|
Want to support
this website?
Make
your tax-deductible
donation here:
|
| VIDEO AND PHOTOS |
| Arlington
West |
| Dogg Daze
|
Graffiti
Gallery
|
SOV
Photo Gallery
|
POP-TV
has a new
Cable
TV Internship
See
Buddy Clark
to
Sign up for free
Media
Internships
310-266-9465
Fax
310-401-0274
email
|
| COOL LINKS
|
| Anti-War Radio |
| Current TV |
| Deep Eddy |
| 1st Amendment |
| Free Press |
| Free Speech Radio |
| Free
Speech TV |
| Hotmall |
|
|
| VENICE BEACH |
| About Us Now |
| Beachhead |
| Beach Cam |
| Councilmember |
| Drum
Circle |
| GRVNC |
|
History |
| Hostels |
| Rec
& Parks |
| SOV
Blog |
|
SOV
Petition |
| SOV News
Group |
| Surf
Report |
| Venice Forum |
| Venice
Paper |
HBO:
Is American
democracy safe in the age of computers?
This
cautionary film
looks at the very real risk of hackers altering vote counts in public
elections exposing the vulnerability of computers which count
approximately 80% of US votes in county, state and federal elections.
Filmed in 2004-05, this documentary tells the story of Bev Harris, a
Seattle publicist/writer whose watchdog group uncovered evidence of
mishandled voting records and suspicious voting
machine malfunctions. Harris' crusade took the group --
consisting
of computer experts, activists and political candidates from both
parties -- from her home computer (where she found a computer system
blueprint accidentally made public) to Tallahassee, FL for a
"mini-election" that proved just how easy it is to hack the vote.
© HBO
Criminal
Records Erased by Courts
Live to Tell Tales
by Adam Liptak NY
Times
In
41 states,
people accused or convicted of crimes have the legal right to rewrite
history. They can have their criminal records expunged, and in theory
that means that all trace of their encounters with the justice system
will disappear. But enormous commercial databases are fast undoing the
societal bargain of expungement, one that used to give people who had
committed minor crimes a clean slate and a fresh start. Most states
seal at least some records of juvenile offenses. Many states also allow
adults arrested for or convicted of minor crimes like possessing
marijuana, shoplifting or disorderly conduct to ask a judge, sometimes
after a certain amount of time has passed without further trouble, to
expunge their records. If the judge agrees, the records are destroyed
or sealed.
But
real expungement is becoming significantly harder to accomplish in
the electronic age. Records once held only in paper form by law
enforcement agencies, courts and corrections departments are now
routinely digitized and sold in bulk to the private sector. Some
commercial databases now contain more than 100 million criminal
records. They are updated only fitfully, and expunged records now often
turn up in criminal background checks ordered by employers and
landlords.
Thomas
A.
Wilder, the
district clerk for Tarrant County in Fort Worth, said he had received
harsh criticism for refusing, on principle, to sell criminal history
records in bulk. "How
the hell do I expunge anything," Mr.Wilder asked
"if I sell
tapes and disks all over the country?" Private database
companies say they are diligent in updating their records to
reflect later expungement of criminal records.
But
lawyers, judges
and experts in criminal justice say it is common for people to lose
jobs and housing over information in databases that courts have ordered
expunged. These critics say that even the biggest vendors do not always
update their records promptly and thoroughly and that many smaller ones
use outdated, incomplete and sometimes inaccurate data.
Lida
Rodriguez-Taseff, a lawyer in Miami, tells her clients that expungement
is a waste of time. "To
tell someone their record is gone is essentially to lie to them,"
Ms.
Rodriguez- Taseff said. "In
an electronic age, people should understand that once they have been
convicted or arrested that will never go away."
Judge Stanford
Blake, whose court often enters
expungement orders, said his inability to make them effective had left
him feeling frustrated and helpless.
"It's a horrible situation,"
said Blake, administrative judge of the criminal division of
the Eleventh Circuit Court in Miami. "It's the ultimate Big Brother,
always watching you." The rise in the
availability of criminal
histories
has been accompanied by a surge in demand for them. Since the attacks
of Sept. 11, 2001, criminal background checks have become routine in
many employment applications. "Something
like 80 percent of
large- or medium-sized employers now do checks,"
said Debbie A. Mukamal, the director of the Prisoner Reentry Institute
at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York. "Employers
need to know about job-related convictions to make a
nuanced, responsible decision so that they can protect themselves and
the public
and give people a fair shot at employment." But the current
system, Ms. Mukamal added, is
not working."It's unfettered,"she
said. "It's not
regulated. There’s misinformation."
ChoicePoint,
one of the
larger database companies, performed nine
million background checks
last year, said Matt Furman, a spokesman. The company's error rate is
very small, Mr. Furman said. "One
out of every thousand background checks has led to a consumer contact
disputing or complaining about the information provided”,
he said "and one of a
thousand contacts results in a change."
There have been only a few lawsuits taking issue with the information
provided to employers in background checks.
In
one, filed in June in
federal court in Brooklyn, Victor Guevares sued a company that had
offered him a job and a database company that he says caused the offer
to be withdrawn. Mr. Guevares, now 33, was convicted of disorderly
conduct more than a decade ago. New
York considers that violation
like a traffic infraction rather than a crime and bars database
companies from reporting such offenses to employers. But Acxiom, a
database company, reported the disorderly conduct charges to the Tyco
Healthcare Group, which had offered Mr. Guevares a job in 2004. Tyco
promptly withdrew the offer, one that would have doubled Mr. Guevares's
salary, to $46,000. It based its decision, his lawsuit says, on its
mistaken understanding that he had committed a misdemeanor and had lied
on his application about whether he had ever been "convicted of any crime which
was not expunged or sealed by a court."
