Archive For Posts Censored By The Indybay Thought Police
Posted in the Soquel Forum
#1 Mar 29, 2012
I'm setting up this thread to archive posts censored by the ITP. I encourage everyone to archive posts here that they consider to be targets for deletion over on Indybay.
#3 Mar 29, 2012
§Wow. I'm Impressed
Monday Feb 6th, 2012 6:40 PM
Damn, he really is nice. I can't believe he didn't just chop off your balls with a blunt scythe and roll them into fried garlic naan with a heavy cast iron rolling pin. I would've, if you'd said about me half the assholey things you've said about him.
This is going to be hilarious. Robert Norse is from there, you know. It's going to be wildly amusing to watch him there in his bathrobe heckling his immediate family as they drive past in their Bentleys, with their immaculately manicured pooches lolling around in their laps. I've finally found a reason to go to Pebble Beach. LOL.
Settle down, there, Becky. It's soup, not hot dogs with nacho cheese sauce. No need to start hypercapitalizing.
This is actually considerably more open-and-shut than you'd have us believe. That property, like all your property, and all my property, is protected by property law. You cannot be on that property without the property owner's permission. It doesn't matter if you don't like the property owner. Contending otherwise, for any reason whatsoever, is specious in the extreme, especially coming from a member of the landed gentry.
The Occupy movement represented a viewpoint at odds with a few millennia of thought on property rights. That's fine, but it did not succeed in negating those property rights, and it did not succeed in establishing an anarchic utopia. You and I are still governed by existing property law, which hasn't changed one whit during the life of the movement.
You may plea down your charges because, as in Wes' matter a couple of years back, it's inconvenient to go to a real jail for any length of time, but those pictures of you inside that building are going to convict you, no matter what you may convince yourself of in the friendly confines of Indymedia.
Good luck to you. I happen to know and like some (but not many) of you, but I really cannot fathom what you guys were thinking.
#4 Mar 29, 2012
I keep asking Robert why he won't use .0001 percent of his multi-million dollar trustfund to help his Bumfest Chump.
Maybe I should keep track of how many times it gets deleted?
#5 Mar 29, 2012
Sorry. A couple of posts got melded there. There are just so many. I can't keep them all straight...
Here's another one:
§Let's Do This Right
by Gemma L
Tuesday Feb 28th, 2012 2:04 PM
I support OSC, and, to some extent, the occupation of 75 River. I don't however, understand why you keep referring to the charges as "false". For one thing, there are photographs clearly showing that the people in question were, at least, trespassing (in the legal sense) and that vandalism (minor) occurred. Maybe the term "false" has some legal standing I don't understand? If not, at least the trespass and vandalism charges have some legs, it seems to me.
I hope that the courts will see the bigger picture and acquit, though. Mahatma Gandhi and MLK, Jr. broke the law too. I don't think they tried to later claim they didn't. I think they embraced the fact that they broke what they saw as unjust laws, and faced the majesty of the legal system with grace and integrity, which is why they ultimately prevailed. I'd encourage the Occupiers to do the same. Not sure claiming the charges are now "false", when they (at least to me) clearly aren't, is the way to do that.
Good luck in court to all the defendants. Free the Santa Cruz 11.
#6 Mar 29, 2012
Another one. I wasn't really a monitor at Indybay, of course. If I had been, I'd have shut down the site and had them all shot. Obviously.
That's why I didn't address the "conspiracy" charges. While it's possible that the DA has evidence that prompted the filing of "conspiracy" charges, I don't know what that evidence is. From where I'm sitting, it's equally possible that they're overreaching. Time will tell.
The evidence of trespass and vandalism, on the other hand, is fairly strong. Journalistic credentials don't entitle one to step on private property without permission. That's established precedent, and making this point will be a slam dunk in court. There isn't any other reasonable conclusion one can reach on the matter.
All this misses the broader point, though. The central claim being made here is that property law is inherently unjust, and that it's criminal that a bank should be allowed to leave that building vacant, while homeless people sleep on the lawn outside. The occupation of that building was billed as a non-violent civil disobedience action, inasmuch as it was conducted in defiance of existing property law.
