3/29/2007 12:25:01 PM Pacific Daylight Time, salzman@inreach.com writes:
"If you appreciate these emails and want to support the work of the Alliance for Ethical Business, please send a donation to AEB po box 387 Eureka, CA 95502 or donate by credit card on our secure webpage at:
http://www.ourhumboldt.org/index.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=6
or www.ourhumboldt.org and click on "Make a donation"."
Richard keeps sending out his missives about the Klamath Dam Removal process.
And I keep thinking, "You stupid dumbass."
Back in 2002, Richard Salzman volunteered in two political campaigns - Paul Gallegos and Jill Geist.
Both took office in January of 2003.
Of the two candidates Salzman supported, one has proven to be an independent thinker, making decisions based on what is best for the people of the county, and one has proven to be "bought and paid for," one has chosen to deride and distance himself from the very agencies that are key to the successful operation of his department. The other has kept her campaign promises and understands her job, has proven her ability to work with the many county departments and state and county governmental agencies, and shown respect for the people as well as the process.
Richard Salzman has repeatedly had to cover for, and make excuses for Paul Gallegos, and chosen to attack all who he perceives to stand in his way, including County Supervisor Jill Geist.
BUT. the really funny thing is, Richard could have chosen differently. He could have chosen the candidate of which he could have been proud.
Jill Geist has been working on the Klamath Dam Removal. Which Richard Salzman purports to care about, as he exhorts his "listserve" followers to lobby their Congressmen, cheering for more predatory litigious action, and, now "Send money." (to him)
Apparently, poor Richard doesn't realize that there are Settlement Negotiations ongoing. There is no need for histrionics.
The quiet hard-working people are getting the job done - for the right reasons. And they're not asking for any money.
Guess he needs to make his new house payment.
(and he tries again - but why would you pay him for warmed over Times-Standard articles? Just google Maxxam, or Pacific Lumber yourself, or sign up for your own google alerts.)
Friday, March 30, 2007
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
We agree wholeheartedly on this one w/update
"As we approach the first anniversary of Moore's death, many questions still await answers, but there has been silence from the district attorney's office.
Silence will not make the questions go away, and the citizens of this city and this county -- as well as Moore's family -- deserve closure.
TS - Silence deafening as shooting anniversary nears
I'll go one step further, though, and say that Gallegos has no business making a decsion in this case. He should have kicked it up to the Attorney General long ago. He cannot be trusted to make the right decsion with regards to law enforcement. His attitude towards law enforcement was made quite clear during the recent election.
UPDATE:
Ahhh, the Dandy's take:
"Last week, we asked the question: What ever became of that? Specifically, we wondered what had become of several riveting events and controversies that dominated the headlines approximately 12 months ago, one of them the possibility of criminal charges being filed against members of the Eureka Police Department in connection with the shooting of Cheri Lyn Moore last April.
What, we wondered, was the hold-up? Either District Attorney Paul Gallegos will charge the officers with a crime, or he will not. He has yet to definitively do either. He has not charged, and he has not said he will not charge. And this is more than a little puzzling. The police stand-off with Moore, which ended with her death, lasted a little longer than two hours. There was a thorough, inter-agency investigation into the shooting, the results of which are on Gallegos' desk. There was a public inquest into the matter six months ago, at which nearly all the officers concerned, as well as others connected to the incident, testified under oath.
There are two matters for a prosecutor to consider when charging a crime, I'm told -- the facts and the law. It truly stretches one's credulity to imagine that either would take a year to research. In the case of the facts, the great bulk of the work has already been done -- forensic reports completed, witnesses interviewed, sworn testimony taken. It's not inconceivable that there would be a follow-up question or three, but it should hardly take six months to ask them. You'd think. The law, then? But this is an attorney's office. Great bound books detailing all the relevant statutory and case law lay at Gallegos' fingertips, and the DA bears a certificate from the state bar association which assures us that he knows how to read them.
We sought answers in an e-mail to Gallegos last week. We didn't hear back until after deadline. Here's his response, in toto: "All I can tell you is that we are evaluating the evidence that we have and will render an opinion on it as soon as we are able to."
The charitable onlooker might focus on the final phrase -- "as soon as we are able to." Having fired or otherwise driven off most of his experienced staff, Gallegos' office now suffers from terminal short-handedness, and what hands there are are mostly green. Therefore, perhaps even a case with as high a public profile as this one must sit on the backburner, waiting for ... something.
The onlooker not inclined to charity might say that Gallegos is a political creature first and foremost, and is simply sitting on the thing because he's unwilling to make a decision one way or the other for fear that it might piss off either a) his left-of-center base or b) the police. That's what an uncharitable onlooker might say."
***
(read the full column in this week's Journal.)
Hank reiterates on Eric's post: "Every person involved with the shooting has been interviewed by the Critical Incident Response Team, the inter-agency investigative squad lead by the District Attorney's Office. The CIRT report has been complete for over six months -- it was complete before the inquest and before the election, contrary to what you might have been led to believe.
Every single officer involved that day with the exception of one testified under oath during the coroner's inquest. All the information and the testimony from that proceeding has been on Gallegos' desk since September."
***
Well, I definitely qualify as an uncharitable onlooker, and my take is that anyone who watches Paul knows exactly what is going on - he always hesitates when he is being pushed to do something he knows is wrong and indefensible - and he doesn't have Stoen here to help him make this one fly. He can't come up with the equivalent of "the right to lie" rhetoric. So he drags his feet until he is pushed into a corner, and then he'll do as he was told.
If he had all the courage all his devotees gave him credit for, he would buck Ken Miller and say, "Look, Ken, I'm sorry, but there's just nothing there. It's tragic. It is sad. And there's nothing there for you to gnash your teeth on anymore."
It'll be interesting to see what he chooses. Most likely, as others have said, he will take the Grand Jury "out."
Silence will not make the questions go away, and the citizens of this city and this county -- as well as Moore's family -- deserve closure.
TS - Silence deafening as shooting anniversary nears
I'll go one step further, though, and say that Gallegos has no business making a decsion in this case. He should have kicked it up to the Attorney General long ago. He cannot be trusted to make the right decsion with regards to law enforcement. His attitude towards law enforcement was made quite clear during the recent election.
UPDATE:
Ahhh, the Dandy's take:
"Last week, we asked the question: What ever became of that? Specifically, we wondered what had become of several riveting events and controversies that dominated the headlines approximately 12 months ago, one of them the possibility of criminal charges being filed against members of the Eureka Police Department in connection with the shooting of Cheri Lyn Moore last April.
What, we wondered, was the hold-up? Either District Attorney Paul Gallegos will charge the officers with a crime, or he will not. He has yet to definitively do either. He has not charged, and he has not said he will not charge. And this is more than a little puzzling. The police stand-off with Moore, which ended with her death, lasted a little longer than two hours. There was a thorough, inter-agency investigation into the shooting, the results of which are on Gallegos' desk. There was a public inquest into the matter six months ago, at which nearly all the officers concerned, as well as others connected to the incident, testified under oath.
There are two matters for a prosecutor to consider when charging a crime, I'm told -- the facts and the law. It truly stretches one's credulity to imagine that either would take a year to research. In the case of the facts, the great bulk of the work has already been done -- forensic reports completed, witnesses interviewed, sworn testimony taken. It's not inconceivable that there would be a follow-up question or three, but it should hardly take six months to ask them. You'd think. The law, then? But this is an attorney's office. Great bound books detailing all the relevant statutory and case law lay at Gallegos' fingertips, and the DA bears a certificate from the state bar association which assures us that he knows how to read them.
We sought answers in an e-mail to Gallegos last week. We didn't hear back until after deadline. Here's his response, in toto: "All I can tell you is that we are evaluating the evidence that we have and will render an opinion on it as soon as we are able to."
The charitable onlooker might focus on the final phrase -- "as soon as we are able to." Having fired or otherwise driven off most of his experienced staff, Gallegos' office now suffers from terminal short-handedness, and what hands there are are mostly green. Therefore, perhaps even a case with as high a public profile as this one must sit on the backburner, waiting for ... something.