Catherine H. O'Neill, a lawyer with the Legal Action Center, which
represents Mr. Guevares, said Acxiom deserved much of the blame. "They should not have been
vacuuming up this information in the first place," Ms.
O'Neill said. A lawyer for Acxiom and a spokesman for Tyco declined to
comment.
There
is
often plenty of
fault to go around. Even within the government, various agencies often
fail to coordinate their records. "The
problem often arises,"
said Ms. Rodriguez- Taseff, the Miami lawyer, "because
so many agencies have access to criminal records: the department of
corrections, the police, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and
the courts. Even though you have an expunged record, oftentimes a
policing agency or a corrections facility allows private entities to
gain access to it." Some state laws place the
burden on
employers, on the apparent theory that the problem is not the
availability of information but the use to which it is put. Illinois,
for instance, prohibits prospective employers from asking about or
making decisions based on expunged or sealed criminal histories.
Margaret
Colgate Love, the nation's pardon attorney for most of the
1990's and the author of a new book called "Relief from the Collateral
Consequences of a Criminal Conviction," said problems like
these were rooted in the nature of expungement. "It does reveal,"
Ms. Love said, "how
perilous it is to build a public policy on a lie."
©
New York Times
Peace
Prize to Pioneer of Loans to Poor No Bank Would Touch By Celia W. Dugger
A Bangladeshi economist,
Muhammad Yunus, and the bank he founded 30 years ago won the Nobel Peace
Prize yesterday for pioneering work in giving tiny loans to millions of
poor people no commercial bank would touch destitute
widows and abandoned wives, landless laborers and rickshaw drivers, sweepers and
beggars. © Pavel
Rahman AP
The Nobel Committee praised Mr.
Yunus, 66, and the Grameen Bank for making microcredit, as the loans
are called, a practical solution to combating rural poverty in
Bangladesh and inspiring similar schemes across the developing world.
"Microcredit has proved to be an
important liberating force in societies where women in
particular have to struggle against repressive social and economic
conditions," the committee said in announcing the prize. Mr. Yunus has long been an
influential champion of the idea that even the most impoverished people
have the drive and creativity to build
small businesses with loans as
small as $12, and Grameen Bank has dedicated itself to helping the
poorest of the poor. The borrowers used the money to
buy milk-giving cows, or bamboo to craft stools, or yarn to weave
into stoles, or incense to sell in stalls, among myriad other
money -making schemes. Full
story ©
NY Times
|
|
Divisive
New Lawsuit on Behalf of Venice Food Not
Bombs Excludes Key Activists
by Barbara Peck
According
to Maya Meinert of the Santa Monica Daily Press:
“A federal lawsuit filed on October 16 against the city of
Los
Angeles claims that the city’s most recent amendment to an
ordinance that restricts activity on the Venice Beach boardwalk is
unconstitutional, claiming it violates both the 1st and 14th
Amendments. Attorney Carol Sobel, president of the Los Angeles National
Lawyers Guild, filed the suit on behalf of Venice Beach boardwalk
“Free Speech Zone” activists. The Free Speech Zone
was
created to give artists, organizations and other individuals a space to
perform their activities on Ocean Front Walk.”
Glaringly absent from the list of plaintiffs on the new lawsuit is
musician/artist/activist, Ibrahim Butler (above), among others, who was
left to fend off ‘assaults’ by LAPD without any
legal
advice or support. In spite of the fact that many of his encounters
were video-taped by Calvin Moss, (seen above taping an incident in
2005) and Peggy Lee Kennedy, of Venice Food Not Bombs and allegedly
handed over to Carol Sobel, he and many others have been excluded. What
Maya fails to mention is that many “Free Speech
Zone” (FSZ)
activists were excluded from this and a previous lawsuit, filed on July
8, 2005, despite being on the frontlines of resistance and undergoing
systematic mistreatment at the hands of LAPD and the City
Attorney’s office since March 1st, 2005. This, in contrast to
Peggy Lee Kennedy and Calvin Moss, who spent a few hours on the
boardwalk with their VFNB feeding program on Sundays, often requesting
incident reports and tickets from battle-worn
“expressionists” to give to Carol Sobel.
Despite the
large number of videos, incident reports and tickets handed in from
March 1, 2005 onwards and in spite of the fact that some incidents
involved blatant harassment, intimidation, discrimination, false arrest
and serious 1st Amendment violations, they were ignored. Instead, Carol
Sobel gave legal counsel to Peggy Lee Kennedy, Calvin Moss and
"friends" only, all the while exploiting what has become a volatile and
potentially dangerous situation for those still involved in the
struggle. Many continue to live in fear of reprisals from LAPD on the
boardwalk, with no legal support and none in sight.
Several
of these “Free Speech Zone” (FSZ)
“expressionists”, whose involvement in this issue
dates as
far back as the 1960s, in some cases, are understandably upset. While
they have put themselves, physically, mentally and emotionally on the
line to defend our collective First Amendment rights, it appears that
Carol Sobel and VFNB have blindly missed a significant opportunity to
unite all concerned under the banner of the First Amendment, rather
than divide. FSZ artist/activists, who spent countless hours over the
past 18 months going to court, facing harassment and intimidation by
Rec. & Parks monitors, LAPD and City Prosecutors, tried in vain
to
find legal assistance. They approached Carol Sobel, John Raphling
(ex-public defender and attorney on the new lawsuit), the ACLU, Yagman
and Yagman, among others; but were ignored. Yet, two of the plaintiffs
on the new lawsuit: James Lafferty, of the National Lawyers Guild and
Wayne Keenan, a “musician”,
are included solely by virtue of the fact that they are “unwilling to risk
citation or arrest” and “fear that they will
be cited and/or arrested”,
but not for actually going out there and exercising their First
Amendment Rights on the boardwalk! What about those who were
not
afraid and who did get cited and/or arrested? Perhaps they were afraid
but went out there anyway because they wanted to defend the
Constitutional rights of everyone
on the boardwalk, not just a 'chosen few'. Surely, this free
speech issue is broader than a few individuals’ freedoms?
