win. So join us! 7:30 Meeting begins. Identify facilitator: Jim Doyle note taker: Spencer time keeper: John Thielking vibes watcher: self monitoring and agenda preparer: Caroline for next meeting. 7:35 Introductions and announcements. Changes to agenda. Caroline, Drew: Working on Brian Good, Jim Doyle, John Thielking, Spencer Graves: Paul Rea, Newark: Works with Sharat on a film series: How to contact Greens near Newark? **** (Drew can help make contact with other Greens in Alameda County) (tri city area: Newark, Union City, Fremont). Ed Campbell. Lives in Willow Glen, retired chiropractor, coach basketball. Feb. 9: Bowling for Columbine in Newark. 7:50 treasurer's report. $1,686.38 + $55 from November minus $50 to Secretary of State Jim Doyle. Hat passing. * Propose that we invite the Jill Stein team to put on a Green Campaign School in our area. Jim Doyle, Caroline *** Caroline to contact Jill Stein's team to get info about cost, etc., and post to the discussion list. After we get the cost, we need to make a decision on whether, when, where. Wellstone Foundation: Feb. 8-9 (Friday noon to Saturday "Camp Wellstone" at Sequoia Retreat Center $30 - $100 (sliding scale) plus DeAnza tuition (2 credit units at DeAnza?) Drew will attend. How to facilitate a group? Strategy for approaching a community? See Drew's email on this on the discussion list 7:55 Report back on events that happened since the last meeting. Anti SS cuts protest in front of Lofgren's office, etc. 8:00 invited speakers, criteria for. Sandy Perry, Jim Doyle Currently, we have no criteria. Sandy: Invite speakers related to on-going campaigns. Campaigns: Single Payer (Sandy, Caroline), DeAnza (Sandy, Drew), How does CA Single Payer differ from "Health Care for All"? Campaign for a Healthy California is a coalition driven by nurses. Health Care for All is their own organization, initiated in the 1990s. Their drawback is mostly all white, ... . Caroline: We also need "climate" and 350.org. Caroline, Sandy, Brian Jim, Spencer to form a committee to select topics for major campaigns: phone conference? Sandy has free conference calling. Sandy to send email with suggested times. 8:10 organised ongoing campaigns Jim Doyle, Sandy Perry 8:20 udel - unincorporated district elections e.g., school, water, and fire districts Jim Doyle Jim will bring the list of elections to the next elections. Unincorporated districts come up in odd years. 8:30 web site improvements Jim Doyle Drew has already studied CiviCRM by Campaign Foundations, built on Drupal: Also need training on CMS (Content Management System) Drupal(?) 8:35 making meetings interesting, efficient, and enjoyable Jim Doyle, Drew Johnson Starting to invite speakers. Good. We operate too much as a committee as a whole. We would be better, Drew believes, if we came together, broke into committees, and then came back together. Sponsorship of events should be delegated to the County Council. We could use Google Hangout to make our meetings virtual, so people can attend without traveling. The exercise should be fun, energizing and productive. Drew to propose more material and send to the email list and report a summary at the next meeting. For sponsorship, Drew suggests it gets posted and it passes if no one objects. 8:50 establishing a social media committee Jim Doyle 8:55 recruiting with emphasis on females Jim Doyle Betsy Wolf-Graves is now on the County Council. 9:00 Obtaining other people for the County Council and to represent Santa Clara County on the statewide Standing General Assembly. Santa Clara County is allowed 5 representatives on the statewide Standing General Assembly. We currently have only 3. John Thielking is currently not on that list; we should put him on. That would bring us to 4, consisting entirely of our current County Council. Drew noted that our County Council is currently all male. Number 7 of the 10 key values of the Green Party is "Feminism and Gender Equity" (www.gp.org/tenkey.php). We could use some females. John Thielking and Betsy Wolf-Graves will be added to the "sga". * Endorse California Disclose Act (Brian), SB52. Approved. Brian to provide us with the info on what we have to do to get listed as an official endorser. 9:05 PROPOSED: The Green Party of Santa Clara County will endorse the presentation of the movie "Enemy Alien" at the Peace Center, Saturday evening, March 23. Spencer DISCUSSION: "Enemy Alien" is a documentary describing the persecution of a Palestinian-American, Farouk Abdel-Muhti, essentially for being Palestinian and refusing to remain silent. The film was produced by a Japanese American, Konrad Aderer, whose parents had spent World War II in a concentration camp in the US (www.lifeorliberty.org/enemy-alien). The South Bay Committee Against Political Repression is organizing a presentation of this movie to be followed by a panel discussion featuring a Japanese-American and an Arab-American. 