So far, so good.
Where all this veers off course, right into a soggy ditch, is in the fact that, having engaged in this civil disobedience, these activists are now vigorously trying to convince us that they didn't. This is as retarded as it gets. Rosa Parks didn't come up with a series of technicalities to prove that that wasn't really her at the front of that bus. Mahatma Gandhi didn't claim that he didn't really make his own salt or that he paid the resultant salt tax. No. These people stood up in front of the world and admitted that they broke the law, and invited the charges brought up against them. And by shining a bright light on the injustice of the system, they prevailed.
By contrast, Becky is challenging everyone to prove that she wasn't on the sidewalk all that time, eating pancakes, and everyone else is saying that the law, the unjustness of which was the crux of the original argument, actually permitted them to be in that building. In effect these activists are now cowering for cover behind the same laws that they engaged in civil disobedience over. In doing this, they obviously validate these very laws.
Lastly, I don't know why one shouldn't compare the actions of these journalists with Gandhi and King. If you've read Becky's opinion on this, you'd know she compares her activism to the civil rights movement all the time. I'm inclined to agree with her. I'd just like to see more consistency and follow through in this activism.
P.S. A bit heavy handed with the comment deletion, monitors. You know, I used to be a monitor on Indybay, and I can confidently say that it took more than a dissenting view like the one above, for me to take umbrage.
It's not making your point to repeatedly delete a well-reasoned view, just because you don't like it.
#7 Mar 29, 2012
Robert, your trust sold an oceanfront estate in Carmel for $10 to $20 million. It's well established fact that it still owns multiple real properties and other assets. You're not just rich, Robert. You have an obscene amount of wealth. So, maybe the DA is going after the right guy, after all.
Monitors, this isn't a personal attack. It's a statement of known fact. I'm mentioning this to inform the community of the facts. The movement is at risk of being compromised by a Trojan horse. It is imperative that we expose this hypocrisy and circle the wagons to protect our nascent Occupy, if we are to not implode from within
#8 Mar 29, 2012
Last one for today...
Meh. It's easy to understand why their attorneys wanted Alex and Brasley sequestered from the rest of what Norse calls "the rabble". Also easy to see why the Society of Professional Journalists wouldn't write a letter on behalf of every other joker in that building. I mean, Becks' claim that she is a journalist is buttressed almost solely by the ASSNA award she received many years ago. I've seen that trophy. It's made of cheap Chinese plastic, with an even cheaper, and now peeling, faux chrome finish. Hard to take that seriously.
No. Good thing Bradley is keeping his distance from the other so-called journalists in the group. One might reasonably dispute his journalistic credentials, but he's a dashed sight more credible than Robert and Becks. That much is certain.
#9 Mar 29, 2012
Then there's the fact that Robert "forgot" that Wells Fargo is the same bank that foreclosed on HIS Attorney Kate Wells's house.
But he left out the part where he never paid her for all of her time on his asinine Nazi Salute stunt. Robert somehow managed to con(Kahn) her into taking the case on a contingency basis.
She refinanced to the hilt to pay for her aged father, who outlived his retirement savings.
When he loses the case, does anyone think he will try to help her?
#10 Mar 29, 2012
And then there's ColbyKOOK who claims that Ruffo got less jail time than the Bumfest Chump.
I kept on pointing out that he hadn't been sentenced yet.
Surprise of surprises, it kept getting vanished
#11 Mar 30, 2012
Great idea! I copied some of my own posts knowing full well they wouldn't conform to the narrow guidelines of acceptable Indybay thought.
In all due respect, Robert, I dont agree with you or Beckys entitlement to journalistic immunity. By the way, it would be respectable if youd not censor free thinking and open discussion because it doesnt conform to the dominant mindset at indybay. Thats not really what journalists do especially progressive journalists, right?