The onlooker not inclined to charity might say that Gallegos is a political creature first and foremost, and is simply sitting on the thing because he's unwilling to make a decision one way or the other for fear that it might piss off either a) his left-of-center base or b) the police. That's what an uncharitable onlooker might say."
***
(read the full column in this week's Journal.)
Hank reiterates on Eric's post: "Every person involved with the shooting has been interviewed by the Critical Incident Response Team, the inter-agency investigative squad lead by the District Attorney's Office. The CIRT report has been complete for over six months -- it was complete before the inquest and before the election, contrary to what you might have been led to believe.
Every single officer involved that day with the exception of one testified under oath during the coroner's inquest. All the information and the testimony from that proceeding has been on Gallegos' desk since September."
***
Well, I definitely qualify as an uncharitable onlooker, and my take is that anyone who watches Paul knows exactly what is going on - he always hesitates when he is being pushed to do something he knows is wrong and indefensible - and he doesn't have Stoen here to help him make this one fly. He can't come up with the equivalent of "the right to lie" rhetoric. So he drags his feet until he is pushed into a corner, and then he'll do as he was told.
If he had all the courage all his devotees gave him credit for, he would buck Ken Miller and say, "Look, Ken, I'm sorry, but there's just nothing there. It's tragic. It is sad. And there's nothing there for you to gnash your teeth on anymore."
It'll be interesting to see what he chooses. Most likely, as others have said, he will take the Grand Jury "out."
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Answer to a question... Adidam / Jim Jones
.
Anonymous said...
Didn't the People's Temple try to open a retreat or something in or near Trinidad a few years ago? I'm talking maybe in the late 90's?
I'm pretty sure what you are referring to is... Adi Da, whose "Adidam" organization owns land in Trinidad, was given the name "Franklin Jones" upon his birth in Long Island, N.Y., in 1939. During the `60s, he gained some notoriety as "Da Free John," an author of spiritual books. Today, the Adidam Web site bills him as the "promised God-man" who has the power to "perfectly fulfill the deepest longings of the human heart." (see "Adidam comes to the North Coast," North Coast Journal, Jan. 14, 1999)
That is to say, no relation to People's Temple. But, you know, Dan Hamburg doesn't think it is a cult: "As a practicing devotee, Hamburg said that he does daily meditation sessions and sends about 10 percent of his income to Adi Da. Despite the apparent similarities, Hamburg said that he didn't think it was fair to compare Adidam to a cult. For one thing, people are free to come and go from the organization without fear of anything worse than griping from former co-worshippers.
"When I quit the Democratic party, a lot of people dumped shit on my head," he said. "If you break the code, there's a price to pay. But in Adidam, the only price is maybe some people think you're a quitter, or that you don't get it. That's it."
Then again: During a New Year's Eve day interview, Calladine said the religious group was closing escrow on a Stagecoach Road home and had just had its offer accepted to purchase the Shadow Lodge. Prior to September, few area residents had heard of the religion known as Adidam or its leader, Adi Da.
News of the religious group's arrival has led some residents to question if the organization is a cult, while others are concerned about increased traffic in their quiet neighborhood. Calladine emphatically argues against the notion Adidam is anything like a cult, and says traffic concerns are being addressed.
But in 1985 Adi Da was the target of a lawsuit accusing him of leading a cult marked by sexual abuse, humiliation and greed. The accusations were false, church leaders contend, and the lawsuit was later dropped.
In a series of articles in April 1985, the San Francisco Chronicle reported on Adi Da's alleged exploits during the 1970s in the San Francisco Bay area and in a "hermitage" on the remote Fijian island of Naitauba, quoting former members, one of whom sued leaders of the religious group on charges of sexual abuse. At the same time, a half dozen angry defectors accused the religious group of false imprisonment, brainwashing, sexual abuse, assault and involuntary servitude. High-ranking members of Adidam, then known as Johannine Daist Communion, responded with a lawsuit of their own, accusing the disgruntled former followers of extortion.
At the time, Adi Da was known as Da Free John and his commune was based in the Marin County city of San Rafael. Thirteen years ago, the Chronicle wrote, Free John's empire built primarily on the earnings of followers was worth an estimated $5 million....
All denied: Both of the lawsuits were eventually dropped, said Michael Wood, Adidam's attorney and a member since 1973. He recalled 1985 as a difficult time for the church and said the accusations all stemmed from a bitter divorce between a member and former member.
More on Adidam
From the Rick A. Ross Institute
A database of information about cults, destructive cults, controversial groups and movements.
From the Cult Awareness and Information Centre
Brand New Development:
From Hank Sims Dandy: "Blast the trumpets to announce the arrival of Beloved Adi Da Samraj, the gregarious guru who maintains an ashram and sometime residence in Trinidad! The Da's already been through a number of incarnations..." "Adi Da" is now an international artiste... "You have to wonder, don't you -- how does a guy go from cheesy holy man to international art celeb in zero time?
Anonymous said...Didn't the People's Temple try to open a retreat or something in or near Trinidad a few years ago? I'm talking maybe in the late 90's?
I'm pretty sure what you are referring to is... Adi Da, whose "Adidam" organization owns land in Trinidad, was given the name "Franklin Jones" upon his birth in Long Island, N.Y., in 1939. During the `60s, he gained some notoriety as "Da Free John," an author of spiritual books. Today, the Adidam Web site bills him as the "promised God-man" who has the power to "perfectly fulfill the deepest longings of the human heart." (see "Adidam comes to the North Coast," North Coast Journal, Jan. 14, 1999)
That is to say, no relation to People's Temple. But, you know, Dan Hamburg doesn't think it is a cult: "As a practicing devotee, Hamburg said that he does daily meditation sessions and sends about 10 percent of his income to Adi Da. Despite the apparent similarities, Hamburg said that he didn't think it was fair to compare Adidam to a cult. For one thing, people are free to come and go from the organization without fear of anything worse than griping from former co-worshippers.
"When I quit the Democratic party, a lot of people dumped shit on my head," he said. "If you break the code, there's a price to pay. But in Adidam, the only price is maybe some people think you're a quitter, or that you don't get it. That's it."
Then again: During a New Year's Eve day interview, Calladine said the religious group was closing escrow on a Stagecoach Road home and had just had its offer accepted to purchase the Shadow Lodge. Prior to September, few area residents had heard of the religion known as Adidam or its leader, Adi Da.
News of the religious group's arrival has led some residents to question if the organization is a cult, while others are concerned about increased traffic in their quiet neighborhood. Calladine emphatically argues against the notion Adidam is anything like a cult, and says traffic concerns are being addressed.
But in 1985 Adi Da was the target of a lawsuit accusing him of leading a cult marked by sexual abuse, humiliation and greed. The accusations were false, church leaders contend, and the lawsuit was later dropped.
In a series of articles in April 1985, the San Francisco Chronicle reported on Adi Da's alleged exploits during the 1970s in the San Francisco Bay area and in a "hermitage" on the remote Fijian island of Naitauba, quoting former members, one of whom sued leaders of the religious group on charges of sexual abuse. At the same time, a half dozen angry defectors accused the religious group of false imprisonment, brainwashing, sexual abuse, assault and involuntary servitude. High-ranking members of Adidam, then known as Johannine Daist Communion, responded with a lawsuit of their own, accusing the disgruntled former followers of extortion.
At the time, Adi Da was known as Da Free John and his commune was based in the Marin County city of San Rafael. Thirteen years ago, the Chronicle wrote, Free John's empire built primarily on the earnings of followers was worth an estimated $5 million....
All denied: Both of the lawsuits were eventually dropped, said Michael Wood, Adidam's attorney and a member since 1973. He recalled 1985 as a difficult time for the church and said the accusations all stemmed from a bitter divorce between a member and former member.
More on Adidam
From the Rick A. Ross Institute
A database of information about cults, destructive cults, controversial groups and movements.
From the Cult Awareness and Information Centre
Brand New Development:
From Hank Sims Dandy: "Blast the trumpets to announce the arrival of Beloved Adi Da Samraj, the gregarious guru who maintains an ashram and sometime residence in Trinidad! The Da's already been through a number of incarnations..." "Adi Da" is now an international artiste... "You have to wonder, don't you -- how does a guy go from cheesy holy man to international art celeb in zero time?