9:10 Proposal to invite Peace and Freedom people to participate in our meetings and events. Caroline Add to discussion of "on-going campaigns". 9:15 There is also a Latino activity going on on Friday that I will send you details of so it can go on the agenda as well. Caroline 9:20 propose a doing a cost benefit analysis of how we can make use of a new voters list. Jim Doyle Endorse: Dalit Baum presentation, Feb. 15. 9:30 Meeting ends. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pagesincolor at yahoo.com Sat Jan 26 21:19:21 2013 From: pagesincolor at yahoo.com (John Thielking) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 21:19:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] ANSWER is indeed a communist front group (was Re: Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013) In-Reply-To: <8CFCA56FE8DB1D2-C60-24F4C@webmail-m046.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <1359263961.86659.YahooMailClassic@web122902.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Thanks for clarifying your position Sandy.? I still think that red-baiting qualifies as Mcarthyism, but that is just my opinion I guess.? We can all get together and talk about this more some other time. I will be printing out this thread and will be showing it to Pete and his Peace and Freedom Party cohorts later on next week. (Pete has already read over most of the thread already.) ? John Thielking --- On Sat, 1/26/13, perrysandy at aol.com wrote: From: perrysandy at aol.com Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] ANSWER is indeed a communist front group (was Re: Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013) To: pagesincolor at yahoo.com, rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Saturday, January 26, 2013, 7:39 PM I do not think this is a good venue to discuss this issue further. I would be happy to discuss it personally with either of you or both. I stand by my comments, but I want to make it clear that I never accused my colleague Drew of engaging in "nothing less than McCarthyism." ? ? Sandy -----Original Message----- From: John Thielking To: Drew Cc: sosfbay-discuss Sent: Sat, Jan 26, 2013 7:03 am Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] ANSWER is indeed a communist front group (was Re: Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013) Drew, ? Since you decided to use wikipedia as a source, please be aware that there are other tidbits of information available on there that contradict your position about the PSL vs ANSWER. ? First, ANSWER was denied a permit to hold a speakout on the national mall at the same time as the inaguration so I don't know the significance of your claim that ANSWER was hijacking someone else's protest, since their only remaining alternative was to go on someone else's march that already had a permit.? For background on this see: http://www.answercoalition.org/national/index.html ? While the ANSWER web site does not appear to have a direct link to PSL or any other backing organizations, that doesn't mean a whole lot if the PSL is not the entire source of their organization as implied here: ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_for_Socialism_and_Liberation where it is stated: ? Antiwar movement The PSL is a member of the steering committee of the Act Now to Stop War and End Racism Coalition (A.N.S.W.E.R.). As one of the most active members of the coalition, PSL has gained notice for successfully forging ties with Arab and Muslim American groups such as the Muslim American Society, Al-Awda and the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. ? ? and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_organization ? More recently, the Workers' World Party (WWP)[32] set up an anti-war front group, International ANSWER. (ANSWER is no longer closely associated with WWP; it is closely associated with a WWP splinter, the Party for Socialism and Liberation, but PSL plays a more open role in the organization.) ? I agree with Sandy Perry that your characterization of the current version of ANSWER as a communist front group and your desire to shun them because of this idea is nothing less than Mcarthyism.? I will continue to work with the Green party for now, but don't expect me to work?with you on any of your pet projects.? I may still go ahead with organizing a debate or panel discussion on Iran-Syria-Palestine, but it won't be done under the Green Party umbrella or at your church or in any way involving Drew Johnson.? ? John Thielking --- On Sat, 1/26/13, Drew wrote: From: Drew Subject: [GPSCC-chat] ANSWER is indeed a communist front group (was Re: Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013) To: "perrysandy at aol.com" , "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" Date: Saturday, January 26, 2013, 3:59 AM I feel extremely annoyed about the fact the ANSWER Coalition is not a coalition at all and conceals its leadership by the Party for Socialism and Liberation (ie. a communist party). A group that is not honest enough to be upfront with who they are can be called a "front group" and that term is actually from the communists themselves, not Hoover (although Hoover certainly took it and fear mongered with it, no doubt).? The creation of front groups that hide their affiliation with the communist organizers is a very deliberate tactic that is widely and openly discussed among communist party strategists.? So I see no reason to avoid the term. ( for more on fronts see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_group). >From wikipedia re: the (communist) World Worker's Party and ANSWER: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers_World_Party In 2004,[21] the WWP suffered its most serious split when a few dozen members of WWP left to form the Party for Socialism and Liberation. The ANSWER coalition aligned itself with the PSL and Workers World Party then founded the Troops Out Now Coalition. The split included many of the top leaders of the WWP which included most of the membership of the WWP on the West Coast. Although I am not one I do not object to working with socialists and communists.? There are many folks of these persuasions within the Green Party. What I object to is dishonesty by people and groups who try to decieve others about their identity.? This is why I have such strong objections to ANSWER. For thes reasons I do not care about their opinion and I resent the way they constantly glom onto and hijack other group's events, such as the MLK march last Monday that I was at.? They've been showin up with their mass-manufactured pre-printed protest signs to the MLK march and other events that they had no hand in organizing and trying to use it as a platform for their own agenda.? If they want to organize their own events (and they do hold their own events, yes its true) then fine.? But don't go and try to dominate a civil rights march that others carefully constructed. Green is GO! Drew ? ~*~*~*~ Jill Stein for President -- A Green New Deal for America Campaign website:? http://www.jillstein.org/ ? ? First TV Ad?http://tinyurl.com/JillStein1stAd From: "perrysandy at aol.com" To: rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com; sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 4:52 PM Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 Hi Everyone, ? I have two cents to add to this discussion. ? 1) I think everyone, including Pete himself, would admit that his outburst was not constructive and did not help him win friends and influence people. To tell the truth, I can't remember exactly what he said or who he insulted, but I definitely remember it was not pretty. ? 2) I believe we were absolutely right to refuse to sponsor a debate between Pete and Sharat. I have been asked to work with a committee to help formulate plans for campaigns to build the Green Party, and IMHO hosting debates between different trends in the left or in the peace movement is definitely not the best way to bring in the masses. ? 3) I strongly object to labeling any group a "communist front group". This was a term developed by J. Edgar Hoover to discredit a whole generation of courageous Americans who fought for social justice in the 1930s, 40s, and 50s, led to the ugly purges of Hollywood and the AFL-CIO, and crippled progressive politics in America for eighty years.?Red-baiting has a nasty way of being turned around and used against us. Besides, I (and many of San Jose's best activists that I know) are very rose-colored ourselves, so I don't think this is a good road to go down. ? 4) I am not a member of ANSWER and do not agree with some of their positions (although I am not well-versed in them all). I have worked with John Bretton in the Hyatt boycott support work and have found him to be cordial, hard-working, and cooperative. If we have disagreements with a group I believe we should just leave it at that, agree to disagree, work together where possible and go our separate ways where not. ? Peace! ? ? Sandy -----Original Message----- From: Drew To: sosfbay discussion group Sent: Fri, Jan 25, 2013 12:20 am Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 Yes I never actually made a real proposal about the "no brainer" event endorsements, etc. -- I merely raised the question and so no of course I didn't reply to the conversation that followed. Also: 1) Note that at no point did anyone suggest we attempt to "raid" the Peace and Freedom Party member and at no point did anyone suggest we try to recruit them to the Green Party.? People we're only talking about inviting them to participate as allies. 