Becky Johnson, one of the alleged journalists, refers to "our message"* in the context of her participation in the occupation of 75 River street. A Journalist doesn't coalesce with a political agenda and its civil disobedience with admitted conformity and then allowed immunity because she writes about it on a her own website's blog. Since Becky does not have a press pass/press card/journalistic pass/journalism credentials nor is she currently employed in any capacity by a news media/organization, she's not acting as a journalist shes acting as a willing participant advocating for an agenda and later blogging about it.
At best, you and Becky could be defined as self-appointed Citizen Journalists and you are not subject to the same protections, privileges and shield laws as credentialed professional journalists.
In your defense, Citizen Journalism has recently gained some 1st amendment protections, but only when employed or solicited by established news media and not acting independently for agenda-based blogs.
Itll be interesting to watch how it all unfolds as I see you solely at the mercy of the courts and have no real legal leg to stand on. Good luck.
* This is Becky's direct quote when I asked about the reason for her presence at 75 River Street and what she meant by "our Message":
BECKY JOHNSON, "As for "our political message" I am referring to the purpose of the Occupation of 75 River Street. This was an EMPTY HULK of a vacant bank building--one of many dotting out downtown---which is a reminder that Wells Fargo bought out its competition bank--Coast Commercial Bank-- a few years ago and has left the empty building sitting vacant for years and years."
...funny, not ONE mention of her being there as a journalist, but most clearly as an activist.
#12 Mar 30, 2012
Here's another on that didn't slip past the ITP, whose motto, it seems, is "Resistere Inutile Est"
If Winston has "a notorious history of harassing poor people in public spaces on Pacific Avenue", maybe that's because he's a beat cop down there and there are a lot of "poor people" behaving poorly and violating the law in public places. He's a cop. What do you think he's supposed to be doing? Handing out lollipops to the transients?
The hyperbole inherent in your statement about 95% this-that-and-the-other, is in the insinuation that somehow the whole thing is grossly unreasonable because it applies (according to your math) to 95% of the subject matter. Stealing is 100% unlawful, you know, as is untying the sashay on one's bathrobe and flashing passersby on Pacific. That doesn't make the law unreasonable. It makes it effective. We don't like what your friends do when they're sitting on the sidewalk and we as a citizenry have passed laws and ordinances that restrict that behavior within tight boundaries, recognizing that it cannot be easily outlawed outright in a public place like Pacific Avenue. Hence the 95%, instead of 100%, which is what most of us would like, I believe. And no, you don't have a constitutional right to make us like your friends.
The good arguments for the ordinances, Robert, are embedded in our desire as a citizenry to have a reasonably pleasant environment on Pacific Avenue, as free as it can be of the drug-addled "poor people" you are so fond of, who aren't defined by their poverty so much as their steadfast refusal to grow up, get jobs and become productive citizens like their better peers from high school who are now paying taxes to finance the sidewalk they want to sit on.
Lastly, as to your assertion that "there is no such thing as a "democratic process" in Santa Cruz", you must be mentally ill, if you really believe that. I don't know what else to say.
#13 Mar 30, 2012
And here's the conclusion to an exchange I had with Auntie Imperial, which thread was completely deleted because they felt that I had outwitted him in too unsubtle a manner, shredding away any intellectual dignity he may have deluded himself into believing he possessed:
Hmmm. I'm not sure I agree with you, Auntie, that we must choose education over action in our quest for the revolution. I don't know if you know who Robert Norse and Becky Johnson are, but they are famous activists who operate an outfit called HUFF, dedicated to keeping homeless people on the streets and asleep under blankets. Also, Becky was the founder of this very site, Indybay, whilst Norse has a radio show that he hosts out of a grey Victorian house at Laurel and Chestnut streets, a few doors down from the 7-11. In short, two highly accomplished activists, and intellects of the highest order.