"Medicinal Meth"
This one's for "medicinal Meth" advocate, Ellen Taylor.
Meth addict who made documentary dies
A former trucker whose documentary chronicled an agonizing descent as methamphetamine ravaged his body has died, optimistic to the end that his story would keep others from the highly addictive stimulant.
By his family's account, (Shawn) Bridges already had died at least twice, his heart so damaged by years of using meth -- a concoction that can include toxic chemicals such as battery acid, drain cleaner and fertilizer -- that it stopped and had to be shocked back into beating.
The documentary shows Bridges mostly bedridden, his constant companions a catheter and feeding tube.
"I'd say he's got a 34-year-old body on the outside with a 70- to 80-year-old man on the inside," his father told The Associated Press last May.
But Ellen thinks "...Demonization of meth cripples democracy..."
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Mon, September 18, 1972
'Healing' Prophet Hailed as God At S.F. Revival
The second of Les Kinsolving's original exposés on People's Temple, from his son, Tom Kinsolving's blog.
This series of articles was killed by Tim Stoen's threats of a lawsuit, for which he apologized to Mr. Kinsolving only recently.
Had the series been allowed to run, and had anyone paid attention, perhaps nearly 1,000 lives could have been saved.
The second of Les Kinsolving's original exposés on People's Temple, from his son, Tom Kinsolving's blog.
This series of articles was killed by Tim Stoen's threats of a lawsuit, for which he apologized to Mr. Kinsolving only recently.
Had the series been allowed to run, and had anyone paid attention, perhaps nearly 1,000 lives could have been saved.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
Who knew?
Ken Miller's "Salmon Forever" had a "Sunnybrae Sediment Lab"
Ken Miller's "Salmon Forever" joined "with the Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC) to develop the THP Watch Program"...and
Ken Miller's "Salmon Forever" says: "We also serve as a scientific consultant to Voices of Humboldt County, a monthly publication of the Humboldt Watershed Council. The publication’s name comes from a video Salmon Forever and Humboldt Watershed Council co-produced in 1997.
(For more articles and documents relating to Humboldt Watershed Council, check watchpaul ARTICLES)
Ken Miller's "Salmon Forever" joined "with the Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC) to develop the THP Watch Program"...and
Ken Miller's "Salmon Forever" says: "We also serve as a scientific consultant to Voices of Humboldt County, a monthly publication of the Humboldt Watershed Council. The publication’s name comes from a video Salmon Forever and Humboldt Watershed Council co-produced in 1997.
(For more articles and documents relating to Humboldt Watershed Council, check watchpaul ARTICLES)
Friday, March 23, 2007
UK (C4) Documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle
You owe it to yourself to watch this:
Apparently direct link has been pulled down. Here's a new one.
Or search Great Global Warming Swindle (lots have popped up on YouTube.
Apparently direct link has been pulled down. Here's a new one.
Or search Great Global Warming Swindle (lots have popped up on YouTube.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
September 17, 1972
.
The Prophet Who Raises The Dead
One of the first exposés of the People's Temple - The first of Les Kinsolving's series from 1972... Tim Stoen plays a prominent role. I had read about these but not yet read them...
Excerpt:
"...He (Jim Jones) has stated to his flock:
“We have won over the sheriff’s office and the police department.”
He has certainly won over the assistant prosecuting attorney of Mendocino County, Timothy O. Stoen-—who is one of the Rev. Mr. Jones’s five assistants, a member of the Temple’s board of directors—-the man who claims “over 40” resurrections for The Prophet.
... There is little question of The Prophet’s influence on the Ukiah Daily Journal—for when The Examiner inquired about the People’s Temple and its charismatic pastor some months ago, Journal editor George Hunter immediately reported the inquiry to the office of prosecuting attorney.
‘Jim, The Prophet’
Thus relaying the news to the precincts of Timothy O. Stoen, assistant prosecuting attorney and assistant to The Prophet. Stoen promptly wrote to The Examiner to say, among other things, the Rev. Mr. Jones “goes by the self-effacing title of ‘Jim Jones.’”
Subsequently, Stoen explained that “our church bulletin writers are somewhat zealous”—but that’s the way they see it.”Stoen seems enthusiastic himself, though he prefers to call The Prophet just plain “Jim.” Here is an excerpt from a Stoen letter to The Examiner received five days ago:
“Jim has been the means by which more than 40 persons have literally been brought back from the dead this year. When I first came into the church, I was the conventional skeptic about such things. But I must be honest:
“I have seen Jim revive people stiff as a board, tongues hanging out, eyes set, skin graying, and all vital signs absent. Don’t ask me how it happens. It just does.
“Jim will go up to such a person and say something like, ‘I love you’ or ‘I need you’ and immediately the vital signs reappear. He feels such a person can feel love in his subconscious even after dying.
“Jim is very humble about his gift and does not preach it.” As a matter of fact, Stoen writes, “The Prophet eschews publicity.”
Additional Powers:
[Stoen continued] “Whenever there is publicity, the extremists seem to show themselves. Jim has simply been hurt enough….Jim Jones is NOT concerned for his own safety. His real concern is to prevent harm to his children and others in his church family who might be hurt for what he himself has stood for…” The Temple’s newsletter, however, is not the least bit shy about publicizing either his power to bring back the dead or his “additional powers.”...
The Prophet Who Raises The Dead
One of the first exposés of the People's Temple - The first of Les Kinsolving's series from 1972... Tim Stoen plays a prominent role. I had read about these but not yet read them...
Excerpt:
"...He (Jim Jones) has stated to his flock:
“We have won over the sheriff’s office and the police department.”
He has certainly won over the assistant prosecuting attorney of Mendocino County, Timothy O. Stoen-—who is one of the Rev. Mr. Jones’s five assistants, a member of the Temple’s board of directors—-the man who claims “over 40” resurrections for The Prophet.
... There is little question of The Prophet’s influence on the Ukiah Daily Journal—for when The Examiner inquired about the People’s Temple and its charismatic pastor some months ago, Journal editor George Hunter immediately reported the inquiry to the office of prosecuting attorney.
‘Jim, The Prophet’
Thus relaying the news to the precincts of Timothy O. Stoen, assistant prosecuting attorney and assistant to The Prophet. Stoen promptly wrote to The Examiner to say, among other things, the Rev. Mr. Jones “goes by the self-effacing title of ‘Jim Jones.’”
Subsequently, Stoen explained that “our church bulletin writers are somewhat zealous”—but that’s the way they see it.”Stoen seems enthusiastic himself, though he prefers to call The Prophet just plain “Jim.” Here is an excerpt from a Stoen letter to The Examiner received five days ago:
“Jim has been the means by which more than 40 persons have literally been brought back from the dead this year. When I first came into the church, I was the conventional skeptic about such things. But I must be honest:
“I have seen Jim revive people stiff as a board, tongues hanging out, eyes set, skin graying, and all vital signs absent. Don’t ask me how it happens. It just does.
“Jim will go up to such a person and say something like, ‘I love you’ or ‘I need you’ and immediately the vital signs reappear. He feels such a person can feel love in his subconscious even after dying.
“Jim is very humble about his gift and does not preach it.” As a matter of fact, Stoen writes, “The Prophet eschews publicity.”
Additional Powers:
[Stoen continued] “Whenever there is publicity, the extremists seem to show themselves. Jim has simply been hurt enough….Jim Jones is NOT concerned for his own safety. His real concern is to prevent harm to his children and others in his church family who might be hurt for what he himself has stood for…” The Temple’s newsletter, however, is not the least bit shy about publicizing either his power to bring back the dead or his “additional powers.”...
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Let's hear both sides
Why do you do this, Rose? Why don't you just drop this?
It's a good question, and one I get all the time. Along with, why did you even start doing this?
The answer to that last question is really the answer to the first one. I have already described my conversation with Richard Salzman, and his statement that this was bigger than I could possibly imagine. From things I learned from him, I had a different perspective on events that unfolded - Stoen's lawsuit, the bizarre dog and pony show, the involvement of the activist community, links to much larger groups with phenomenal sources of funding and support, Gallegos' - sorry, but no other way to say it but - dishonesty - the Recall, the enormous effort to keep Gallegos in office and the reasons for it, all the way to now, the destruction of the office, the loss of valuable talent, the decimation of important programs...