2) I'm not sure anyone said that Pete was disrespectful of other's points of view, so I'm not sure where you (John) are getting that. However the problem I believe was that Pete's outburst where he implied that (newly joined Green Party member) Dr. Sharat Lin was an "imperialist" came across to many witnesses as being entirely unreasonable, illogical, without evidence, disruptive and entirely without merit..? That is not a way to win friends and influence people -- or frankly to demonstrate emotional safeness to be participating as a guest at Green Party events.? I don't think any of the rest of us Greens (besides maybe you John) had any doubt about Dr. Lin's credibility since after all he has a very long track record that many of us have observed, whereas we are unfamiliar with Pete.? In my opinion it was Pete that undermined his welcome by his loss of temper. And to the point that the communist party front group (that hides their affiliation) A.N.S.W.E.R. asserts that we should not criticize Iran -- who is A.N.S.W.E.R. anyway and why should anyone take such a rigid and doctrinaire tack.? That's not much different from progressive Dems who say we should not criticize President Obama because he's so much better than the Repuglicans.? Sorry I don't by the idea that any government is above criticism. Green is GO! Drew ~*~*~*~ Jill Stein for President -- A Green New Deal for America Campaign website:? http://www.jillstein.org/ ? ? First TV Ad?http://tinyurl.com/JillStein1stAd From: John Thielking To: Spencer Graves Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 10:46 PM Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 A few clarifications: ? When Drew proposed the County Council decision mechanism where if no one objects to a sponsorship proposal, it passes, both John and Spencer objected to that.? Spencer objected generally and John objected specifically citing how the default decision? making process was already attempted for the planning of the Iran-Syria talk and failed miserably. It was my understanding that the proposal WAS DROPPED after that discussion and is not now in force.? Drew and others were tasked with making more specific proposals regarding how to make the meetings better? I'm not sure. ? Post meeting discussions with Peace and Freedom Party member Pete O'Reilly yielded the following points and suggestions re: plans to "work with" the Peace and Freedom Party: ? 1) It is not good politics to raid the list of Peace and Freedom Party members and attempt to recruit them to join the Green Party. ? 2) Pete is well aware of opposing points of view and while he did raise his voice in a way that may only end up breeding contempt from people who don't share his point of view, he at no point sought to exclude Sharat Lin from the Iran-Syria talk.? So to say that he is disrespectful of other's points of view is accurate only from the point of having his voice raised and not from the words that came out of his mouth. You should take a step back and try to percieve the difference. Pete has heard Sharat Lin speak many times on many topics, but Sharat Lin has not heard Pete speak on anything yet.? Pete would like it better to have a debate with Sharat and Answer about Iran and Syria that is a serious debate, as was promissed awhile ago (before John and Drew's most recent attempt at organizing an event). ? John Thielking --- On Thu, 1/24/13, Spencer Graves wrote: From: Spencer Graves Subject: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 To: "John Thielking" Cc: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Thursday, January 24, 2013, 9:19 PM On 1/24/2013 9:10 AM, John Thielking wrote: This is now the final agenda.? I will print copies to bring to the meeting. ? John Thielking --- On Wed, 1/23/13, John Thielking wrote: From: John Thielking Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Draft Agenda For The GPSCC Meeting 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013 To: sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org Date: Wednesday, January 23, 2013, 6:24 PM ? Draft Agenda for Thursday, January 24, 2013 Green Party of Santa Clara County GA meeting to be held at San Jose Peace Center 48 S 7th St, San Jose, CA. Final Agenda will be published at 9AM Thursday. 7:00PM -7:30PM Arrive, socialize. Guest speaker Brian Good on: A. developing new technologies. 1. Many years I have been unhappy that there has been no high-tech reinvention of a Commodore 64, Texas Instruments 99, Radio Shack TRS-80, or Atari 800 that could plug into our TVs. 2. For many years I have wanted a belt-pack flash-drive video recorder so I can plug my flaky old mini-DV video cameras into a tapeless recorder. 3. Smart phone tech is bringing us a computing reinvention without Windows, without Apple, without Intel or AMD. It runs Linux, it's thumb-drive or credit card sized, it's cheap, and it's here. Google A10, A31, Raspberry Pi. B. third-generation California Disclose Act, SB52. Democrats hold 2/3 majorities in both Assembly and Senate so this year is likely to be the year we win. So join us! 7:30 Meeting begins. Identify facilitator: Jim Doyle note taker: Spencer time keeper: John Thielking vibes watcher: self monitoring and agenda preparer: Caroline for next meeting. 