Isn’t it about the fundamental Constitutional right of all
people
to participate in First Amendment protected activities in a public
forum? Whether visitor or vendor, without interference from the
government.
Reliable sources have revealed that some
‘stakeholders’ on
the boardwalk are unhappy with Carol Sobel’s lawsuit, having
written letters of complaint recently to the City. As a
result of
these complaints, L.A. City will be summoning the letter-writers as
witnesses and have approached artist/filmmaker, Aaron Waugh, creator
of “Battle
for the Boardwalk”
to use his movie as ‘evidence’ against the lawsuit.
Sources
also report that a $100,000 settlement was made for damages in the
previous lawsuit (July, 2005) with the lion’s share going for
attorney fees to Carol Sobel.
Often, people who are not personally involved in the boardwalk issue do
not understand the broader dynamic of what has taken place
historically. There would have been no need for a permit/lottery system
if LAPD had continued to enforce the “no commercial
vending” section of LAMC 42.15 by simply removing ALL
commercial
vendors (as they did following the 1993 amendment until approximately
1995). Instead, commercial vending was condoned and allowed
to
proliferate in the guise of “religious
freedom” and “free speech”,
causing congestion which led, ultimately, to conflict: resulting in new
FSZ “regulations”
created by the City Attorney’s office, L.A. City Council and
Rec.
& Parks. They turned a blind eye to the problem from
1995
until March 25, 2006, neglecting to uphold LAMC 42.15 and allowing
commercial vending in the Free Speech Zone, a public forum. In addition
and most egregious of all, the City failed to protect and uphold the
First Amendment of the United States Constitution
© Barbara Peck
(If you agree with this, please sign our Boardwalk
Petition which we intend to give to Bill Rosendahl for
Christmas!).
The
Lawsuit by Therese Dietlin
I
have just read the Lawsuit filed by Carol Sobel, Sharon Robinson and
John Raphling, Attorneys for the Plaintiffs Venice Food Not Bombs, Lani
Ware, James Lafferty, Wayne Kennan and William Greenslade, vs the City
of Los Angeles, a municipal corporation. These are my
comments, perhaps with more to come at a later date. Right
now, I am overwhelmed with shock at the betrayal of the Venice
Boardwalk Resistors illustrated in this lawsuit.
First: Let
me call your attention to the characterization of the City of Los
Angeles as a “municipal corporation”. I
direct you to George French's article in this newsletter for more on
that and its implications.
Second:
Let me comment on the Lafferty claim. First, I am a
resistor. I have been since the matter of the
“lottery” first came up in public
discourse. Unlike 99% of the “resistors,”
I
remained a resistor and have not joined the Lottery. I put my
‘politically incorrect’ material out every Sunday.
I intend to continue putting my ‘politically
incorrect’ material out every Sunday until I am carried away
or the need to put out ‘politically incorrect’
material disappears. I hope and pray for the latter rather than the
former. Carol Sobel was directed to me because I had been
ticketed for having my stuff on display in a “designated
space” between sunset and 12 noon after being told by the
police that, with the new and improved ordinance, I could no longer use
the non-designated space I had occupied for over two years.
My conversation with Ms. Sobel focused on whether I had been told I
could not display my materials because I hadn't created them
myself. I have not. Nor is it likely that LAPD
would commit such a flagrant abuse. Ms. Sobel repeated that
question several times. Then she said she was filing a
lawsuit and would I be a plaintiff. I agreed, if it would be
helpful to those opposed to the lottery. She already had my
incident report. After weeks of silence, I learn that she did
not want me as a plaintiff because I had not been stopped from
displaying my materials. Instead she chose Jim Lafferty,
whose charge is that he is “afraid” that he will
not be able to sell books promoting the case for impeachment. Let's
consider Jim Lafferty for a moment. He, like Carol Sobel, is
a member of the National Lawyers Guild. As such, he serves regularly as
a legal observer in local marches and rallies. When the
lottery was first instituted, I contacted Jim via email, explaining the
situation and asking him if he or another member of the National
Lawyers Guild would be willing to take up the matter on First Amendment
grounds. The request met with silence. Perhaps he
was afraid already then! If fear was what Carol Sobel was
looking for, I could have honestly told her that I am very leery now
about putting my materials out before noon precisely because I am
concerned that they will be confiscated, as were Bill's items and
Ibrahim's art. I operate on a shoestring, with donations, and
confiscation of my materials would result in significant
hardship. So I now restrict my early display to things that,
if taken, would not represent a great loss. If fear is what
keeps Jim Lafferty from coming to the Boardwalk, he had only to speak
to the resistors who could have cued him in about the situation
there.