In the beginning, with my post-Watergate mentality, I believed in the press. I believed in the press almost as an arm of law enforcement... that if there was wrongdoing, they would expose it... if there was another side to the story, they would be happy to tell it. I was sadly mistaken.
The press, here and elsewhere, were sucked up into the great Gallegos fairy-tale. The gallant David against Goliath, the courageous young upstart against the evil corporation.
The press bought the story spun by the master PR team hook line and sinker.
In the beginning, I asked my friends in journalism why they didn't ask the questions, why the very words used by Salzman and his crew didn't make the hairs on the backs of their necks rise up. "Timber Yes, Fraud NO" Look behind the words and there is an empty vacuum. "Justice for all" - the picture of the statue of liberty on Paul's election materials... all a facade.
I began my own inquiries, and along the way, I have gotten to know the people involved. Whenever the opportunity arose to talk to the people actually affected by what was going on, I took it.
And as people began to bring me information, and documents that backed up what they had to say, and the media continued to ignore it, I learned about Gallegos' entry into the DAs office from the other side - from those who were told in a meeting that any perceived act of disloyalty would result in their termination, the side who received the infamous "gag order" memo telling them that they were not allowed to talk to the media. And I came to know the atmosphere that pervaded the DAs office. I have watched as the prosecutors have left, til only those who are unable to leave remain.
I learned about People's Temple, and Stoen's role. And I talked to people who were involved way back then, in various capacities.
I have talked to watchdog groups all across the country about "Salzman's Plan" and many watched to see if any further attempts were made to implement it.
More importantly, I came to see the extent of the activist network, the inter-relationships, the funding opportunities and connections. As I began to put pieces of the puzzle together, clearer and clearer pictures emerged.
Every morning I would wake up and say to myself "This is crazy."
And by the end of the day, I would have talked to two more people, gotten another piece of the puzzle and knew that there was an important story here to be told.
But I watched as day after day, Salzman's spin was written across the front pages of the paper, and I knew people had gone and talked to the reporters, and gotten nowhere.
So they stopped coming forward. they lost faith in the reporters. And I did, too. This ensured that Salzman's view prevailed, as now no one even tried to get the other side out.
Well, the old saying that "you can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time " held true in this case - eventually, Gallegos' failings began to show, little by little, culminating in the plagiarism coming to light, but too late.
Eventually the media did begin to ask questions, and Hank Sims took the first step forward with his exposure of Richard Salzman and his tactics.
Little by little the media came to see that the shiny facade was at least a little tarnished, if not completely hollow.
So - I am a little hyper-sensitive to things like John Driscoll's sitting with Mark Lovelace and covering the Palco proceedings. I see it from a completely different perspective.
The perspective of looking at Ken Miller professing to be "stunned" when the Gallegos' (Stoen's) PL case was first announced, and finding that he was involved long before, and was in fact actually instrumental in the drafting of the suit (which he ultimately had to 'fess up to, try as he did to hide it), to finding out just how long he had been involved in the effort.
The perspective of knowing who and what Michael Shellenberger was, and knowing that the national press coverage that Gallegos was receiving was well orchestrated, knowing that the spin machine was in full force. That they were indeed "structuring the debate."
The perspective of knowing when lies were being told, such as when Salzman acted as a defacto spokesperson for the DAs office during the Martinez-Hernandez case.
Everyone has had their say about the Lovelace/Driscoll thing - unethical practices, just a volley in the newspaper war, nothing at all compared to Arkley...
Well, none of that answered the questions about the incident and Lovelace's response only told us who paid for the calls, not how many days of shared coverage... How many people in the room... Who they were... Whether or not there was discussion about key points, whether Lovelace expounded on his version of the events...
But more importantly - who is Mark Lovelace, who has such an effect on so many issues with his testimony to the Water Board, with his being the go-to source whenever anything remotely involving Palco comes up - what is Humboldt Watershed Council? How many people are on the "council"? When do they meet? Who votes? What are its origins? What is its source of funding? Who pays Mark Lovelace's salary? Does he even have a salary? Does it come out of Ken Miller's pocket? What's the relationship with Michael Shellenberger? Why the full court press, the appearances on every radio talk show, the cultivation of reporters? Where does Mark Lovelace come by his sudden "expertise" in the intricacies of the Stock market, big business and bankruptcy procedure? Where do the talking points come from?
The story has already been told as if they are the ragtag underdogs, like the Merry Men against the King, the idealistic young college students who give up their lives to come sit in the trees -
Now let's hear the other side - about the activist networks which ensure protestors arrive on cue - and disappear during a contentious election - about the people who manipulate behind the scenes.
What could it hurt?
(For more articles and documents relating to Humboldt Watershed Council, check watchpaul ARTICLES)
It's a good question, and one I get all the time. Along with, why did you even start doing this?
The answer to that last question is really the answer to the first one. I have already described my conversation with Richard Salzman, and his statement that this was bigger than I could possibly imagine. From things I learned from him, I had a different perspective on events that unfolded - Stoen's lawsuit, the bizarre dog and pony show, the involvement of the activist community, links to much larger groups with phenomenal sources of funding and support, Gallegos' - sorry, but no other way to say it but - dishonesty - the Recall, the enormous effort to keep Gallegos in office and the reasons for it, all the way to now, the destruction of the office, the loss of valuable talent, the decimation of important programs...
In the beginning, with my post-Watergate mentality, I believed in the press. I believed in the press almost as an arm of law enforcement... that if there was wrongdoing, they would expose it... if there was another side to the story, they would be happy to tell it. I was sadly mistaken.
The press, here and elsewhere, were sucked up into the great Gallegos fairy-tale. The gallant David against Goliath, the courageous young upstart against the evil corporation.
The press bought the story spun by the master PR team hook line and sinker.
In the beginning, I asked my friends in journalism why they didn't ask the questions, why the very words used by Salzman and his crew didn't make the hairs on the backs of their necks rise up. "Timber Yes, Fraud NO" Look behind the words and there is an empty vacuum. "Justice for all" - the picture of the statue of liberty on Paul's election materials... all a facade.
I began my own inquiries, and along the way, I have gotten to know the people involved. Whenever the opportunity arose to talk to the people actually affected by what was going on, I took it.
And as people began to bring me information, and documents that backed up what they had to say, and the media continued to ignore it, I learned about Gallegos' entry into the DAs office from the other side - from those who were told in a meeting that any perceived act of disloyalty would result in their termination, the side who received the infamous "gag order" memo telling them that they were not allowed to talk to the media. And I came to know the atmosphere that pervaded the DAs office. I have watched as the prosecutors have left, til only those who are unable to leave remain.
I learned about People's Temple, and Stoen's role. And I talked to people who were involved way back then, in various capacities.
I have talked to watchdog groups all across the country about "Salzman's Plan" and many watched to see if any further attempts were made to implement it.
More importantly, I came to see the extent of the activist network, the inter-relationships, the funding opportunities and connections. As I began to put pieces of the puzzle together, clearer and clearer pictures emerged.
Every morning I would wake up and say to myself "This is crazy."
And by the end of the day, I would have talked to two more people, gotten another piece of the puzzle and knew that there was an important story here to be told.
But I watched as day after day, Salzman's spin was written across the front pages of the paper, and I knew people had gone and talked to the reporters, and gotten nowhere.
So they stopped coming forward. they lost faith in the reporters. And I did, too. This ensured that Salzman's view prevailed, as now no one even tried to get the other side out.
Well, the old saying that "you can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time " held true in this case - eventually, Gallegos' failings began to show, little by little, culminating in the plagiarism coming to light, but too late.
Eventually the media did begin to ask questions, and Hank Sims took the first step forward with his exposure of Richard Salzman and his tactics.
Little by little the media came to see that the shiny facade was at least a little tarnished, if not completely hollow.
So - I am a little hyper-sensitive to things like John Driscoll's sitting with Mark Lovelace and covering the Palco proceedings. I see it from a completely different perspective.
The perspective of looking at Ken Miller professing to be "stunned" when the Gallegos' (Stoen's) PL case was first announced, and finding that he was involved long before, and was in fact actually instrumental in the drafting of the suit (which he ultimately had to 'fess up to, try as he did to hide it), to finding out just how long he had been involved in the effort.