Well now, Becks, as she is popularly known, and Robert, repeatedly disavow concrete action, defined as anything that would require them to physically exert or otherwise inconvenience themselves, in favor of advocacy, or what you might call education. Becks is often pressed by haters and skeptics as to why HUFF never does anything for any one, and why, whenever they call upon other activists to sacrifice by, say, going to jail or getting tickets for civil disobedience, they themselves are absent at the time the arrests are made, and tickets are distributed to the various characters in the sketch. During the recent, highly successful Peace Camp 2010, they were essentially the only two who escaped unscathed. Why, even their attorney was arrested, convicted and received a lengthy jail term.
Becks' response is that HUFF is an advocacy group, and does not exist to actually do anything. What HUFF does apparently, is convince others to go do the work, while Becks and Robert watch from a safe distance. Becks has made almost 10,000 highly informative posts on one site alone, as well as on her blog, with a view to bringing people around to her point of view. Her posts have been successful in attracting a legion of followers and admirers.
I will say that, in the time that Robert and Becks have been advocates for the homeless, they have made it safer and easier for homeless to sleep on the streets at night, and they have reduced the number of homeless people dramatically. Thanks to them, homeless people everywhere are better off than they've ever been.
Anyway, all this to say that HUFF's attitude that education is better than action seems in concert with yours, Auntie, and maybe you're both right, but I can't help feeling that sometimes a little action might help get things done faster and better.
That's all. Peace.
#14 Mar 30, 2012
Lollypops? A SC PO is handing out lollypops and DIDN'T GIVE ME ONE??
#15 Apr 1, 2012
By way of clarification, what led up to that last post was that Auntie Imperial posted a weird commentary about the Coming Revolution, excitedly speculating on its sequence of events, and professing his undying commitment to the whole thing, as long as he didn't have to wake up earlier than say, noon, and as long as he could still buy weed with his social security check.
Anyhoo, I joined in, expressing my solidarity with the Coming Revolution also, and we had a long, chummy discussion about exactly how much actual work it would take, his position being that the less, the better.
Of course, I was pulling his leg, but he was too dense to notice until I pulled so hard that his femur, or what Becks calls his ulna, came out of its socket entirely. Then, in a sublime moment of counterculture farce, the whole thread went away.
In case you were wondering :-)
#18 Apr 1, 2012
And there's the photo of a cup being passed between two people with a caption about "Sharing".
I keep asking Robert why he promotes "Sharing", except when it comes to a single penny of his inherited millions.
That's the one that gets deleted the fastest of them all!!!!
#19 Apr 1, 2012
But Pancakes/BJ and Robert Kahn-job only believe in sharing as long as you're talking about sharing someone elses goods/money/etc.
#21 Apr 1, 2012
My posts lasted a whopping 25 minutes!!!
A new record.
Somebody must have been "asleep at the switch"!!!
#22 Apr 1, 2012
A typical tactic by BJ/Pancakes and Robert Kah-job. Deflect criticism and visibility of their idiotic antics and behavior by casting aspersions on someone or something else.
#23 Apr 1, 2012
I keep bombarding the Indycrap threads with:
For what the public thinks of Robert Kahn-job and BJ Whackjob, go to the Topix City of Santa Cruz.
It's the same tactic the HUFF crackpots use to direct traffic to where they can censor whatever they don't like.
#24 Apr 1, 2012
A record. That post on Indycrap is still going after three hours. I hope that doesn't jinx it.
Add your comments below
|Indymanure is circling the drain (Nov '14)||1 hr||woofers||41|
|Where did the SPLAT thread go?||16 hr||woofers||8|
|Will the FBI respond to the LOONs complaint abo...||21 hr||Swiss Miss||4|
|SCPD Refuses to answer John Colby's phone calls (Oct '13)||21 hr||Joe Landon||10|
|Help ColbyLOSER find a JOB......||22 hr||Joe Landon||11|
|ColbySTALKER getting Whacked on the Sentinel BI... (Oct '14)||Thu||Joe Landon||31|
|Editorial, July 17, 2016: Fr. Peter Carota, 194...||Wed||kms||5|
Find what you want!
Search Soquel Forum Now
Copyright © 2016 Topix LLC