Third:
More troubling than this, though, is the failure of the lawsuit to
address the lottery itself. Instead, it focuses on peoples'
fears about what can be displayed or how much sound can be generated,
on vague complaints about definitions of terms, on ambiguous wording in
the ordinance, on a host of issues that would simply disappear with the
elimination of the lottery and the rigorous implementation of
restriction on commercial vending. The lawsuit contains some
notable errors, to wit: the permit fee is a single lifetime
fee, not annual as stated. People with permits often do NOT
attend the lottery drawing as it maintains they must, but call and
reserve a space on the Boardwalk; a practice that the resistors
strenuously object to - so far without effect. Ms. Sobel
would have learned this readily if she had spoken to just about anyone
on the Boardwalk when she toured. The statute of limitations
for citations of alleged violations of the ordinance is one year, and
as far as I am aware, not one of the citations has been dismissed
following a hearing, as claimed. This lawsuit, unfortunately, would
only validate the very ordinance that true free expressionists are
claiming is unconstitutional. These are the grounds that
challenges have to be made on. Anything less does not serve
anyone. © Therese Dietlin
The Year
2016 On Venice Boardwalk
by Bill Greenslade
It is a beautiful summer morning as I step out of my beautiful
$10,000,000.00 studio/art/loft/condo on the corner of Rose and the
Boardwalk. I am heading for Starbucks for my morning caramel, vanilla,
mint chocolate low-fat soy latte dry. Should I go to the one
on
Dudley or perhaps the one on sunset, or Westminster? Actually
I
feel like walking. I’ll head for the Windward
store. Oops,
mustn’t forget to call General Bowser and have him remove
that
damned guitar player from in front of my door. I can’t wait
for
the new system that LAPD will be installing for controlling the
boardwalk. It is called the F.E.E.S. The entire Boardwalk will be
monitored and laser transmitted images will go directly to General
Bowser’s office, (I understand for old time sake he has a
special
chair that he uses and it is modeled after his old ATV) From his chair
the General can observe anyone who might be three inches over the line
or perhaps a real violator at a foot over the line. At the push of a
button the perpetrator and all of their property will be
beamed
immediately into the proper jail. A very quick clean and efficient
method of controlling what used to be legal constitutional activity.
Technology for better living! What would we do with out it?
My
family is coming to visit and I plan on taking them to the new Park and
Rec. theatre in the round, they have a great 3D movie of the drum
circle with a virtual sunset, all in the comfort of a vibrating lounge
chair. The monitors there are very courteous. There are a
series
of smaller theatres where one can experience on small wide screens “The Real Venice
Beach”
in surround sound. You experience the likes of Huba-Huba, The Fireman,
Ricky the juggler - again all in the comfort of a comfortable climate
controlled environment ?????? ©
Bill Greenslade
Hawaii Court Restrains Health
Dept. TB Skin-Testing: Student Wins Religious Freedom and School
Access by
Jackie Lindenbach
 Hilo HI - A
Judeo-Christian minister’s daughter won her
freedom to return to public school today by order of the Third Circuit
Court of Hawaii after being expelled for more than a month. The
14 year-old was ordered to home school by health officials due
to her
family’s religious conviction to abstain from TB skin testing
and vaccinations. The restraining order, which has
an immediate effect on the Dept. of Health and Dept. of Education in
Hawaii, sends a message nationally. The final outcome of the case may
set an American precedent as a victory for religious freedom and body
sovereignty.
Alena
N. Horowitz, a straight “A” student, Varsity
athlete, and author of a children’s book extolling the
virtues of love and natural healing, was effectively
“quarantined” from Hilo High School in early
September for failing to comply with the State’s TB skin
testing mandate. The expulsion violated several state and federal laws
according to the meritorious complaint scheduled for preliminary
hearing on October 12. Like Rowe vs. Wade, the outcome
of this controversial action may set a national precedent restoring
choice and religious freedoms increasingly violated or restricted
nationally by health department officials that demand TB skin tests and
vaccinations for employment or school admission. Two Hilo judges excused
themselves for potential conflicts before Judge Elizabeth A. Strance
ordered Dept. of Health officials and school administrators to cease
harming the student while the case moves through the courts.
The
student “is
sustaining immediate and irreparable injury, loss, damage
and such would be continuing in nature by being kept from classes and
activities,” Judge Strance wrote. “Said injury is
irreparable given the nature of the educational process which requires
timely completion of assignments and examinations, the increasing
nature of the burden over time, the importance of attendance for full
learning opportunity, and that there appears an inadequate remedy at
law.” “It is
further ordered that defendants desist and refrain from denying
admission to Alena N. Horowitz to Hilo High School classroom and
extracurricular activities,” the order stated.
The
court’s decision may help determine how far health officials
can go in curtailing civil rights and religious freedoms while
administering to public health risks in an age of bioterrorism and
threatened outbreaks. In Hawaii, TB skin testing has
been mandatory only for secular students for a decade. This entire time
authorities have misrepresented the threat of an outbreak, and claimed
no religious exemptions exist for the TB test. To the contrary, state
laws evidence allowable religious exemptions and, in fact, TB levels
statewide have remained nearly the same low risk level since the
legislation took effect in 1996.
“If
there truly was an imminent danger of a TB epidemic on the Big Island
of Hawaii then officials are additionally negligent,”
Dr.
Leonard Horowitz, Alena’s father said. “Health
officials are required by law to provide weekly reports on a proclaimed
outbreak, or lift their quarantines within 72 hours. We
weren’t given any notice, never anything in writing, and
their quarantine has been illegally in effect for more than a
month.”
Alena was
certified "TB free" by her medical doctor last spring, but was forced
from school anyway by Hilo, Hawaii’s Health Department
Director, Judy Akamine because of the lacking TB test. Akamine
disallowed all possible alternatives to the skin test including chest
x-rays, sputum analysis, and a new blood test deemed superior by
federal authorities. According to the family’s attorneys,
Akamine’s actions violated several state and federal laws by
denying the student’s boni fide religious exemption from the
test. The test is obviously a form of “medical
examination” legally considered an “immunization”
by the State’s clear
definitions. Both require health officials to honor religious
exemptions according to a half dozen State laws.
Akamine
and other
officials had routinely claimed that TB skin testing was not an
“immunization,” but a careful review
of their own
“Administrative Rules” book evidences otherwise.