The perspective of knowing who and what Michael Shellenberger was, and knowing that the national press coverage that Gallegos was receiving was well orchestrated, knowing that the spin machine was in full force. That they were indeed "structuring the debate."
The perspective of knowing when lies were being told, such as when Salzman acted as a defacto spokesperson for the DAs office during the Martinez-Hernandez case.
Everyone has had their say about the Lovelace/Driscoll thing - unethical practices, just a volley in the newspaper war, nothing at all compared to Arkley...
Well, none of that answered the questions about the incident and Lovelace's response only told us who paid for the calls, not how many days of shared coverage... How many people in the room... Who they were... Whether or not there was discussion about key points, whether Lovelace expounded on his version of the events...
But more importantly - who is Mark Lovelace, who has such an effect on so many issues with his testimony to the Water Board, with his being the go-to source whenever anything remotely involving Palco comes up - what is Humboldt Watershed Council? How many people are on the "council"? When do they meet? Who votes? What are its origins? What is its source of funding? Who pays Mark Lovelace's salary? Does he even have a salary? Does it come out of Ken Miller's pocket? What's the relationship with Michael Shellenberger? Why the full court press, the appearances on every radio talk show, the cultivation of reporters? Where does Mark Lovelace come by his sudden "expertise" in the intricacies of the Stock market, big business and bankruptcy procedure? Where do the talking points come from?
The story has already been told as if they are the ragtag underdogs, like the Merry Men against the King, the idealistic young college students who give up their lives to come sit in the trees -
Now let's hear the other side - about the activist networks which ensure protestors arrive on cue - and disappear during a contentious election - about the people who manipulate behind the scenes.
What could it hurt?
(For more articles and documents relating to Humboldt Watershed Council, check watchpaul ARTICLES)
Saturday, March 10, 2007
Times Standard in bed with the activists w/two updates
This explains alot...
Don't pretend "Humboldt Watershed Council" is an unbiased legitimate public service organization. "Humboldt Watershed Council" is nothing more than the latest, most effective manifestation of Ken Miller's jihadist crusade against Palco/Hurwitz/Maxxam. It's one thing for John Driscoll to have a source. It is entirely another thing entirely for him to be in bed with the group, to be used as a propaganda tool in Mark Lovelace's full-court-press mission to seize full advantage in the face of the Palco Chapter 11 filing.
This allows Mark Lovelace to control the spin, put his own self-serving context around every detail of the reporting. It allows him to irrevocably influence public perception and opinion, to "control the debate." It is an unforgivable breach of journalistic ethics, and an incredible disservice to the readers who trust the Times Standard to present them with factual unbiased information.
The only equivalent would be if Driscoll was sitting in Maxxam's corporate offices with Palco's lawyers and reporting through their prism.
If the Times Standard is going to embed a reporter with the activist attack group, they should also embed a reporter with Palco, and put Lovelace's spin on the opinion pages where it belongs.
There's no excuse for this.
Times-Standard violates media ethics
3/9/2007
Part of a newspaper’s role is to be held accountable by itself, its readers and other media. When a newspaper oversteps ethical boundaries, it is essential that it be pointed out.
Case in point: Reporter John Driscoll of the Times-Standard has been writing stories about Pacific Lumber Co.’s bankruptcy proceedings based on a telephonic conference call from Texas that is reportedly being paid for by Mark Lovelace, president of the Humboldt Watershed Council. Lovelace invited Driscoll to the Humboldt Area Foundation, where the telephone conference call has been heard by Driscoll.
Neither the Times-Standard nor Driscoll have acknowledged this gift publicly. And it is a gift. At $6 every 15 minutes, the all-day proceedings easily add up to hundreds of dollars.
The Eureka Reporter is paying for its own conference call tie-in, and it was not invited to HAF by Lovelace.
And this is not sour grapes. We were offered a similar opportunity to listen in to the conference call by a local attorney who has been a litigant against PALCO. We declined on ethical grounds.
The Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics states reporters should “avoid conflicts of interest — real or perceived.”
At the very least, Driscoll’s actions represent a perceived conflict of interest.
The SPJ states reporters should “remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.”
Listening to a contested bankruptcy hearing on a telephone conference call paid for by Lovelace violates the spirit if not the substance of remaining “free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.”
Journalists should “refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment … if they compromise journalistic integrity,” according to the SPJ.
As we said, at $6 every 15 minutes, the Times-Standard and Driscoll are receiving a significant financial subsidy. We are amazed that Driscoll didn’t see a problem with his actions, once the issue was brought to his attention by The Eureka Reporter.
Additionally, with this revelation, how can Driscoll claim that he is objective in covering environmental issues? It calls into question his entire history of reporting on PALCO-related issues.
When news media overstep their boundaries, it sullies all journalists, and that is why we are drawing attention to this lapse by the Times-Standard and Driscoll. The SPJ states that media should “expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media (and) abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.”
We hope the Times-Standard and Driscoll can learn from this mistake and change direction.
(Editor’s note: The full SPJ Code of Ethics is available online at the Society of Professional Journalists.)
Copyright (C) 2005, The Eureka Reporter. All rights reserved.
###
More on that Code of Ethics:
Act Independently
Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know.
Journalists should:
—Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
— Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
— Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service in community organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity.
— Disclose unavoidable conflicts.
— Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable.
— Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence news coverage.
— Be wary of sources offering information for favors or money; avoid bidding for news.
Be Accountable
Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other.
Journalists should:
— Clarify and explain news coverage and invite dialogue with the public over journalistic conduct.
— Encourage the public to voice grievances against the news media.
— Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
— Expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media.
— Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.
****
Discussion on Fred's, buhne, eric, and heraldo
****
Nathan Rushton on the Bankruptcy teleconference disruption
From heraldo's blog:
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Mark Lovelace Responds to Eureka Reporter
Humboldt Watershed Council president Mark Lovelace responds to Eureka Reporter accusations of ethics breach.
Glenn Franco Simmons
Nathan Rushton
The Eureka Reporter
215 4th Street
Eureka, CA 95501
Re: CourtCall and Journalistic Ethics
Dear Glenn and Nathan,
I was surprised to read your editorial on Saturday, regarding the apparently egregious breach of journalistic ethics posed by the presence of the Times-Standard’s John Driscoll at a ‘listening session’ for the Pacific Lumber bankruptcy hearings. I had spoken to Nathan about the arrangement on Thursday, but he expressed no ethical indignation about the issue. Rather, he merely seemed curious as to why he had not been invited too.
I explained to Nathan that the invitation to John Driscoll arose out of conversation in the course of John’s constant, in-depth coverage of the PL story. I would likely have invited Nathan, too, had he and I spoken, but such conversation was hampered by the Eureka Reporter’s relative absence on this critically important story. I was certainly pleased to hear that the Reporter was planning to step up its coverage, and I assured Nathan that he would be welcome to join us in any future listening sessions. In fairness, Nathan reflected much of this in his own column on Sunday.
The Times-Standard and the North Coast Journal have both written some excellent investigative reports on the details of this case while, so far, the Reporter has merely relayed the days events. With this editorial, the Eureka Reporter seems to have chosen to investigate the investigators, rather to investigate the story itself. Even in that the Reporter has erred, getting two critical facts wrong.
For one, the cost of the CourtCall service was paid by the Redwood Forest Foundation Inc, not HWC, though I did make the arrangements. Thus the assertion that this was in some way a ‘gift’ from the Humboldt Watershed Council is simply incorrect.
For two, neither the Humboldt Watershed Council, nor RFFI, nor anyone else in the room was a party to these proceedings. We were on a ‘listen only’ line because we were not participants, but rather observers, as would be any other member of the general public. This is fundamentally different from listening-in with Palco, or with an attorney for one of the parties.
Though HWC is not a party, we do have a deep interest in the outcome of this process, as should anyone in Humboldt County . The bankruptcy of Pacific Lumber Company is a huge story, and how this issue is resolved will have a significant impact on Humboldt County’s future. Through this process, we have the opportunity to finally put 22 years of division and culture war behind us, and to focus on developing a truly sustainable Pacific Lumber Company that our community can once again be proud of.