7:35 Introductions and announcements. Changes to agenda. Caroline, Drew:? Working on Brian Good, Jim Doyle, John Thielking, Spencer Graves:? Paul Rea, Newark:? Works with Sharat on a film series:? How to contact Greens near Newark?? **** (Drew can help make contact with other Greens in Alameda County)? (tri city area:? Newark, Union City, Fremont).? Ed Campbell.? Lives in Willow Glen, retired chiropractor, coach basketball.? Feb. 9:? Bowling for Columbine in Newark.? 7:50 treasurer's report. ????? $1,686.38? + $55 from November minus $50 to Secretary of State? Jim Doyle. Hat passing. * Propose that we invite the Jill Stein team to put on a Green Campaign School in our area.? Jim Doyle, Caroline ??? ??? *** Caroline to contact Jill Stein's team to get info about cost, etc., and post to the discussion list.? After we get the cost, we need to make a decision on whether, when, where.? Wellstone Foundation:? Feb. 8-9 (Friday noon to Saturday "Camp Wellstone" at Sequoia Retreat Center $30 - $100 (sliding scale) plus DeAnza tuition (2 credit units at DeAnza?)? Drew will attend.? How to facilitate a group?? Strategy for approaching a community?? See Drew's email on this on the discussion list 7:55 Report back on events that happened since the last meeting. Anti SS cuts protest in front of Lofgren's office, etc. ???? 8:00 invited speakers, criteria for. Sandy Perry, Jim Doyle ????? Currently, we have no criteria.? ????? Sandy:? Invite speakers related to on-going campaigns.? Campaigns:? Single Payer (Sandy, Caroline), DeAnza (Sandy, Drew), How does CA Single Payer differ from "Health Care for All"?? Campaign for a Healthy California is a coalition driven by nurses.? Health Care for All is their own organization, initiated in the 1990s.? Their drawback is mostly all white, ... .? ????? Caroline:? We also need "climate" and 350.org.? ????? Caroline, Sandy, Brian Jim, Spencer to form a committee to select topics for major campaigns:? phone conference?? Sandy has free conference calling.? Sandy to send email with suggested times.? 8:10 organised ongoing campaigns Jim Doyle, Sandy Perry 8:20 udel - unincorporated district elections e.g., school, water, and fire districts Jim Doyle ????? Jim will bring the list of elections to the next elections.? Unincorporated districts come up in odd years.? 8:30 web site improvements Jim Doyle ??? ? Drew has already studied CiviCRM by Campaign Foundations, built on Drupal:? Also need training on CMS (Content Management System) Drupal(?) 8:35 making meetings interesting, efficient, and enjoyable Jim Doyle, Drew Johnson ????? Starting to invite speakers.? Good.? ????? We operate too much as a committee as a whole.? We would be better, Drew believes, if we came together, broke into committees, and then came back together.? ????? Sponsorship of events should be delegated to the County Council.? ????? We could use Google Hangout to make our meetings virtual, so people can attend without traveling.? ????? The exercise should be fun, energizing and productive.? ????? Drew to propose more material and send to the email list and report a summary at the next meeting.? ????? For sponsorship, Drew suggests it gets posted and it passes if no one objects.? 8:50 establishing a social media committee Jim Doyle 8:55 recruiting with emphasis on females Jim Doyle ????? Betsy Wolf-Graves is now on the County Council.? 9:00 Obtaining other people for the County Council and to represent Santa Clara County on the statewide Standing General Assembly. Santa Clara County is allowed 5 representatives on the statewide Standing General Assembly. We currently have only 3. John Thielking is currently not on that list; we should put him on. That would bring us to 4, consisting entirely of our current County Council. Drew noted that our County Council is currently all male. Number 7 of the 10 key values of the Green Party is "Feminism and Gender Equity" (www.gp.org/tenkey.php). We could use some females. John Thielking and Betsy Wolf-Graves will be added to the "sga".? * Endorse California Disclose Act (Brian), SB52.? Approved.? Brian to provide us with the info on what we have to do to get listed as an official endorser.? 9:05 PROPOSED: The Green Party of Santa Clara County will endorse the presentation of the movie "Enemy Alien" at the Peace Center, Saturday evening, March 23. Spencer DISCUSSION: "Enemy Alien" is a documentary describing the persecution of a Palestinian-American, Farouk Abdel-Muhti, essentially for being Palestinian and refusing to remain silent. The film was produced by a Japanese American, Konrad Aderer, whose parents had spent World War II in a concentration camp in the US (www.lifeorliberty.org/enemy-alien). The South Bay Committee Against Political Repression is organizing a presentation of this movie to be followed by a panel discussion featuring a Japanese-American and an Arab-American. 