The plantiffs’ attorneys say that officials misrepresented
clear definitions, were grossly negligence in dishonoring legislated
religious rights, and criminally liable for breaking laws considered a
felony under State statutes. Akamine rejected
the Administrative Rules governing health officials’ behavior
when Dr. Horowitz brought these laws to her attention. She told him she
didn’t understand the laws, and then referred the matter to
the State’s attorney general’s office. There the
decision was made to force the teen’s home
schooling. “This is
a great civics lesson for Alena and our community,”
said
plaintiffs’ attorney Gary Zamber of North Hilo “I’m very
proud of Alena for standing up for her
rights and for those who may be persecuted in the future for holding
different religious convictions. She is also serving to bring justice
to those who have disrespected the body temple as a
sovereign.”
Dr.
Horowitz, the
Overseer of The Royal Bloodline of David ministry, has been at the
forefront of defending religious freedom internationally from the
threat of “genocidal
contaminations” from
vaccinations. His website
offers a controversial
view of vaccinations that have been linked to many new diseases, and
articles written for the ecclesiastic community including one entitled,
“What
Jesus and Moses Would Say and Do About
Vaccinations.”
Horowitz’s
family involvement in this case he says, “obviously came by
Divine appointment.” Someone with his
credentials was needed
to “take
these devil-doers to task,” he said,
referring to his doctorate in medical dentistry from Tufts University
and a Master of Public Health Degree from Harvard. “Intelligence is
needed to stand up for sanity in public
health policy, particularly since autocrats are violating state,
federal, and Biblical laws.”
.
The expulsion
caused Alena to be targeted with substantial persecution as evidenced
on the Hawaii Herald-Tribune’s top Blog. “When I asked to get
my homework from my teachers the vice principle told me that the
problem was my religion was keeping me from going to school,”
Alena said. She was then told that principal Robert Dircks would need
to approve of way in which she got her assignments since she was not
even allowed to step foot on school property. “When I confronted
Dircks about this deplorable treatment he said this problem should not
have happened, homework assignments should have been readily available,
and that he would investigate why Alena had been misinformed,”
Dr. Horowitz said.
The
court order for Alena to return to school “is a fine example of
how the legal system can work to resolve disputes,”
attorney Zamber said. “This
case may lead everyone to recognize religious exemptions to medical
examinations and “immunizations” including TB skin
testing is a constitutional right, not a privilege to be carelessly
overlooked by health officials.” Too often parents have been
coerced into accepting unwanted procedures based on lacking awareness
of the law. “There
is a strong individual right to privacy, liberty, and religious
_expression,” Zamber explained. “Our eternal vigilance
is the price we all must pay for our constitutional
freedoms.” http://www.tetrahedron.org
|
Can Someone Lend ZD $1.5 Million
For A New Condo At Venice Beach? by Zuma Dogg
 I told all of y'all, the first
day I showed up at City Hall on April 4, 2006 to protest the shady,
unconstitutional ban Mayor Antonio
and City Council imposed on the artists on the west side (beach side)
of Venice Beach had NOTHING to do with store owners' businesses being
hurt over the sale of $1 dollar incense and Zuma Dogg T shirts -- and
everything to do with the gentrification, condo-conversion craze,
running rampant throughout the City of LosAngeles; wiping away every
bit of national culture and heritage that makes L.A. a world-wide
attraction. So, as I was walking down the Venice boardwalk
today,
I saw some new construction going up. WOW! It must be some of that
affordable housing The Mayor is so concerned about. So I asked the
construction worker, "What
are you building?" Their response, "New condos... $1.5 million
each."
YOU SHADY,
DECEITFUL,
SONS-A-B*****S AT CITY HALL: I TOLD YOUR ASS IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH
THE RETAIL STORES ON THE EASTSIDE OF THE BOARDWALK, AND EVERYTHING TO
DO WITH THE MAYOR'S SELF-IMPOSED CONSTRUCTION BOOM. (Everything in
Mayor V.'s City Hall & Eric G.'s City Council is a mere
diversionary tactic for some "special interest" fueled, high-end,
development project.) And the middle class and lower class are paying
the tab. Your Mayor and Los Angeles City Council members can't even
have the rich developers making all the profit off the backs of the
middle and lower (working) class help kick-in. Meanwhile,
you destroy the cultural and economic integrity of this City while you
steamroll the City and kick lifelong L.A. residents out on the streets;
to be replaced by high-price, luxury condos like the $1.5 million ones
going up on Venice Beach, overlooking the tweakers and increased
homeless population below. (And there was a big sign promoting the sale
of another set of condos, just down the boardwalk.) But the Mayor will
tell you that he wants affordable housing, with the rich living with
the middle and lower income families, creating a real community balance
in the City; helping traffic problems by having people not having to
commute as much. (Like if teachers and police and city workers could
live in the communities they work/serve...Less commuting; better quality
of life…
(Belushi Voice): But, NOOOOOOOOOO! There's not a stitch of room for any
of that, unless the voters in all income brackets (lower, middle,
higher) give the Mayor's short list of preferred contractors a piece of
your paycheck: AKA: Prop. H/billion dollar "affordable housing bond"
that only gives the City about 1000 units a year, for the next ten
years, while there are 40,000 homeless people living on the streets
today, according to stats I heard at City Hall.