Organizing this CourtCall listening session was a part of HWC’s ongoing efforts to make this bankruptcy process as accessible and understandable as possible to the broader Humboldt County community. That same goal was the reason that HWC and others sponsored the Bankruptcy 101 workshop, which was attended by over 100 PL workers, retirees, their families and other members of the Fortuna and Rio Dell communities. It must be pointed out that the Eureka Reporter neither attended nor reported on that workshop.
For weeks I have been working to arrange a venue where anyone in Humboldt County could listen in to the bankruptcy proceedings. I have been in touch with the folks at CourtCall to try to arrange for the hearings to be streamed live on the web, which is something they have never done before. I have explored arrangements to provide a public listening venue in Fortuna. Significantly, I also provided Nathan with the necessary information on how to sign up for the CourtCall service.
What is particularly disappointing to me is that I had spent a significant part of my day Friday working on establishing a better, more public listening venue, and I believe that I have finally been able to make an arrangement that would allow any member of the public to join in. I spoke to both John Driscoll and Hank Sims about their respective papers’ interest in helping to fund this effort along with the Humboldt Watershed Council and others. I called Nathan on Friday and left him a message asking if the Eureka Reporter would like to join in this group effort, too. How disappointing, then, to read the Reporter’s divisive editorial the very next morning.
It is in everyone’s interest to work together, to share information, and to focus on providing a service to our community. I hope that the Eureka Reporter’s inaccurate and divisive editorial hasn’t soured the various partners who would be necessary to make this public service possible.
Sincerely,
Mark Lovelace, President
Humboldt Watershed Council
# posted by Heraldo @ 8:59 AM
Don't pretend "Humboldt Watershed Council" is an unbiased legitimate public service organization. "Humboldt Watershed Council" is nothing more than the latest, most effective manifestation of Ken Miller's jihadist crusade against Palco/Hurwitz/Maxxam. It's one thing for John Driscoll to have a source. It is entirely another thing entirely for him to be in bed with the group, to be used as a propaganda tool in Mark Lovelace's full-court-press mission to seize full advantage in the face of the Palco Chapter 11 filing.
This allows Mark Lovelace to control the spin, put his own self-serving context around every detail of the reporting. It allows him to irrevocably influence public perception and opinion, to "control the debate." It is an unforgivable breach of journalistic ethics, and an incredible disservice to the readers who trust the Times Standard to present them with factual unbiased information.
The only equivalent would be if Driscoll was sitting in Maxxam's corporate offices with Palco's lawyers and reporting through their prism.
If the Times Standard is going to embed a reporter with the activist attack group, they should also embed a reporter with Palco, and put Lovelace's spin on the opinion pages where it belongs.
There's no excuse for this.
Times-Standard violates media ethics
3/9/2007
Part of a newspaper’s role is to be held accountable by itself, its readers and other media. When a newspaper oversteps ethical boundaries, it is essential that it be pointed out.
Case in point: Reporter John Driscoll of the Times-Standard has been writing stories about Pacific Lumber Co.’s bankruptcy proceedings based on a telephonic conference call from Texas that is reportedly being paid for by Mark Lovelace, president of the Humboldt Watershed Council. Lovelace invited Driscoll to the Humboldt Area Foundation, where the telephone conference call has been heard by Driscoll.
Neither the Times-Standard nor Driscoll have acknowledged this gift publicly. And it is a gift. At $6 every 15 minutes, the all-day proceedings easily add up to hundreds of dollars.
The Eureka Reporter is paying for its own conference call tie-in, and it was not invited to HAF by Lovelace.
And this is not sour grapes. We were offered a similar opportunity to listen in to the conference call by a local attorney who has been a litigant against PALCO. We declined on ethical grounds.
The Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics states reporters should “avoid conflicts of interest — real or perceived.”
At the very least, Driscoll’s actions represent a perceived conflict of interest.
The SPJ states reporters should “remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.”
Listening to a contested bankruptcy hearing on a telephone conference call paid for by Lovelace violates the spirit if not the substance of remaining “free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.”
Journalists should “refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment … if they compromise journalistic integrity,” according to the SPJ.
As we said, at $6 every 15 minutes, the Times-Standard and Driscoll are receiving a significant financial subsidy. We are amazed that Driscoll didn’t see a problem with his actions, once the issue was brought to his attention by The Eureka Reporter.
Additionally, with this revelation, how can Driscoll claim that he is objective in covering environmental issues? It calls into question his entire history of reporting on PALCO-related issues.
When news media overstep their boundaries, it sullies all journalists, and that is why we are drawing attention to this lapse by the Times-Standard and Driscoll. The SPJ states that media should “expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media (and) abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.”
We hope the Times-Standard and Driscoll can learn from this mistake and change direction.
(Editor’s note: The full SPJ Code of Ethics is available online at the Society of Professional Journalists.)
Copyright (C) 2005, The Eureka Reporter. All rights reserved.
###
More on that Code of Ethics:
Act Independently
Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know.
Journalists should:
—Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
— Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
— Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service in community organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity.
— Disclose unavoidable conflicts.
— Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable.
— Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence news coverage.
— Be wary of sources offering information for favors or money; avoid bidding for news.
Be Accountable
Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other.
Journalists should:
— Clarify and explain news coverage and invite dialogue with the public over journalistic conduct.
— Encourage the public to voice grievances against the news media.
— Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
— Expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media.
— Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.
****
Discussion on Fred's, buhne, eric, and heraldo
****
Nathan Rushton on the Bankruptcy teleconference disruption
From heraldo's blog:
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Mark Lovelace Responds to Eureka Reporter
Humboldt Watershed Council president Mark Lovelace responds to Eureka Reporter accusations of ethics breach.
Glenn Franco Simmons
Nathan Rushton
The Eureka Reporter
215 4th Street
Eureka, CA 95501
Re: CourtCall and Journalistic Ethics
Dear Glenn and Nathan,
I was surprised to read your editorial on Saturday, regarding the apparently egregious breach of journalistic ethics posed by the presence of the Times-Standard’s John Driscoll at a ‘listening session’ for the Pacific Lumber bankruptcy hearings. I had spoken to Nathan about the arrangement on Thursday, but he expressed no ethical indignation about the issue. Rather, he merely seemed curious as to why he had not been invited too.
I explained to Nathan that the invitation to John Driscoll arose out of conversation in the course of John’s constant, in-depth coverage of the PL story. I would likely have invited Nathan, too, had he and I spoken, but such conversation was hampered by the Eureka Reporter’s relative absence on this critically important story. I was certainly pleased to hear that the Reporter was planning to step up its coverage, and I assured Nathan that he would be welcome to join us in any future listening sessions. In fairness, Nathan reflected much of this in his own column on Sunday.
The Times-Standard and the North Coast Journal have both written some excellent investigative reports on the details of this case while, so far, the Reporter has merely relayed the days events. With this editorial, the Eureka Reporter seems to have chosen to investigate the investigators, rather to investigate the story itself. Even in that the Reporter has erred, getting two critical facts wrong.
For one, the cost of the CourtCall service was paid by the Redwood Forest Foundation Inc, not HWC, though I did make the arrangements. Thus the assertion that this was in some way a ‘gift’ from the Humboldt Watershed Council is simply incorrect.
For two, neither the Humboldt Watershed Council, nor RFFI, nor anyone else in the room was a party to these proceedings. We were on a ‘listen only’ line because we were not participants, but rather observers, as would be any other member of the general public. This is fundamentally different from listening-in with Palco, or with an attorney for one of the parties.
Though HWC is not a party, we do have a deep interest in the outcome of this process, as should anyone in Humboldt County . The bankruptcy of Pacific Lumber Company is a huge story, and how this issue is resolved will have a significant impact on Humboldt County’s future. Through this process, we have the opportunity to finally put 22 years of division and culture war behind us, and to focus on developing a truly sustainable Pacific Lumber Company that our community can once again be proud of.