9:10 Proposal to invite Peace and Freedom people to participate in our meetings and events. Caroline ????? Add to discussion of "on-going campaigns".? 9:15 There is also a Latino activity going on on Friday that I will send you details of so it can go on the agenda as well. Caroline 9:20 propose a doing a cost benefit analysis of how we can make use of a new voters list. Jim Doyle Endorse:? Dalit Baum presentation, Feb. 15.? 9:30 Meeting ends. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss _______________________________________________ sosfbay-discuss mailing list sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com Sat Jan 26 21:29:32 2013 From: rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com (Drew) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 21:29:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] ANSWER is indeed a communist front group (was Re: Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013) Message-ID: <1359264572.67682.androidMobile@web125402.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> John no you misunderstood me. I am talking about the march i was at on Monday for MLK day in SF. I go most years and and whenever there's been a march ANSWER is there hijacking media and people's attention with their signs and aggressive surveys and proselytization. I've seen it firsthand for years now. But they never are honest and come out and Isay they are really the PSL in disguise and not a "coalition" at all. BTW MoveOn is a front group for the Democrats. I do not appreciate them either for the same reason. Front groups are not uncommon, but since they deceitfully conceal their affiliation that approach is unacceptable to me unless there were no other way (such as in a totalitarian regime).? Deceit as a tactic is not okay with me and therefore I do not think the Green Party should do any activities enabling ANSWER. They will just hijacking our work. No thanks. And I never said anything about PSL vs ANSWER -- I said they ARE ANSWER. Green is GO! Drew Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com Sat Jan 26 22:15:49 2013 From: rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com (Drew) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 22:15:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GPSCC-chat] ANSWER is indeed a communist front group (was Re: Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013) Message-ID: <1359267349.30087.androidMobile@web125406.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> To point out the true nature of a group is they are a front organization for a communist party is not "red baiting" when it is simply a statement of fact. As I stated before I work with and respect socialists and communists (indeed it would be challenging not to given that there's a significant number of Greens that self identify as such). What I can't abide by is concealing the nature of a group's as ANSWER does (and MoveOn does as a Dem. front group). Green is GO! Drew Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com Sat Jan 26 22:23:48 2013 From: spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com (Spencer Graves) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 22:23:48 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] ANSWER is indeed a communist front group (was Re: Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013) In-Reply-To: <1359264572.67682.androidMobile@web125402.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1359264572.67682.androidMobile@web125402.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5104C7F4.5010401@structuremonitoring.com> Hi, John: Regarding the Greens contacting Peace & Freedom people: I think the Green and Peace & Freedom parties should collaborate to develop a joint list of candidates for offices so we never compete head to head. Jim Doyle got a list of all the registered voters in Santa Clara County last May 30. The party preference categories with over 1,000 in that list were as follows: * Democrat 341,611 * No party preference 212,636 * Republican 174,102 * American Independent 15,151 * Green 4,112 * Libertarian 4,057 * Peace & Freedom 1,800 There were 21 other parties, 4 of which had only 1 registered voter each. The Communist Party had 2. There were NONE with PSL / Party for Socialism and Liberation. The platforms of the Green and Peace & Freedom parties are closer to each other than to any of the other top 7 parties in Santa Clara county, I think. We need to find a way to agree to disagree agreeably on points where we differ and collaborate effectively on issues of common concern. Best Wishes, Spencer ############## On 1/26/2013 9:29 PM, Drew wrote: > John no you misunderstood me. I am talking about the march i was at on Monday for MLK day in SF. I go most years and and whenever there's been a march ANSWER is there hijacking media and people's attention with their signs and aggressive surveys and proselytization. I've seen it firsthand for years now. But they