So ZD's next
prediction
is to watch for the bottom to fall out of this Mayoral/City Council
imposed fake luxury-condo crisis, just about as soon as all the money
has been made off the construction. (Like a cheap Hollywood set, with
nothing but two-by-fours propping everything up. (Hello, Loft Yuppies
still being harassed by aggressive Skid Row panhandlers, so you are
already moving out, and no one is moving in, especially new
business.) So let's try and do a better job, and try and get
rid
of all the bums at Venice Beach. Only one problem, fool...Those weren't
bums, those were tourist attractions. And I also noticed, a whole bunch
of stores were out of business on the East Side/Retail side that were
usually just getting ready for the holiday tourist season. But now,
tourists will see a lot of condo construction overhead empty store
fronts, with "This
Space Available"
signs up and down the boardwalk where you used to see the true, vibrant
spirit of the community (culture). And by the way,
no on H
& R. © Zuma Dogg
Love Affair With Venice by Diane
Butler
I never thought that I could have a love affair with a place, but when
I found Venice at 18 years old, it was truly love at first
sight.
Music on the corners, art and crafts illuminating the sidewalks, people
from all walks of life touching each other's souls and creating
community. People are fond of saying, “This is the
last
place where all the hippies went, just another day in Paradise, and
once you come to Venice you will always come back.”
I am by
far not the only person who has fallen in love with Venice.
Most
of the locals agree that there is no other place like it. If
a
place can be a soul mate, then Venice is mine. And it tears
my
heart apart to think I may have to leave it someday. When I first
arrived in Venice, it was one of the most affordable places in Los
Angeles. Mothers raised their children on welfare and people
lived on fixed incomes. These were people who worked but did
not
get paid for their work, demonstrating that everyone works and money is
not a measure of how meaningful that work is. When rent
control ended, prices of tiny single and
nothing-to-write-about apartments went sky-high. Now the
artists,
poets, musicians and people who dance to the beat of a different drum
are all but pushed out into the streets. People live
creatively
in cars, RVs, gingerbread house campers – but those options
may
be short lived. Others sleep where they can in cubbyholes,
cardboard boxes, tarp-like tents (a regular tent would be confiscated
in a minute). Venice is a transient town
and a
spiritual place. People come there to seek more meaningful
lives. There's not a day that goes by that one cannot have a
meaningful conversation with a stranger, friend, or even a
foe.
People connect in Venice and this is what community is all
about.
Even the angel birds know their human friends here.
I've put
thirty-six years of my heart, soul and creativity into Venice,
and I am sure many people have put even more years of love into this
place. For the most part, buildings were not allowed to block one of
the most beautiful coastlines on the Pacific Ocean.
That
is, until, in the name of renovation, a hideous bike and skate rental
shop was recently erected and now blocks a major part of the ocean
view. We had a perfectly good mobile bike rental store at the
end
of the Rose Avenue parking lot which blocked not one inch of that view,
not to mention that there are a ton of bike rental businesses on the
boardwalk. In addition to the grotesque bike rental shop,
there
is allowance for a future fast-junk-food stand adjacent to
it. A
hideous metal so-called sculpture serves to further block sunsets on
the ocean. Unless there is a plan to incorporate these metal
beams into solar panels, they serve no purpose, and of course, we have
come to expect no such ingenious applications to be
forthcoming.
While solutions readily suggest themselves to many problems, they are
rarely incorporated into existing plans. Could it be that
“money is the root of all evil,” stopping all real
progress
for a better world for our children and our grandchildren?
Venice is my
life's polarization point and I don't know what I would do
without it. With plans to post permit parking signs all over
Venice and provide no alternative places for people living in their
vehicles, with increasingly stringent laws against people sleeping on
the earth, and with nothing but corporate money ruling the day, a
miracle will have to take place. A miracle to keep Venice
drumming, singing, painting, playing and – most important of
all
– being the dissident place that it is. Because,
let's face
it, we need dissidence in a country where an unelected fraud illegally
occupying the people's house can even fathom legalizing torture and
upgrading nuclear weapons, the most insidious things on
earth. Even nonreligious people can understand that torture
is
satanic, or at least, the cruelest kind of inhumanity there
is.
If and when we lose Venice, we will lose one of the most magical places
on earth, real magical, natural magical, not the phony magical of
Disneyland or Disney World. The kind of magical that makes a
person believe in fairy tales. © Diane Butler
The
Truth Shall Set you Free
by I. M.
Love
Children of
America, it is time to say HELL NO, we won't go. Stop
risking your life being shipped into a war zone to fight for a cause we
do not support. Ask yourself, “Is it worth it
– a war
based on lies, a war led by a group of Chickenhawks with tough talk but
who avoided military service themselves? Stay home and fight
in
your country and rebuild urban America. Hell no, we won't
go. © I.M. Love
Red Alert! by W. George E. K. French
We're in
trouble right here in our city and in every other city.
It gets worse every day and none of us can just sit back and let it
keep on going. To explain, I am going to start with the basic
root of the current situation. Let's start with a British
Nobleman named Lord Acton, who lived over a hundred years
ago. He
said that power corrupts people. It was a lie. What
corrupts people is being allowed to misuse power without being punished
for it. You hold the power of life and death over scads of
people
every time you drive your car. It hasn't corrupted you...has
it? Power itself doesn't corrupt. But its misuse
without
punitive consequences does. So where has the misuse of power
without punishment taken us? Out judges rule against the
Constitution, the Supreme Law of our country, and get away with
it. They pass the buck, leaving the superior court to
overrule
them. Every judge knows what the Constitution calls
for.
Instead, they rule in favor of some local ordinance because they are
paid by local government, and fines that are collected help pay their
salaries. Any judge who rules against the Constitution is a
disgrace for the Bench and should be immediately discharged from
office. The parking Nazis give out totally bogus parking
tickets.
The procedure for dealing with this form of deliberate criminal
extortion was expounded in the October
issue of Spirit of Venice
Speaks.
Our cops
illegally search and seize whatever they want. They
consistently enter without warrants, illegally confiscate money,
vehicles, boats, drugs, property. They act as if the law is
for
their convenience, as if Constitutional rights do not exist at
all. Their refusal to observe Constitutional rights that
contradict local laws is conspiracy, treason, theft, fraud and a few
more. At the federal level, the IRS steals from almost everyone,
illegally, and almost all live in fear of them. Careful
research
has proven that ; there is no law compelling anyone to pay an
“income tax.” No statute states who does
or doesn't
have liability to pay this tax, or what this liability would consist
of, nor how anyone could acquire such liability. A 1040 from
is a
very carefully worded deception. It is a self assessment; a
confession that the filer owes the government the amount entered on the
form. This is a form of entrapment. Although the
Constitution outlaws self-incrimination (the 5th Amendment), once that
form is filed, the government can prosecute or jail for
nonpayment. This is extortion under color of law. Nor does an
IRS
agent have the legal right to issue a lien or levy on anyone.
Because liens or levies must be signed under penalty of perjury, an
unsigned “notice” is sent instead. Banks,
employers,
insurance companies and others then treat the
“notices” as
if it were a legal lien or levy, and just GIVE the IRS money although
they are not legally compelled to, for fear of being audited.
These actions constitute a violation of fiduciary trust and as such are
grounds for a lawsuit. There is no statute of limitations on
such
civil fraud. Any IRS agent guilty of this terrorism should be
jailed and personally fined. While there are laws to this
effect,
no judge will rule on them because judges are part of the system that
supports itself by these illegal means. The Founding Fathers would not
allow our government to print paper money because they knew that gold
and silver were the only true money, unlike paper money, such as the
“Continental Scrip” issued by the British, which
can be
devalued, in this way robbing the people of all things of
worth.
Yet, today, the government has private banks (the Federal Reserve)
print and distribute paper money with nothing backing it, and charge
us, the people, with the FACE VALUE OF THE CURRENCY PLUS INTEREST ON
EVERY DOLLAR THEY DISTRIBUTE!!! There is NO real money in
circulation in our country today. This “face
value”
plus interest: makes up the so-called National Debt. Since
1965,
the supposed value of this paper money has been cut in half.
It
now takes two parents, both working, to provide for a family.
This is insane. The day the “government”
is allowed
to set up property taxes, ownership of private property came to an
end. The government confiscates property for unpaid
property taxes. This means they were the real owners all
along. The presumed ownership is actually renting the
property
from the government. If the rent is not paid, the property is
repossessed. Under this arrangement, the government owns everything;
the people own nothing: Buy a car, don’t pay the
registration fees, and you can't use it. Now, you even have
to
pay for it if it is just sitting unused in your garage.
Every public
official from the police officer on the beat to the person
at the top has sworn an oath to “Protect and Uphold the
Constitution”, the Supreme Law of the Land, yet our
politicians
pass laws contrary to it (Patriot Act, War Powers Act, etc.) and nobody
stops them. Their actions are literally treason and should be
treated accordingly. We have a government that is running wild, seeking
to control all of us, in every way. It acts as if we have no
rights at all. If considered necessary, the government will
cheat, lie and steal to get its way (WMD, 19 Arab fundamentalists
carried out 9-11).
A right is
not a privilege; it cannot be taken away. However, if a
person cannot stand up for that right, for whatever reason, then that
person does not have that right. Big Brother gets bigger
every
day, and the longer we wait to deal with it, the less ability we have
to fight back, or to keep pace with it. Locally, there is no
action to remove from the books ordinances that violate Constitutional
rights, nor do the police or politicians refuse to obey them.
Police acting in violation of personal civil rights are supported by
the system and our “lawmakers” continue to write
laws that
are in violation of the Constitution. This undermines the
authority of the Supreme Law of the Land and is
treason. We
cannot allow this trend to continue. It will only get
worse. It has consistently gotten worse. We must
alert
every person in this country to the scope of what is
happening.
When some “public servant” oversteps a boundary, we
must be
willing to scream bloody murder until changes are made. If we
don't want our children and our children's children herded into
compounds for supposed crimes against the state, without rights or
liberty, we MUST take action NOW. Don't wait for someone else
to
do it. We ALL must do it, and keep on doing it until things
are
put to rights...More on ways to do this next month. Stay
tuned... ©
W. George E. K. French
The
Truth Shall Set You Free (II) by I. M. Love
We need the
revolutionary change that Nat Turner was preaching to our
fore-parents. To Rise Up and take their freedom from the slave
master. Children, we must demand our freedom, justice and
equality. This spirit is moving in the air, blowing life into
our
community. This spirit is like fire – it can't be
put
out. Everything on earth is crying out for the end of White
Supremacy rule. Our spirit represents the Kingdom of
God.
This is the revolution; this is the word; this is the song.
Get
up! I am shouting. We have the will of the Most
High. We
have the courage. We have the faith. We will get it
done!
©
I.M. Love
JOIN
4-TIME
GRAMMY AWARD WINNER
EDWIN HAWKINS IN
HIS APPEAL
TO RAISE FUNDS
FOR
AMERICA’S HOMELESS
Donate
$10 online and download a copy of Edwin Hawkins’
“People In Need” (PIN)
song http://www.benefitnetwork.org/PINCD.htm
or send $15.00
check/money order
The
Benefit Network/PIN Fund
P O Box 1952
Venice CA 90294
* * * * * * * * * *
Troops
Battle 10-Foot Marijuana Plants
OTTAWA (Oct.
13) -
Canadian troops fighting Taliban militants in Afghanistan have stumbled
across an unexpected and potent enemy -- almost impenetrable forests of
10-feet-high marijuana plants. General Rick Hillier, chief of
the
Canadian defence staff, said on Thursday that Taliban fighters were
using the forests as cover. In response, the crew of at least one
armoured car had camouflaged their vehicle with marijuana.
"The
challenge is that
marijuana plants absorb energy, heat very readily. It's very difficult
to penetrate with thermal devices ... and as a result you really have
to be careful that the Taliban don't dodge in and out of those
marijuana forests," he said in a speech in Ottawa. "We
tried burning them with white phosphorous -- it didn't work. We tried
burning them with diesel -- it didn't work. The plants are so full of
water right now ... that we simply couldn't burn them." Even
successful incineration had its drawbacks. "A
couple of brown plants on the edges of some of those (forests) did
catch on fire. But a section of soldiers that was downwind from that
had some ill effects and decided that was probably not the right course
of action," Hillier said dryly. One soldier told
him later: "Sir, three
years ago before I joined the army, I never thought I'd say 'That damn
marijuana'." http://tinyurl.com/yxvo44
Update on
Photographing Police - CBS NEWS by Robert Lederman
CBS just did a news story on an incident in which an NYPD Lt. struck a
young man and damaged his camera while he was videotaping another
officer writing a summons. As I related a few weeks ago, NYPD officers
are increasingly acting in an aggressive and illegal manner concerning
being videotaped. A number have recently threatened me with arrest
under the Patriot Act for doing so. I have refused to stop videotaping
in each of these incidents and have, so far, suffered no retaliation.
A number of these officers claimed that, based on the Patriot
Act, it is now illegal to videotape, photograph or tape record a police
officer. This is completely untrue, as the CBS story below shows.
It remains 100% legal to videotape, photograph or tape record any on
duty police officer. The section in the Patriot Act the officers are
mistakenly referring to involves someone photographing a train station,
police precinct, airport, bridge or other infrastructure in preparation
to destroy it by an act of terrorism. Exactly how NYPD
officers
got this misinterpretation is unclear. I think the confusion
may have partly involved a completely different
issue in which a man was caught a few months ago photographing the
license plates of private cars belonging to NYPD officials in order to
bring a charge of them violating parking regulations. The man was taken
into custody but never charged, because it is not illegal to do so. The
police involved felt that what the man was doing violated their private
security by exposing their home addresses, family etc. He is now suing
the NYPD.
In Times Sq on numerous occassions I've personally observed police
officers with machine guns posing for souvenier photos with tourists.
Clearly, those officers don't think it's illegal to photograph them.
I have filed a Freedom of Information request with the NYPD
legal
division for offical written clarification on this matter. So far,
they have not responded. Ironically, the legal
division
officer who offically answers these requests is the same Lt. who was
featured in the CBS News piece. I have videotaped
him many times over the years
during
my own arrests and he never gave me any problem about it. In fact, he
always made it clear I had every right to do so. Usually he had his own
NYPD camera people from the TARU Unit there videotaping me as well!
When they reply I will post their offical response to the
list. There remains no better way to protect yourself from
illegal harassment
while vending than to fully document everything a police officier says
or does while interacting with you. Today in SoHo the police illegally
seized a number of unattended tables belonging to artists. Getting this
on video would have been very useful. The first few seconds
of
these incidents are the most important to get on tape because that's
when the officer often reveals that the enforcement is illegal. For
example, they will often say right at the beginning, "Yes, I know you have a right to
sell here, but somebody complained so you must leave."
Get that on tape and you just won your case.
I take a digital photo of my stand every time I set up to show the
exact position on the sidewalk. If an officer comes up to talk to me I
make sure to get a photo of the stand with him in it. This has to do
with issues of distance from a door, or corner etc. If the officer is
giving you a summonses for being less than 20' from a door, videotape
them measuring (or not measuring) the space. If he claims the sidewalk
is unusually crowded and you have to leave, make sure to videotape the
pedestrians walking by. Everything in and around the area, everything
said etc. is evidence. It's all about collecting good
evidence as
compared to weak or inconclusive. Court cases revolve around evidence,
not opinions. To be found guilty, the police must bring concrete
evidence of your crime to the court. If you have the better evidence,
you will prevail. Most of the evidence police bring to a court on
vending issues is just their written description on the summons and
it's often very poorly put together. If your photographic evidence
proves their written descrition is wrong, you will surely win the case.
However, use common sense. Do not stick a camera right in
their face or
use it in a threatening manner. Don't threaten them verbally either.
Nobody likes being threatened. When I reach for my camera I do it
slowly and tell them what I'm doing so they don't think I'm reaching
for a weapon. Don't stick the camera inside their car window either.
Your right to photograph them involves public space, exactly like your
right to sell art. also, don't make a big speech. You want them talking
on the tape, not you telling off the officer or making excuses about
why you are set up illegally.
The comments by the attorney in the article below refer to a situation
in which an officer tells you that you are under arrest. In other
words, you can't refuse to be handcuffed, and just continue
videotaping. I got falsely arrested more than 40 times and videotaped
or otherwise recorded most of those incidents. Once the officer told me
I was under arrest I let him or her cuff me. If you can, just leave the
camera or tape recorder on. The digital tape recorder I use now will
keep going for many hours. Everyone's experience is different
but
in my case during those incidents the police never once broke my
camera, took the tape or erased it. I was never found guilty during a
single one of these incidents, and the tapes were often very useful in
winning my cases.
Recording things is a two way street. Most officers understand that the
videotape also protects them from you making any false charge of police
brutality or misconduct. If they are doing nothing illegal, they should
have no problem with you documenting their actions. At least in theory,
they work for you. In a surveilance society, it's only fair
that
you should be able to record the police. Be assured, they are recording
you much of thetime, including when you are vending. The Parks and
streets of NYC are filled with hidden video surveillance cameras.
© Robert Lederman
Go here for FAQS
about your constitutional rights during police encounters:
http://www.flexyourrights.org/frequently_asked_questions
This website is sponsored by
The
Benefit Network
|
|
|