Organizing this CourtCall listening session was a part of HWC’s ongoing efforts to make this bankruptcy process as accessible and understandable as possible to the broader Humboldt County community. That same goal was the reason that HWC and others sponsored the Bankruptcy 101 workshop, which was attended by over 100 PL workers, retirees, their families and other members of the Fortuna and Rio Dell communities. It must be pointed out that the Eureka Reporter neither attended nor reported on that workshop.
For weeks I have been working to arrange a venue where anyone in Humboldt County could listen in to the bankruptcy proceedings. I have been in touch with the folks at CourtCall to try to arrange for the hearings to be streamed live on the web, which is something they have never done before. I have explored arrangements to provide a public listening venue in Fortuna. Significantly, I also provided Nathan with the necessary information on how to sign up for the CourtCall service.
What is particularly disappointing to me is that I had spent a significant part of my day Friday working on establishing a better, more public listening venue, and I believe that I have finally been able to make an arrangement that would allow any member of the public to join in. I spoke to both John Driscoll and Hank Sims about their respective papers’ interest in helping to fund this effort along with the Humboldt Watershed Council and others. I called Nathan on Friday and left him a message asking if the Eureka Reporter would like to join in this group effort, too. How disappointing, then, to read the Reporter’s divisive editorial the very next morning.
It is in everyone’s interest to work together, to share information, and to focus on providing a service to our community. I hope that the Eureka Reporter’s inaccurate and divisive editorial hasn’t soured the various partners who would be necessary to make this public service possible.
Sincerely,
Mark Lovelace, President
Humboldt Watershed Council
# posted by Heraldo @ 8:59 AM
Friday, March 09, 2007
From Venezuela News And Views
.
Bloggers in jail, today Egypt, tomorrow?
from daniel-venezuela
I'm not particularly religious, but I pray for these guys.
Bloggers in jail, today Egypt, tomorrow?
from daniel-venezuela
I'm not particularly religious, but I pray for these guys.
Eco-Propaganda
The EcoNews is certainly under no obligation to offer 'fair and balanced' reporting, but the Northcoast Environmental Center's supporters may not realize exactly how far they are from that noble goal, as they are fed polarizing propaganda issue after issue. But this latest one is over the top.
The March 2007 issue's cover story on Palco starts out telling the reader "The story of Pacific Lumber Company - now calling itself Palco - has been told and retold in painful detail for 22 years, ever since marauding Texas investor Charles Hurwitz leveraged enough publicly traded stock in the company to force out a long era of more benign management."
The author, Erica Terence, then quotes Mark Lovelace laying the groundwork for Ken Miller's "Transition Mission." She of course, has no idea how she is being used.
The crocodile tears pour forth. "The last 22 years have not been good to Humboldt County. We've been rocked by protests, tree-sits, ceaseless litigation, layoffs, mill closures, the Judi Bari bombing, the Stafford landslide, the pepperspray incident, the death of David Chain, increased flooding, landsliding and environmental damage, and a deepening polarization of our community..." Lovelace says.
You'd think he was getting ready to apologize. But no.
And Erica goes right along, regurgitating all the talking points from Lovelace, Ken Miller, and Ken Miller's other partner Jesse Noel.
Now, she says, "Lovelace and his colleagues do not want to waste time fixing blame - they'd rather figure out how to fix the structure of the company." As if they owned it.
She probably has no idea of the ceaseless role of those three in creating all the "protests, tree-sits, ceaseless litigation, layoffs, mill closures, the Judi Bari bombing, the pepperspray incident, the death of David Chain, and the deepening polarization of our community."
But there's no attempt at balance here, and no real research. No attempt to include a different perspective. This is propaganda, pure and simple, and it ought to be identified as such.
The EcoNews is a newsLETTER, not a newsPAPER, but publications are a record of our time. When they do not offer a full and honest accounting, with facts checked and with both sides represented they do a disservice to current and future readers and researchers.
"Earth First!," "Bay Area Coalition for Headwaters," "Salmon Forever," "EPIC," "Humboldt Watershed Council," "The Alliance for oh-so-ethical-Business," "Timber Yes, Fraud No" - Ken Miller and his crew, using many different "group" names, have been involved in a decades-long effort to attack one man and destroy one company. Pure and simple. And that story ought to be told.
The March 2007 issue's cover story on Palco starts out telling the reader "The story of Pacific Lumber Company - now calling itself Palco - has been told and retold in painful detail for 22 years, ever since marauding Texas investor Charles Hurwitz leveraged enough publicly traded stock in the company to force out a long era of more benign management."
The author, Erica Terence, then quotes Mark Lovelace laying the groundwork for Ken Miller's "Transition Mission." She of course, has no idea how she is being used.
The crocodile tears pour forth. "The last 22 years have not been good to Humboldt County. We've been rocked by protests, tree-sits, ceaseless litigation, layoffs, mill closures, the Judi Bari bombing, the Stafford landslide, the pepperspray incident, the death of David Chain, increased flooding, landsliding and environmental damage, and a deepening polarization of our community..." Lovelace says.
You'd think he was getting ready to apologize. But no.
And Erica goes right along, regurgitating all the talking points from Lovelace, Ken Miller, and Ken Miller's other partner Jesse Noel.
Now, she says, "Lovelace and his colleagues do not want to waste time fixing blame - they'd rather figure out how to fix the structure of the company." As if they owned it.
She probably has no idea of the ceaseless role of those three in creating all the "protests, tree-sits, ceaseless litigation, layoffs, mill closures, the Judi Bari bombing, the pepperspray incident, the death of David Chain, and the deepening polarization of our community."
But there's no attempt at balance here, and no real research. No attempt to include a different perspective. This is propaganda, pure and simple, and it ought to be identified as such.
The EcoNews is a newsLETTER, not a newsPAPER, but publications are a record of our time. When they do not offer a full and honest accounting, with facts checked and with both sides represented they do a disservice to current and future readers and researchers.
"Earth First!," "Bay Area Coalition for Headwaters," "Salmon Forever," "EPIC," "Humboldt Watershed Council," "The Alliance for oh-so-ethical-Business," "Timber Yes, Fraud No" - Ken Miller and his crew, using many different "group" names, have been involved in a decades-long effort to attack one man and destroy one company. Pure and simple. And that story ought to be told.
Thursday, March 08, 2007
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
Another one to watch...
Whaddya gonna do with this one?
ER - Man arrested for having sex with teen
3/1/2007
A man was arrested Wednesday on multiple sexual charges after being found in a vehicle, allegedly engaged in sexual relations with a teen.
According to a news release from the Fortuna Police Department, at about 2 a.m. Wednesday, an officer located a suspicious vehicle parked in the 600 block of Third Street in Fortuna.
Upon investigating the suspicious vehicle, which was blacked out behind a business, the officer determined that Douglas Richard Collard II, 25, of Eureka, was having sexual relations with a 15-year-old female passenger, the FPD reported.
Upon further investigation, it was found that Collard and the teen met in person once, began a relationship over the Internet in a chat room and had been meeting during the past several months and having sexual relations, the FPD reported.
Collard was arrested and booked into the Humboldt County Correctional Facility on suspicion of lewd and lascivious acts with a child, oral copulation and sodomy, the FPD reported.
Collard remained behind bars late afternoon Wednesday on a $75,000 bail, a jail official reported.
The Fortuna police warned parents to watch their children’s Internet usage.
“The Internet can be a dangerous place for unsupervised kids to be roaming,” the FPD release stated. “Parents are also reminded that Fortuna has a curfew for kids: 10 p.m. for under 17 and 11 p.m. for kids who are 17 years old.”
Copyright (C) 2005, The Eureka Reporter. All rights reserved.
TS - Man allegedly caught having sex with minor
ER - Man arrested for having sex with teen
3/1/2007
A man was arrested Wednesday on multiple sexual charges after being found in a vehicle, allegedly engaged in sexual relations with a teen.
According to a news release from the Fortuna Police Department, at about 2 a.m. Wednesday, an officer located a suspicious vehicle parked in the 600 block of Third Street in Fortuna.
Upon investigating the suspicious vehicle, which was blacked out behind a business, the officer determined that Douglas Richard Collard II, 25, of Eureka, was having sexual relations with a 15-year-old female passenger, the FPD reported.
Upon further investigation, it was found that Collard and the teen met in person once, began a relationship over the Internet in a chat room and had been meeting during the past several months and having sexual relations, the FPD reported.
Collard was arrested and booked into the Humboldt County Correctional Facility on suspicion of lewd and lascivious acts with a child, oral copulation and sodomy, the FPD reported.
Collard remained behind bars late afternoon Wednesday on a $75,000 bail, a jail official reported.
The Fortuna police warned parents to watch their children’s Internet usage.
“The Internet can be a dangerous place for unsupervised kids to be roaming,” the FPD release stated. “Parents are also reminded that Fortuna has a curfew for kids: 10 p.m. for under 17 and 11 p.m. for kids who are 17 years old.”
Copyright (C) 2005, The Eureka Reporter. All rights reserved.
TS - Man allegedly caught having sex with minor
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
Gallegos and Pelican Bay - what's the real story?
I'm not sure what to make of this article, but it's got a couple of interesting references to Gallegos' time (defending prisoners) at Pelican Bay... There were rumors of double billing and being kicked out of Del Norte County flying around... plus the allegations of passing notes between prisoners and illegally taping guard/inmate conversations and having his tape recorder and tapes bagged into evidence right in front of him. The latter, at least is documented.
Then there's these two references in this article below that give another glimpse into what happened, in his own words, sort of:
"...Other lawyers tell similar stories of beating the prosecution too many times and then finding themselves with fewer defense appointments. "Now the judges go all the way down to Humbolt to find incompetent, pony-tailed fuck-ups who alienate juries and can’t win cases," says de Solenni..."
..."I am convinced that they went after Easton because he filed suits on behalf of prisoners," say defense attorney Paul Gallegos, who has been accused of gang affiliation by the DA. "That accusation was patently absurd. The DA didn’t even realize he was, by implication, accusing the judge who appointed me to the case..."
So - Gallegos was accused of gang affiliation? That's a little heavier than just passing notes... What's the real story?
Rural Prison as Colonial Master
rsklnkv | 02 October, 2006 19:13
Then there's these two references in this article below that give another glimpse into what happened, in his own words, sort of:
"...Other lawyers tell similar stories of beating the prosecution too many times and then finding themselves with fewer defense appointments. "Now the judges go all the way down to Humbolt to find incompetent, pony-tailed fuck-ups who alienate juries and can’t win cases," says de Solenni..."
..."I am convinced that they went after Easton because he filed suits on behalf of prisoners," say defense attorney Paul Gallegos, who has been accused of gang affiliation by the DA. "That accusation was patently absurd. The DA didn’t even realize he was, by implication, accusing the judge who appointed me to the case..."
So - Gallegos was accused of gang affiliation? That's a little heavier than just passing notes... What's the real story?
Rural Prison as Colonial Master
rsklnkv | 02 October, 2006 19:13
Disclaimers...
Should "Media Maven" Marcy Burstiner be commenting on DA's office cases without a disclaimer... same goes for Baykeeper/Dioxin issues given that her husband Jeffrey "yougofree.com" Schwartz works for Paul, whose campaign manager is the "Baykeeper's" wife...
Well, I happen to like her work, and often agree with her conclusions, but this "right wing" blogger thinks the answer is "NO."
For the record, Marcy - it may be wishful thinking on the part of your husband, Paul Gallegos and Jose Mendez to think that people aren't interested, but the Sean Marsh case was topic #1 at the coffee shops, as people expressed utter disbelief that the DA's office wasted time and energy persecuting a good Dad, and based on blog traffic on those Ferndale Enterprise stories, I can tell you it was very closely followed by people here and out of the area.
But you're right about one thing, there is a "bigger picture" that has really been ignored, a story that MUST and WILL be told...
Well, I happen to like her work, and often agree with her conclusions, but this "right wing" blogger thinks the answer is "NO."
For the record, Marcy - it may be wishful thinking on the part of your husband, Paul Gallegos and Jose Mendez to think that people aren't interested, but the Sean Marsh case was topic #1 at the coffee shops, as people expressed utter disbelief that the DA's office wasted time and energy persecuting a good Dad, and based on blog traffic on those Ferndale Enterprise stories, I can tell you it was very closely followed by people here and out of the area.
But you're right about one thing, there is a "bigger picture" that has really been ignored, a story that MUST and WILL be told...
Monday, March 05, 2007
Why be NORML?
One of Gallegos' two favorite topics...Is it a little like fiddling while Rome burns? The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws Humboldt State University Chapter will host a conference... Humboldt County District Attorney Paul Gallegos will give a speech.
Sunday, March 04, 2007
A little more of Jeffrey "yougofree.com" Schwartz's history...
Re-trial granted for Napoleon Brown murder conviction
March 11, 2006
http://www.fogcityjournal.com
" ...After his conviction, Brown's lead attorney, Jeffrey Schwartz, went to work for the Humboldt County district attorney's office...
On Feb. 27, Judge Jerome Benson granted their motion to re-try the murder case on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel...
Wise and Zilversmit argued in court that Schwartz had not used every option in his arguments in Brown's defense.
They said Schwartz had failed to fully argue that the chain of causation had been broken in Brown's connection to White's death..."
background:
Man Found Guilty of Murder, Four Counts of Robbery, Carjacking
Man convicted of getaway-car murder
Three Strikes - Court did not reject three-strikes law
New Deputy DA Schwartz excited about working for Gallegos
"...former Deputy District Attorney Tim Stoen introduced the two..." (Gallegos and Schwartz)
Web address not wrong, just changed
March 11, 2006
http://www.fogcityjournal.com
" ...After his conviction, Brown's lead attorney, Jeffrey Schwartz, went to work for the Humboldt County district attorney's office...
On Feb. 27, Judge Jerome Benson granted their motion to re-try the murder case on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel...
Wise and Zilversmit argued in court that Schwartz had not used every option in his arguments in Brown's defense.
They said Schwartz had failed to fully argue that the chain of causation had been broken in Brown's connection to White's death..."
background:
Man Found Guilty of Murder, Four Counts of Robbery, Carjacking
Man convicted of getaway-car murder
Three Strikes - Court did not reject three-strikes law
New Deputy DA Schwartz excited about working for Gallegos
"...former Deputy District Attorney Tim Stoen introduced the two..." (Gallegos and Schwartz)
Web address not wrong, just changed
Thursday, March 01, 2007
Is Paul Gallegos licensed to practice law in Texas?
Hank Sims describes a PL Bankruptcy conference call in which Gallegos, acting in his official capacity (albeit on his cellphone), made what amounts to a court appearance in the matter, as he insisted the Court recognize that he joined with the CA AG's motion.
Gallegos graduated from an unaccredited law school. As I understand it, while he is licensed to practice law in California, he is not licensed to practice law in other states. In Texas state courts, they will grant a waiver (pro hac vice ) allowing a lawyer from California, from an unaccredited school,* to practice, but this has to be applied for and granted. Did he apply for pro hac vice status to appear or did he appear illegally?
But if the bankruptcy hearing is in front of a Federal Court, do they offer such a waiver? - This question arose in the comments yesterday and my limited googling hasn't gotten me an answer.
When Paul made a "court appearance" via cellphone, as described in the Journal article, was he practicing law without a license?
(*note: apparently California is one of the few states that allows unaccredited law school graduates to practice law, so the Texas judicial system allows a waiver subject to approval.)
Follow up:
Pacific Lumber Co. bankruptcy trial begins Tuesday in Texas
Gallegos graduated from an unaccredited law school. As I understand it, while he is licensed to practice law in California, he is not licensed to practice law in other states. In Texas state courts, they will grant a waiver (pro hac vice ) allowing a lawyer from California, from an unaccredited school,* to practice, but this has to be applied for and granted. Did he apply for pro hac vice status to appear or did he appear illegally?
But if the bankruptcy hearing is in front of a Federal Court, do they offer such a waiver? - This question arose in the comments yesterday and my limited googling hasn't gotten me an answer.
When Paul made a "court appearance" via cellphone, as described in the Journal article, was he practicing law without a license?
(*note: apparently California is one of the few states that allows unaccredited law school graduates to practice law, so the Texas judicial system allows a waiver subject to approval.)
Follow up:
Pacific Lumber Co. bankruptcy trial begins Tuesday in Texas
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)