never are honest and come out and Isay they are really the PSL in disguise and not a "coalition" at all. > > BTW MoveOn is a front group for the Democrats. I do not appreciate them either for the same reason. > > Front groups are not uncommon, but since they deceitfully conceal their affiliation that approach is unacceptable to me unless there were no other way (such as in a totalitarian regime). Deceit as a tactic is not okay with me and therefore I do not think the Green Party should do any activities enabling ANSWER. They will just hijacking our work. No thanks. > > And I never said anything about PSL vs ANSWER -- I said they ARE ANSWER. > > Green is GO! > > Drew > > > > Sent from Yahoo! Mail on Android > > > > > _______________________________________________ > sosfbay-discuss mailing list > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss -- Spencer Graves, PE, PhD President and Chief Technology Officer Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. 751 Emerson Ct. San Jos?, CA 95126 ph: 408-655-4567 web: www.structuremonitoring.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tnharter at aceweb.com Sat Jan 26 22:32:33 2013 From: tnharter at aceweb.com (Tian Harter) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 22:32:33 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] ANSWER is indeed a communist front group (was Re:Fw: GPSCC Meeting minutes -- 7PM Thursday, Jan 24, 2013) In-Reply-To: <1359267349.30087.androidMobile@web125406.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1359267349.30087.androidMobile@web125406.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5104CA01.4060302@aceweb.com> Ummm.... Move On started out as an independent group, but they were captured by the Democrats. They just got plowed under by the need for money and the large lists that the Dems have to work with. It happens. Tian On 01/26/2013 10:15 PM, Drew wrote: > > To point out the true nature of a group is they are a front > organization for a communist party is not "red baiting" when it is > simply a statement of fact. As I stated before I work with and respect > socialists and communists (indeed it would be challenging not to given > that there's a significant number of Greens that self identify as > such). What I can't abide by is concealing the nature of a group's as > ANSWER does (and MoveOn does as a Dem. front group). > > Green is GO! > > Drew > -- Tian http://tian.greens.org Latest change: Added pictures and words from my Dad's funeral. The Kiwi Green pin I got in Baltimore is now on a 1998 quarter. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spencer.graves at prodsyse.com Sun Jan 27 18:15:58 2013 From: spencer.graves at prodsyse.com (Spencer Graves) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 18:15:58 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Fwd: Re: [gpca-forum] Campaign School In-Reply-To: <74CFD406-9A43-435A-AF8C-CDEA8B67CB0E@yahoo.com> References: <74CFD406-9A43-435A-AF8C-CDEA8B67CB0E@yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5105DF5E.2090307@prodsyse.com> Hello, All: Please mark your calendars: * The Northern California Greens will meet in San Francisco April 13 and 14. The 13th is a general meeting (GA?). The 14th will be a Jill Stein Campaign School. * The statewide General Assembly will occur June 22-23 in Napa. Please see below for a few other details. Best Wishes, Spencer -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [gpca-forum] Campaign School Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 18:07:57 -0800 From: Tim Laidman To: Spencer Graves CC: Marnie Glickman , GPCA Forum The dates were just set at the January 19th CC retreat for the Gatherings and Stein campaign participation. The GA will happen June 22-23 in Napa. There will be announcements made. The southern gathering is April 6-7 and the northern gathering is April 13-14. Tim Sent from my iPhone On Jan 27, 2013, at 4:30 PM, Spencer Graves wrote: > "... on Sunday, April 14th! The all-day event will follow the Northern California State Gathering on Saturday, April 13th." > > > Will there be a General Assembly in San Francisco, April 13? > > > Spencer > > > On 1/27/2013 3:22 PM, Marnie Glickman wrote: >> The Stein campaign is advertising campaign schools in California and we've >> heard nothing about them from the CC. >> >> http://www.jillstein.org/events >> >> What's the story? >> >> Marnie Glickman >> Marin County >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> gpca-forum mailing list >> gpca-forum at cagreens.org >> http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/gpca-forum > > > -- > Spencer Graves, PE, PhD > President and Chief Technology Officer > Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc. > 751 Emerson Ct. > San Jos?, CA 95126 > ph: 408-655-4567 > web: www.structuremonitoring.com > _______________________________________________ > gpca-forum mailing list > gpca-forum at cagreens.org > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/gpca-forum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 28 17:59:19 2013 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 17:59:19 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] UDEL elections Message-ID: <51072CF7.3090008@sbcglobal.net> Here is an edited version of the Registrar of Voters schedule of UDEL elections held in November of odd numbered years. If we wish to present cndidates this year these are the places to do that. SANTA CLARA COUNTY LOCAL JURISDICTION ELECTION SCHEDULE SCHEDULED LOCAL ELECTIONS BY ELECTION TYPE UDEL CITIES: CUPERTINO ? + means spending limits SUNNYVALE SPECIAL DISTRICTS: ALDERCROFT HEIGHTS COUNTY WATER BURBANK SANITARY LION?S GATE COMMUNITY SERVICES SAN MARTIN COUNTY WATER SILVER CREEK VALLEY CC GHAD SOUTH S.C. VALLEY MEMORIAL WEST BAY SANITARY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS CUPERTINO UNION ORCHARD SUNNYVALE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTS: PATTERSON JOINT STANISLAUS COUNTY BD. OF EDUCATION ? CITIES WITH CAMPAIGN SPENDING LIMITS. * TRUSTEES MUST LIVE IN TRUSTEE AREA & ARE VOTED ON BY TRUSTEE AREA VOTERS ** TRUSTEES MUST LIVE IN TRUSTEE AREA & ARE VOTED ON ?AT LARGE? I used http://convertpdftoword.net/ to convert the pdf file to a word document which I then edited to show only the UDEL portion. The original pdf filecame froom the registrar of voters web site at *http://tinyurl.com/akj8m7l *The original pdf file's url is http://www.sccgov.org/sites/rov/Candidate%20-%20Measure%20Information/Documents/Local-Jurisdiction-Election-Schedule.pdf From gerrygras at earthlink.net Wed Jan 30 20:12:06 2013 From: gerrygras at earthlink.net (Gerry Gras) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 20:12:06 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Global Warming Events & News Message-ID: <5109EF16.4090201@earthlink.net> FYI, ===================== Events: [350.org now has at least 2 local groups in the SF Bay Area, one is centered around SF / Oakland, the other is centered around Mountain View] ------- Sa 2/2 350 Silicon Valley Climate Action Meeting (San Jose Area): http://www.350bayarea.org/350_silicon_valley_climate_action_meeting_san_jose_area ------- Tu 2/5 350 Silicon Valley Climate Action Meeting (Palo Alto Area): http://www.350bayarea.org/350_silicon_valley_climate_action_meeting_palo_alto_area ------- 2/17 Climate Rallies in DC, SF, and elsewhere: DC: http://350.org/ DC: http://act.350.org/signup/presidentsday SF: http://www.350bayarea.org/ SF: http://www.350bayarea.org/forward_on_climate_bay_area_rally ===================== News: About a week ago there was a news item saying that 53 US Senators sent a letter to Obama in support of the Keystone XL pipeline: http://www.sfgate.com/news/texas/article/53-senators-urge-approval-of-Keystone-XL-pipeline-4215772.php The article below contains the letter and a list of signers. Boxer and Feinstein did not sign it. http://fuelfix.com/blog/2013/01/23/53-senators-push-obama-to-approve-keystone-xl/ ===================== Gerry From j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 30 22:10:36 2013 From: j.m.doyle at sbcglobal.net (Jim Doyle) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:10:36 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Honduras happenings Message-ID: <510A0ADC.4000907@sbcglobal.net> I received this notice from the San Jose Peace Center. *People's Victory in Honduras* ** Wednesday February 6-th 7:30 pm Kirsch Center -- De Anza College *21250 Stevens Creek Blvd Cupertino * * * In the aftermath of the U.S. backed coup of June 2009, a massive popular resistance has arisen in Honduras. The National Popular Resistance Front has successfully united farm workers, urban laborers, including teachers, feminists, militant youth, LBGT, and environmentalists. Thousands mobilized daily in the streets. Most recently they organized an electoral wing, the Libre Party, which broke the two-party electoral monopoly in the national primary elections. Note: Use the De Anza College South Entrance to access the Kirsch Center, building KC218. This event is sponsored by Honduran Solidarity Network Delegation, Bay Area Latin American Solidarity Committee, Human Agenda, Kirsch Center for Environmental Studies, National Front of Popular Resistance, and San Jose Peace and Justice Center. From snug.bug at hotmail.com Thu Jan 31 22:01:17 2013 From: snug.bug at hotmail.com (Brian Good) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 22:01:17 -0800 Subject: [GPSCC-chat] Introducing Cutski Bear Message-ID: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dn1Xgmh2xuw&feature=youtu.be Due to an extremely difficult budget environment, all University of California mascots have been terminated. In this time of sacrifice, we have implemented the most effective, cost-saving solution. Regards, -The UC Regents -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: