.
.
.
.
.
SHOW OF FARCE: The Santa Ana Police Department demonstrates to the world that their top priority on a busy Saturday night is not to patrol the community and apprehend would-be burglars, robbers, and rapists, but to deploy between 17 and 23 cops, some on horseback, to arrest four young men who non-violently “occupied” a patch of publicly-owned grass at that city’s Civic Center.
Last Saturday night, while attending the “Occupy Santa Ana” demonstration at that city’s Civic Center, I had the opportunity to watch the Santa Ana Police Department deploy between 17 and 23 cops to arrest four young men who decided to non-violently “occupy” a patch of publicly-owned grass not far from the Orange County Clerk-Recorder’s Office. I don’t understand why they needed an equestrian unit on the scene for crowd control especially since I estimated there were probably less than 50 people milling about.
Nevertheless, this rather huge contingent of Santa Ana police, no doubt held over from an earlier shift and likely earning quite a bit of overtime pay by now, at first spent time monitoring us from afar in the parking lot of the old County Courthouse. But not long after the young men erected two tents on the lawn, cops began swarming all over the place, some on horseback. As I watched them handcuff and place the men one by one into a van waiting to haul them off to jail, I wondered how much taxpayer money was being wasted on this?
As any Chief of Police will tell you, Saturday nights are the busiest nights for any law enforcement agency serving an urban area. So while Santa Ana police were taking their time removing men who committed the heinous “crime” of sitting in tents on public property, I thought about all the burglaries, robberies, rapes, and other violent offenses that might be occurring in other parts of that nearly-bankrupt town. I’m sure most residents would be pleased to know Santa Ana’s finest were working hard to keep “lawbreakers” off the grass.
But what is ironic is shortly after Santa Ana police left the Civic Center, that same patch of grass the men had been arrested on ended up being “occupied” after all. As Andrew Galvin, a reporter for the Orange County Register pointed out, a “handful of protesters actually spent the night on [the] lawn.” There was nothing in Galvin’s article indicating cops even bothered returning to the scene to harass or intimidate them. So all of this begs the question: what the heck were Santa Ana police doing? Was this a show of force? Or a show of farce?
Yes, so far so good as far as being hassled by the popo. It would be great to find out exactly how much this farce cost taxpayers.
They can be on the lawn as long as they don’t have tents or sleeping bags, that’s the word from the Occupy OC crew tonight. Otherwise it is considered illegal camping.
As far as I’m concerned, what the Santa Ana Police Department did at the “Occupy Santa Ana” demonstration on Saturday night was a complete waste of taxpayer money. They have more important priorities than to play games with a handful of non-violent protesters setting up tents on a patch of publicly-owned grass.
“They have more important priorities than to play games with a handful of non-violent protesters setting up tents on a patch of publicly-owned grass.”…… Hmmmm
Not really Duane!
It is not accident that Mayor Pulido is in Power over 22 years, virtually same length as an average dictator and about 10 years more than Adolf Hitler.
It is not accident that Mayor Pulido appointed Police Chief Paul Walters as a city manager to form Police City.
It is not accident that Paul Walters’ SAPD13 death squad shoots mothers in front of their children see Susie Young Kim and is using Mexican youth as a shooting practice target.
It is not accident that Paul Walters in 90’s was freebasing cocaine in the SAPD lab and was selling it to children.
Well Duane, you are dealing with numero uno Mexican National Socialists.
Expect a bloodbath in Santa Ana.
Next time vote for Fiala when he runs for the Mayor for Santa Ana — the Europeans love to consume the horse meat.
A bloodbath? Really? Would you care to admit you were wrong if that doesn’t happen?
Onan,
For all practical reasons it already happened.
If you would add all blood produced by SAPD13 under the leadership of the Chief Paul Walters it would fill more than one bathtub to take a bath.
Yes, yesssss, Walters has been running death squads and has been murdering people for years and nobody knows. Got it.
If you do not know about that Onan, then you are not as literal as you claim as you are.
Read at leas your local papers. Add together all likings by SAPD13.
Just a murder of Susie Young Kim would produce 2 Liters of blood for a bath.
When a drunk woman resists arrest and begins a high-speed chase, then drives toward a police officer (that turns a car into a weapon), that does not amount to murder.
Care to try again?
Onan,
I have never seen any high-speed chase ending in driver killing.
She past several cities Buena Park, Anaheim and Fullerton without being shoot.
She was allegedly driving stupid Honda 120 m/h drunk and she did it without any accident or hitting any object.
Try to get drunk and see if you can do that; obviously she was not drunk but pissed at COPs acting in self defense.
Maybe the were gone to search her Fullerton Stile.
If you would read court facts than she was stooping to surrender,; the car speed was about 5m/h when Walters’ goon walk up to her and soot her in the head from behind.
Obviously you are pro COP apologist and it wouldn’t be prudent for me to continue this argument with a moron mongoloid.
Every Psychopath has his reason to kill people, Paul Walter and his SAPD13 have theirs.
I hold no brief for Walters (never met the man), but: when you say this, Stanislavski, do you do so with malice. If it’s not technically defamatory, no one can make fun of Walters for not responding to it as such.
Esq. Encino,
Please be legally advised that publishing a truth is not malicious act.
So if your do not know facts google; and if you are stupid ask.
http://www.ndsn.org/nov94/stings.html
I should add
Please ask Walters, Paul PWalters@santa-ana.org
Tell him Stanislawski send you.
FYI, Polish and Jewish spelling is with (w)
The lined story says that in the mid-90s the SAPD was converting cocaine to ultraviolet-dye-coated crack for use in its sting operations.
That’s new to me. It seems like a dubious policy. But it is also not what people then or now would, so far as I now, mean by the verb “freebasing,” which I’ve only ever heard in reference to consuming the drug itself. Saying that he was “freebasing cocaine” thus seems defamatory.
So, to clarify, Stanislavski, is your assertion that Walters actually smoked crack or that he just manufactured it for sting operations, as described above? Truth of an assertion is indeed a defense, so let’s clarify your assertion.
“so far as I now, mean by the verb “freebasing,” which I’ve only ever heard in reference to consuming the drug itself”…… Hmmmmm
Obviously you are basing your meaning analysis on a hearsay which is inadmissible as an evidence.
As to whether Walters actually smoked crack?…. if your do not know facts google; and if you are stupid ask Paul PWalters@santa-ana.org
Tell him Stanislawski send you.
Again with the cowardice! This is becoming unbecoming, Stanislav.
My legal advice to you is: never use another legal term in your life until and unless you understand it.
“My legal advice to you is: never use another legal term in your life until and unless you understand it.”
Since you have admit that you are rendering an advise to me you have establish attorney client relationship.
Since I do interpret your alleged advise as a threat I believe that you are in a violation of the Cal. Bars Rules of Professional Conduct.
I’ll handle committing you for psychiatric observation and I’ll hold your Euros for you while you’re gone. My fee will be huge.
“My fee will be huge”……. Hmmmm
It is clearly apparent Esq. Encino that there is something of yours which may be “huge” but it ain’t your fee.
Legal Malpractice May Come from an Implied Attorney Relationship.
Attorney client relationship may be implied. The North Dakota court has weighed in with yet another case holding that an attorney may find him/her self involved as an attorney without knowing it! The Court reprised that “It is not necessary that there be an express contract or payment of fees; an attorney-client relationship may be implied from the conduct of the parties. See Stormon v. Weiss, 65 N.W.2d 475, 520 (N.D. 1954); Robertson, 536 N.E.2d at 348; Keegan, 519 N.W.2d at 611.” That is the majority rule in the United States.
1) recent SUSIE YOUNG KIM $2.45 MILLION DOLLAR SETTLEMENT by City of Santa Ana.
http://santaana.ocregister.com/2011/10/25/city-pays-2-55-million-in-settlements-as-funds-dwindle/
2) I have a deep respect for our SAPD, unfortunately, I am aware of two incidents of improper police action, which reflects on poor leadership at the very top.
a) One is an improper accusation of a crime to a young man who had no history of any criminal activity, was a college student, and was accused even when non-related and independent witnesses had placed the “accused” somewhere else.
b) Police brutality against a young boy.
Police brought him back to the mom, did not mention anything. Mom noticed something suspicious on the young man’s behavior. Found out that 2 officers had brutalized him and threatened him to not say anything. Mom took the young man to the hospital that night. Found out the boy had a collapsed lung, fractured ribs/bones, and that he if had not been brought to the emergency room, the boy would have most likely died that night.
3) Then you have what I believe to be improper and negative campaigning by the SA Chief of Police on behalf of the Mayor, and who also appears to have violated the CA Police Chief’s Association “Code of Ethics”.
below are the Chief’s own words:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9qcXj78EFo
4) And it appears that the Chief is conflicted and is favoring one dept (SAPD) over another (SAFD), and appears to lack full objective as it relates to departmental budgetary issues.
And with these issues out there, we are rewarding the Chief with TWO positions, one of which I believe he is not fully qualified for because he does not appear to have the extensive experience required for this; and by splitting up his time, he is NOT fully devoting time to either of the two positions to the detriment of both, and to our citizens.
All of the above issues are detrimental and do a disservice to the Citizens of Santa Ana, and to the brave men and women of both the SAPD and SAFD.
Francisco “paco” Barragan
My opinions only and not those of any group
Thanks Francisco to bring me up to date re Susie Young Kim, 2.5M it is better than nothing. Now, I have some closure in my mine because I was really upset about this one especially when this country would be willing to go to war against Saddam if he would shoot mother in front of her child.
Obama too did nothing re may complaint.
However, I would like to see Pulido and Walters tried for the first degree murder.
Anybody with their right mind must see them as murderess.
Well we have to wait and see what will future bring, considering that both Walters an Pulido are as stupid as Bustamante we may see soon some scandalous narrative to unfold.
Anyway we should put $2.5M lean on their properties.
I have begun to think that this is their secret plan to help out bloggers.
Oh I agree completely. Just informing you of the “deal” that is goin’ on.
Did they get that in writing?
I’ve been finding that it’s important to get these assurances in writing.
To my knowledge, it’s not in writing yet.
Greg Diamond wrote:
> Did they get that in writing?
>
> I’ve been finding that it’s important to get these assurances in writing.
I’ve been informed via email that protesters sleeping at the Civic Center were issued citations by Santa Ana Police early this morning.
Well, at least the citations in writing….
So, OK, Santa Ana’s position is for now the same as Irvine’s. Both will arrest (a citation is a non-custodial arrest) for sleeping in the “park.” If people in Santa Ana wanted to do it, that’s up the them; people in Irvine are still optimistic about getting City Council approval, which is probably more likely if we’re not getting arrested in the meanwhile. Now people have two different approaches they can choose, one in each site.
Greg Diamond wrote:
> Well, at least the citations in writing….
And the Santa Ana Police most likely issued those citations because they wanted to sweep the area of all the “rabble” before the rich white folk who run County Government came to work.
My guess is that they didn’t want members of the Orange County Board of Supervisors suffer the indignity of looking out their office windows and seeing “rabble” sprawled on the grass.
Seeing that might distract them from their goal of helping their rich friends get rich off of public money. They also don’t want to be reminded of the end result of “free market capitalism.”
My solution: people who run County Government should live in tents on the grass. (Can I get a consultant fee for that one?)
Greg Diamond wrote:
> My solution: people who run County Government should live in
> tents on the grass. (Can I get a consultant fee for that one?)
Great idea! Then we could use all those empty buildings to house homeless people living at the Santa Ana Civic Center. Now If the rich white folk who run County Government need any office space, they can ask their rich friends to give them some. It won’t make a big difference to us since they’re already working for them anyways.
——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Stanislav Fiala is asking: Should Paul Walters join Oath Keepers Declaration of Orders We Will NOT Obey?
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 07:02:31 -0700
From: Standa standa@merlin4x.com
To: Walters, Paul PWalters@santa-ana.org, Harrelson, Anthony THARRELSON@santa-ana.org, McGeachy, Douglas DMcGeachy@santa-ana.org
CC: Straka, Josef jstraka@ci.santa-ana.ca.us, Pulido, Miguel MPulido@santa-ana.org, Alvarez, Claudia calvarez@santa-ana.org, Sarmiento, Vincent vsarmiento@santa-ana.org, Benavides, David DBenavides@santa-ana.org, Martinez, Michele mimartinez@santa-ana.org, Bustamante, Carlos cbustamante@santa-ana.org, Tinajero, Sal stinajero@santa-ana.org
Dear Chieve Paul Walters,
As a founding member of the Oath Keepers I am inviting you and SAPD to join us and sign our Declaration of Orders We Will NOT Obey
“The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves; whether they are to have any property they can call their own; whether their Houses, and Farms, are to be pillaged and destroyed, and they consigned to a State of Wretchedness from which no human efforts will probably deliver them. The fate of unborn Millions will now depend, under God, on the Courage and Conduct of this army” – Gen. George Washington, to his troops before the battle of Long Island
Such a time is near at hand again. The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the Courage and Conduct of this Army – and this Marine Corps, This Air Force, This Navy and the National Guard units of these sovereign states.
Oath Keepers is a non-partisan association of currently serving military, reserves, National Guard, peace officers, and veterans who swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic … and meant it.
Our oath is to the Constitution, not to the politicians, and that oath will be kept. We won’t “just follow orders.”
Below is our declaration of orders we will NOT obey because we will consider them unconstitutional (and thus unlawful) and immoral violations of the natural rights of the people. Such orders would be acts of war against the American people by their own government, and thus acts of treason. We will not make war against our own people. We will not commit treason. We will defend the Republic.
Declaration of Orders We Will NOT Obey
Recognizing that we each swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and affirming that we are guardians of the Republic, of the principles in our Declaration of Independence, and of the rights of our people, we affirm and declare the following:
1. We will NOT obey any order to disarm the American people.
The attempt to disarm the people on April 19, 1775 was the spark of open conflict in the American Revolution. That vile attempt was an act of war, and the American people fought back in justified, righteous self-defense of their natural rights. Any such order today would also be an act of war against the American people, and thus an act of treason. We will not make war on our own people, and we will not commit treason by obeying any such treasonous order.
Nor will we assist, or support any such attempt to disarm the people by other government entities, either state or federal.
In addition, we affirm that the purpose of the Second Amendment is to preserve the military power of the people so that they will, in the last resort, have effective final recourse to arms and to the God of Hosts in the face of tyranny. Accordingly, we oppose any and all further infringements on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. In particular we oppose a renewal of the misnamed “assault-weapons” ban or the enactment of H.R. 45 (which would register and track gun owners like convicted pedophiles).
2. We will NOT obey any order to conduct warrantless searches of the American people, their homes, vehicles, papers, or effects – such as warrantless house-to house searches for weapons or persons.
One of the causes of the American Revolution was the use of “writs of assistance,” which were essentially warrantless searches because there was no requirement of a showing of probable cause to a judge, and the first fiery embers of American resistance were born in opposition to those infamous writs. The Founders considered all warrantless searches to be unreasonable and egregious. It was to prevent a repeat of such violations of the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects that the Fourth Amendment was written.
We expect that sweeping warrantless searches of homes and vehicles, under some pretext, will be the means used to attempt to disarm the people.
3. We will NOT obey any order to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to trial by military tribunal.
One of the causes of the American Revolution was the denial of the right to jury trial, the use of admiralty courts (military tribunals) instead, and the application of the laws of war to the colonists. After that experience, and being well aware of the infamous Star Chamber in English history, the Founders ensured that the international laws of war would apply only to foreign enemies, not to the American people. Thus, the Article III Treason Clause establishes the only constitutional form of trial for an American, not serving in the military, who is accused of making war on his own nation. Such a trial for treason must be before a civilian jury, not a tribunal.
The international laws of war do not trump our Bill of Rights. We reject as illegitimate any such claimed power, as did the Supreme Court in Ex Parte Milligan (1865). Any attempt to apply the laws of war to American civilians, under any pretext, such as against domestic “militia” groups the government brands “domestic terrorists,” is an act of war and an act of treason.
4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state, or to enter with force into a state, without the express consent and invitation of that state’s legislature and governor.
One of the causes of the American Revolution was the attempt “to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power” by disbanding the Massachusetts legislature and appointing General Gage as “military governor.” The attempt to disarm the people of Massachusetts during that martial law sparked our Revolution. Accordingly, the power to impose martial law – the absolute rule over the people by a military officer with his will alone being law – is nowhere enumerated in our Constitution.
Further, it is the militia of a state and of the several states that the Constitution contemplates being used in any context, during any emergency within a state, not the standing army.
The imposition of martial law by the national government over a state and its people, treating them as an occupied enemy nation, is an act of war. Such an attempted suspension of the Constitution and Bill of Rights voids the compact with the states and with the people.
5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty and declares the national government to be in violation of the compact by which that state entered the Union.
In response to the obscene growth of federal power and to the absurdly totalitarian claimed powers of the Executive, upwards of 20 states are considering, have considered, or have passed courageous resolutions affirming states rights and sovereignty.
Those resolutions follow in the honored and revered footsteps of Jefferson and Madison in their Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, and likewise seek to enforce the Constitution by affirming the very same principles of our Declaration, Constitution, and Bill of Rights that we Oath Keepers recognize and affirm.
Chief among those principles is that ours is a dual sovereignty system, with the people of each state retaining all powers not granted to the national government they created, and thus the people of each state reserved to themselves the right to judge when the national government they created has voided the compact between the states by asserting powers never granted.
Upon the declaration by a state that such a breach has occurred, we will not obey orders to force that state to submit to the national government.
6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.
One of the causes of the American Revolution was the blockade of Boston, and the occupying of that city by the British military, under martial law. Once hostilities began, the people of Boston were tricked into turning in their arms in exchange for safe passage, but were then forbidden to leave. That confinement of the residents of an entire city was an act of war.
Such tactics were repeated by the Nazis in the Warsaw Ghetto, and by the Imperial Japanese in Nanking, turning entire cities into death camps. Any such order to disarm and confine the people of an American city will be an act of war and thus an act of treason.
7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.
Mass, forced internment into concentration camps was a hallmark of every fascist and communist dictatorship in the 20th Century. Such internment was unfortunately even used against American citizens of Japanese descent during World War II. Whenever a government interns its own people, it treats them like an occupied enemy population. Oppressive governments often use the internment of women and children to break the will of the men fighting for their liberty – as was done to the Boers, to the Jewish resisters in the Warsaw Ghetto, and to the Chechens, for example.
Such a vile order to forcibly intern Americans without charges or trial would be an act of war against the American people, and thus an act of treason, regardless of the pretext used. We will not commit treason, nor will we facilitate or support it.”NOT on Our Watch!”
8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control” during any emergency, or under any other pretext. We will consider such use of foreign troops against our people to be an invasion and an act of war.
During the American Revolution, the British government enlisted the aid of Hessian mercenaries in an attempt to subjugate the rebellious American people. Throughout history, repressive regimes have enlisted the aid of foreign troops and mercenaries who have no bonds with the people.
Accordingly, as the militia of the several states are the only military force contemplated by the Constitution, in Article I, Section 8, for domestic keeping of the peace, and as the use of even our own standing army for such purposes is without such constitutional support, the use of foreign troops and mercenaries against the people is wildly unconstitutional, egregious, and an act of war.
We will oppose such troops as enemies of the people and we will treat all who request, invite, and aid those foreign troops as the traitors they are.
9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies, under any emergency pretext whatsoever.
One of the causes of the American Revolution was the seizure and forfeiture of American ships, goods, and supplies, along with the seizure of American timber for the Royal Navy, all in violation of the people’s natural right to their property and to the fruits of their labor. The final spark of the Revolution was the attempt by the government to seize powder and cannon stores at Concord.
Deprivation of food has long been a weapon of war and oppression, with millions intentionally starved to death by fascist and communist governments in the 20th Century alone.
Accordingly, we will not obey or facilitate orders to confiscate food and other essential supplies from the people, and we will consider all those who issue or carry out such orders to be the enemies of the people.
10. We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.
There would have been no American Revolution without fiery speakers and writers such as James Otis, Patrick Henry, Thomas Paine, and Sam Adams “setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.”
Patrick Henry: “Give me Liberty, or Give me DEATH!”
Tyrants know that the pen of a man such as Thomas Paine can cause them more damage than entire armies, and thus they always seek to suppress the natural rights of speech, association, and assembly. Without freedom of speech, the people will have no recourse but to arms. Without freedom of speech and conscience, there is no freedom.
Therefore, we will not obey or support any orders to suppress or violate the right of the people to speak, associate, worship, assemble, communicate, or petition government for the redress of grievances.
— And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually affirm our oath and pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor. Oath Keepers
The above list is not exhaustive but we do consider them to be clear tripwires – they form our “line in the sand,” and if we receive such orders, we will not obey them. Further, we will know that the time for another American Revolution is nigh. If such a revolution comes, at that time, not only will we NOT fire upon our fellow Americans who righteously resist such egregious violations of their God given rights, we will join them in fighting against those who dare attempt to enslave them.
NOTE: please also read our Principles of Our Republic We Are Sworn to Defend
More About Oath Keepers
Oath Keepers is a non partisan association of currently serving military, veterans, and peace officers who will fulfill our oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help us God.
Our oath is to the Constitution, not to the politicians, and not to any political party. In the long-standing tradition of the U.S. military, we are apolitical. We don’t care if unlawful orders come from a Democrat or a Republican, or if the violation is bi-partisan. We will not obey unconstitutional (and thus unlawful) and immoral orders, such as orders to disarm the American people or to place them under martial law. We won’t “just follow orders.” Our motto: “Not on Our Watch!” or to put it even more succinctly, in the words of , “NUTS!”
There is at this time a debate within the ranks of the military regarding their oath. Some mistakenly believe they must follow any order the President issues. But many others do understand that their loyalty is to the Constitution and to the people, and understand what that means.
The mission of Oath Keepers is to vastly increase their numbers.
Respectfully submitted by the founding member
-Stanislav Fiala
If the cops were not there to protect the silver spoon’ers, then there would have been a problem.
The show of force was not about the fifty or so protestors, but was all about keeping the scores of criminals from descending upon these defenseless sheep and cattle and mopping up the street with them.
Cook, I do not think that Marx, Engels and Lenin would like you, however, Stalin and Mao may.
Ooo, snap!
When you refer to the “silver spooner defenseless sheep and cattle” in the Occupy Santa Ana March, are you thinking of the Iraq vets there, or the Vietnam vets there, or all the folks struggling to get by with 2 or 3 minimum wage jobs? Which silver spooners, Cook? Which defenseless sheep?
You were obviously miles away…
Yes, because the street criminal element is notoriously protective of the interests of the financial industry.
Cook, they were there because they wanted to be there. If you never pull out the horses, how do you expect citizens to want to pay for them?
Greg, I am not sure what you are saying.
Vern, the people I saw when I was there don’t look to me like they have ever gone without anything in their lives.
But I did not spend much time there as most of my time was spent at the Zoo for the various activities there.
Not to po-po what the protestors are complaining about (like the big pile of horse dodo left on the lawn) it is my opinion that the majority of them have not paid the dues, to earn the right to complain about those who support (pay for) their care free lifestyle.
I was being facetious in the first sentence. The cops were not there to “protect the protesters” from street criminals. That would have required many fewer cops and did not require arrests.
I do think that some cops seem to look forward to the confrontation — more in Santa Ana than in Irvine, to Irvine’s P.D.’s credit.
There’s a wide diversity in income level, age, and life experiences in the Irvine group; I expect that the same is true of Santa Ana.
The notion that someone must suffer before complaining about the wrenching wealth and disparity in this country — not deriving from the wealthy doing their “jobs” well, but from their gaming the system — is something that must make sense to the conservative brain, but I think it is bonkers.
Greg Diamond wrote:
> I do think that some cops seem to look forward to the
> confrontation — more in Santa Ana than in Irvine, to Irvine’s
> P.D.’s credit.
The only reason why Irvine Police Department appears to be less confrontational to the “Occupy Irvine” protesters is because it has far less resources available at it’s disposal to handle them. As I recall, it’s less than one third the size of the Santa Ana Police Department, which has lots of “assets” to play with, including armored cars and an equestrian unit they use to control crowds.
Any confrontation that Irvine Police had with protesters, even a small crowd, could conceivably tie up their cops for long periods of time and prevent them from patrolling the rest of the city. Santa Ana Police, on the other hand, is the biggest city law enforcement agency in Orange County. They can easily put 50-100 cops equipped with riot gear on the street at any time.
I’ve been involved in demonstrations and protests all over the county and have tended to notice that the smaller the city police department is, the more “friendlier” they are to protesters. Why? Because they don’t have enough resources available at their disposal to be “aggressive.” Although they can call other law enforcement agencies for help, they use it sparingly due to cost.
It’s all about economics.
Well, OccIrv also not baiting them. People want that council approval. If it eventually becomes clear that it won’t be forthcoming — I choose to make no prediction.
GREAT photo-essay of Occupy Santa Ana from the Voice of OC’s Nick Gerda (hat-tip Paco)
http://voiceofoc.org/oc_central/article_2c5c31f6-fe46-11e0-96c2-001cc4c002e0.html
I wish them well. Assuming that Irvine holds to its present path, we’ll see in time whether one, the other, neither, or both lead to victory.
I should say “victories,” rather — measured in terms of getting to occupy the public space, in court, in the hearts and minds of others in Orange County, and in attracting other people to the cause.
I love a good quasi-experiment!
Naomi Wolf – In 70s America, protest used to be very effective, but in subsequent decades municipalities have sneakily created a web of “overpermiticisation” – requirements that were designed to stifle freedom of assembly and the right to petition government for redress of grievances, both of which are part of our first amendment. One of these made-up permit requirements, which are not transparent or accountable, is the megaphone restriction.
So I informed the group on Hudson Street that they had a first amendment right to use a megaphone and that the National Lawyers’ Guild should appeal the issue if they got arrested. And I repeated the words of the first amendment, which the crowd repeated.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/oct/19/naomi-wolf-arrest-occupy-wall-street
Thanks, Sharon. Good advice to load into our hopper.
Peaceful demonstrators, are Endowed with a Permanent permit:
The Declaration of Independent talks about UNALIENABLE rights…meaning rights that can NOT be separated from the individual.
Right to peaceful assembly and to petition the government can never and should never be abridged by ordinances, rules, regulations and procedures.
The overriding principle is the respect of the individuals’ Constitutional rights, protections and privileges. The ordinances, rules, regulations and procedures should be there To FACILITATE freedom of expression and peaceful assembly and NOT to infringe on this unalienable right.
Francisco “paco” Barragan
There’s a case to be made along the lines of that laws regulating time/place/manner and such should have to facilitate any freedom of expression the speakers/demonstrators choose, but no one should fool themselves into thinking that a court would see it as that simple and straightforward.
I think that your approach may invite people to think that this is a “gimme” and they would be able to avoid punishment. I’m certainly not telling anyone that.
“but no one should fool themselves into thinking that a court would see it as that simple and straightforward”………. Hmmmm
In other words you believe that you are not a competent attorney make case along the above lines?
Those are indeed other words. They don’t express what I was saying, but they are definitely “other.”
What were you saying?
btw my friend Shalise recorded the video above – everyone add her on Twitter! She will be updating more as she gets more followers 🙂
http://twitter.com/shalise99pct
“I thought about all the burglaries, robberies, rapes, and other violent offenses that might be taking place”
When I read that statement Ithought perhaps I was reading the comments section on the Register website.
The bottom line is that we have an anti-camping ordinance in Santa Ana and these folks were breaking the law. The Santa Ana PD was simply enforcing the law.
While I am sympathetic to much of the message of the “occupy” movement I am also a believer in upholding the law. That is what the SAPD was doing. If you don’t like that perhaps you should petition the city council to change the law.
Sadly when I took a drive down Ross Street passed Sasscer Park around 3PM on Saturday I saw a few of the prostesters overturning a planter and pushing it out into the street in the lanes of traffic. This is totally unacceptable and they should’ve been arrested for vandalizing property. This won’t win over the residents of Santa Ana by doing this.
The men and women of the Santa Ana Police Department under the leadership of Paul Walters do a terrific job. I am sorry that you have a problem with them doing it.
Wow, so now we have pissed off commissioner Sin Mill.
The pictures here http://voiceofoc.org/oc_central/article_2c5c31f6-fe46-11e0-96c2-001cc4c002e0.html shows that any vandalism may have been done by the lumpenproletariat closely associating with Mayor Pulido….. Huh?
Where did you see violence in those photos, Stanislaw?
The photographs speak for themselves!
I suppose that, with you as an alternative, they had better.
Are you writing in an official capacity, Sean? I ask only because of your penultimate sentence.
I don’t think that the people who allegedly massacred the planter are representative of the movement. Of course, protests attract a swarm of people who want to destroy property; the General Assembly in Irvine (and I presume that this is also true of Santa Ana) have discouraged this.
I’m touched by your belief in “upholding the law,” since that’s one of the main messages of the Occupy movement. Tell me — how well has the law been upheld against the pressure of the financial companies over the past dozen or so years — and if the only resistance you consider acceptable to it that which is pretty much guaranteed to be ineffective and shrugged off?
The world has changed, Sean. Orange County is going to change with it, even if it is kicking and screaming and demanding to be left alone.
P.S. If you think that leftists like robberies and rape, you may be too far gone to reach. Were you referring metaphorically to Enron?
I THINK Sean is saying that Duane mentioning the existence of “burglaries, robberies, rapes, and other violent offenses” in Santa Ana makes him similar to the racist ranters who like to trash the town in places like the Register.
Of course Duane’s coming from as far a place as can be imagined from the typical Register commenter. But that’s not a reason for anyone to pretend there’s not a lot of crime in the town, more serious and dangerous than four 20-somethings camping out to make a political statement.
I know what he’s saying. It’s absurd.
Do you?
What I am saying is that folks like to portray Santa Ana in a negative light in order to further their political bent. Duane, like those at the Register site, is trying to portray Santa Ana as a crime ridden community. That just isn’t the case.
Tell me how many rapes or violent offenses took place Saturday night in Santa Ana? Duane’s commentary seems to insinuate that there were some that took place. Lets see the facts.
When you compare Santa Ana to Irvine of course the crime stats are skewed. However when you compare it to cities of similar population and demographics you will see that our crime rates are not that bad. Paul Walters and the SAPD do a great job.
Outsiders like Roberts and Diamond don’t know what really goes on in our city and yet they write about it as if they are experts.
“Outsiders like Roberts and Diamond don’t know what really goes on in our city and yet they write about it as if they are experts”………. Hmmmmm
Are you implying that you are an expert on the Santa Ana Commissioner Sin Mill?
Here are the crimes http://www.crimemapping.com/map.aspx?loc=Santa%20ana
By the way it does not include crimes committed by the SAPD13 against the Santa Ana Citizens.
If I can briefly speak for Duane in his absence – as well as for myself, and for Diamond – none of us want to trash Santa Ana. I LOVE Santa Ana, and i believe Duane and Greg also do. Duane’s point should be very easy to understand though – there were doubtless many more urgent matters for the SAPD to be attending to on a Friday night than a peaceful campout-protest. Are we really not succeeding in making that point clear to you?
Sean Mill wrote:
> What I am saying is that folks like to portray Santa Ana in a
> negative light in order to further their political bent.
> Duane, like those at the Register site, is trying to portray
> Santa Ana as a crime ridden community. That just isn’t the case.
Although I can see how you perceive this, it was NOT my intention to reinforce any negative stereotypes about Santa Ana being a “crime ridden community.” One purpose of my post was to question why SAPD deployed so many officers to the Civic Center when they have more important priorities to attend too.
I’ve dealt with Walters many times before and he has a tendency to waste exorbitant amounts of taxpayer money deploying armies of cops to harass non-violent demonstrations. The SAPD did NOT need up to 23 cops, including some on horseback, to arrest four people for allegedly violating some camping ordinance.
If the street crime rates are low (which I don’t doubt), then maybe Santa Ana should seriously consider laying off its police officers. It is my opinion that Walters seems to want to justify big budgets for his police department by constantly overblowing the “threat” that non-violent protesters pose to “public order.”
Sean, if you are really concerned about the city’s financial health, you should ask Walters how much money was spent babysitting these non-violent protesters last Saturday. Then compare it with other cities here in Orange County who don’t send out armies of cops every time somebody stands on a street corner with a sign.
What Vern said.
I would be very surprised if the time, money, and attention put into staving off the general insurrection Saturday night in Santa Ana was worth it; I would be very surprised if it were worth it even if Santa Ana’s demographics, including crime rate, were the same as Irvine’s.
Frankly, holding that opinion doesn’t demand a whole lot of expertise.
“Are you writing in an official capacity, Sean?”
I am writing in my official capacity as a resident of Santa Ana. I am writing as someone who actually lives here and knows what goes on in our city and knows of the great work of Chief Walters and the SAPD.
But you are still a commissioner?…. Huh?
Subject to rule of ethics?….. Huh?
That’s not an official capacity, as you know. It just sounded so official.
Could you set Santanislav straight as to whether Walters was “freebasing” in the mid-90s? I’d do it myself, but as you know I’m not a resident.
Esq. Encino,
Please be advised that only purpose for freebasing is to purify the cocaine from what ever a dealer used to step on it.
Once that is done you have pure cocaine instead dirty one.
If you want to consume it at that stage or convert it into a crack cocaine you will have to further process it as did SAPD.
However you may always use it as is without any freebasing.
Whether or not COPs (including Walters) used some of it in the process, is subject for an investigation but I believe that a statute of limitation has ran.
Therefore, Walters was freebasing cocaine for a purposes of purity. In one article Walters admitted that he did it to protect children to from getting hurt should they consume dirty cocaine admitting that a pure cocaine is harmless, to which I agree.
Since you are an attorney you may initiate investigation on behalf of Cal. Attorney General. I cannot!
Sean Mill wrote:
> The bottom line is that we have an anti-camping ordinance in
> Santa Ana and these folks were breaking the law. The Santa Ana
> PD was simply enforcing the law.
Although I am not defending the Santa Ana Police department, they could have easily enforced the “anti-camping ordinance” with about six or seven police officers who were NOT earning overtime or doubletime. But acting-Chief Paul Walters has a tendency to waste exorbitant amounts of taxpayer money by deploying triple, quadruple, or sextuple the amount of cops he needs to control small non-violent crowds of protesters.
I’m sure the Santa Ana Police Officer’s Association is happy with all the generous amounts of overtime and doubletime their men and women get standing around laughing and giggling in parking lots watching a demonstration. After all, it’s easier to get paid big bucks babysitting non-violent protesters than to fight crime. You might get killed if you try to apprehend a robber who just held up a bank or liquor store with a sawed-off shot gun.
> While I am sympathetic to much of the message of the “occupy”
> movement I am also a believer in upholding the law. That is what
> the SAPD was doing. If you don’t like that perhaps you should petition
> the city council to change the law.
Just to let you know, I was actually opposed to anybody engaging in “civil disobedience” on Saturday night. I personally didn’t think it was a good idea. However, I was rather surprised Santa Ana Police was stupid enough to overreact and deploy so many officers to arrest so few people in front of cameras. But like I said, Walters loves to waste taxpayer money. With people like him in charge for so long, it’s no wonder why your city is going bankrupt.
> Sadly when I took a drive down Ross Street passed Sasscer Park
> around 3PM on Saturday I saw a few of the prostesters overturning
> a planter and pushing it out into the street in the lanes of traffic.
> This is totally unacceptable and they should’ve been arrested for
> vandalizing property. This won’t win over the residents of Santa
> Ana by doing this.
I don’t disagree with you. But whoever did that had absolutely nothing to do with the “Occupy Santa Ana” demonstration. We were far away from the Ronald Reagan Federal Building and Courthouse when that occurred. Most of the protesters didn’t know anything about that until we went to the Civic Center later in the afternoon.
> The men and women of the Santa Ana Police Department under
> the leadership of Paul Walters do a terrific job. I am sorry that you
> have a problem with them doing it.
Although I don’t think all the men and women who work at the Santa Ana Police Department are “pigs,” I have no respect for Walters because of the utter disregard he has for civil liberties and civil rights. Oh yes, his cops behaved very professionally when they arrested the four young men at the Civic Center. But that’s because there were television cameras recording everything they were doing. You should see how some of them behave with protesters when reporters aren’t around. I know, I’ve been there.
But hey, if you want two dozen cops, probably earning big bucks earning overtime and doubletime, spending almost an hour to arrest four people for sitting on a patch of publicly-owned grass, that’s fine with me. You’re the one who is paying taxes to support them, not me. And you’re the one whose going to be victimized by a crime because Walters and his lackeys deployed an army of officers in riot gear on the other side of town to goof off in parking lots while they watch peaceful people exercise their constitutional rights.
Well-said. I’d love to know the price tag on that police effort Saturday night.
@ Greg:
I believe that the process should always be there to facilitate a CONTINUED peaceful assembly and demonstration, and NOT to be used as a tool to break up peaceful assemblies, when it seems convenient and expedient to do so.
Of course, I expect law enforcement to use their authority and SOUND judgment in PREVENTING VIOLENCE or destruction of private or public property, if necessary, but this should not be used as an excuse to prevent the exercise of constitutional and peaceful rights.
And of course I expect for us to follow procedures or the rule of law to keep us an ordered and civil society, but again these procedures or rules should not be designed (intentionally or unintentionally) to trump or violate Constitutional protections.
We can add as much difficulty and complexity as we can dream up, but the principle of freedom of peaceful assembly should not be violated for the sake of simplicity and convenience.
It is unfortunate that we are becoming a society that assumes that Citizens have automatically “Opted OUT” of our rights, and that in order to exercise these right that Citizens have to “Opt IN”, and that if we fail to “Opt In” that therefore we can not exercise our rights.
Also, I have traveled to 28 countries and 22 states, and I am amazed as to the OVER-regulation and social repression of our rights here in the USA, and oftentimes these regulations have negative unintended consequences to civil liberties and protections.
On the surface we seem to be the most politically free, but act or conduct our affairs as the most socially repressed.
Everything you have said above, I ditto.
The rights you are referring to are “unalienable rights” given to you by your creator.
YOU STILL HAVE THEM SO USE THEM!
In America we are lazy, trusting left liberals who are telling us that we have lost our “unalienable rights” given to us by our creator.
Do not trust left liberals![emphases added]
How about when conservative Presidents eavesdrop on Americans without court permission, as was mandated by law in the wake of Watergate?
How about the supper liberal president giving an order to assassinate USA citizen without a due process on the top of continuing what the conservative president started.
FYI, Bush was not conservative!
Yes, Bush was a conservative, and so were those in his Administration who went along with the illegal wiretapping.
And Obama committed murder by assassinating Anwar Awlaki…not to mention Awlaki’s 16-year-old son and his cousin.
So you see, these abuses are not just a “liberal” thing. They are the result of an America that’s lost its way when it comes to foreign policy and national security, and that phenomenon cuts across party lines.
Onan,
Lets go back to the constitution and Bill of Rights.
The unalienable rights are given by a creator not by government.
So if the left liberals do not believe in a creator they do not believe in the unalienable rights too!…. correct
Lets ask supper ultra left liberal comrade Vern.
Vern do I have unalienable rights?
Roger that, Stanislav.
Some liberals don’t believe in a creator.
Some conservatives don’t believe in a creator.
So exactly what the “F” are you talking about. Could you please spare us these unobjective, over-generalized, incoherent ramblings?
Stan, I see you started this whole nonsensical discussion by blaming the loss of constitutional rights on liberals (up above.) So I’m gonna cut this one off now.
Thank you, if Bush was a conservative, then I must be a closet liberal???? NOT!
“No child left behind act”. “prescription drugs free”, Not just taking out Iran and Iraq, instead he wanted to build nice schools and try to teach people who CUT OF HEADS, to be diplomatic. No Bush was not conservative.
OK Francisco if comrade Vern would be SA COP he would too arrest you regales of your observations in your comment!
1% = Left Liberals not Banks!
If you have travel as much as I have, then you would know that most counties don’t give a hoot about their people and will let them scream and yell, cause really they are done with their own population. Most countries are in trouble Francisco because freedom has become code word for not working and living off the government!
This country is free for one reason and one reason only, there are more workers and people who want to work and strive in this country, than any other country in this world. That is what makes this country free, cause they give a dam. Then there are people like you and the far left that want to take away the freedom of self reliance, self pride, self production etc… and replace it with your own brand of freedom, the freedom to not give a fuc* ….Pardon my french!
@ Michelle Q:
“Most countries are in trouble Francisco because freedom has become code word for not working and living off the government!”
MY RESPONSE
Most countries are in trouble because of unchecked CORPORATE WELFARE.
The most recent example, Fall of 2008, in the USA is the almost $20 Trillion (out of a $13.5 Trillion annual economy) given to the financial industry.
We should have left the FREE Market & Capitalism correct itself.
I think middle class Americans are rightly NOT opposed to Capitalism or Free Markets, but rather the undue influence that lobbyists have and which hurts average Americans.
A further example that also has Americans concerned is the unchecked military spending that actually is weakening our country.
Please see Former Secretary Robert Gates sentiment that “warfare should not be welfare”.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/09/12/what-gates-plans-to-do-before-he-leaves-office.html
@ Michelle Q:
You state, “Then there are people like you and the far left that want to take away the freedom of self reliance, self pride, self production”
MY RESPONSE:
I want Americans to continue enjoying their freedoms, self reliance, self pride, and self production, because this is the formula to success as a country.
What I am opposed to is the undue and corrupt influence in which Corporations or Individuals are dependent on the government.
a) CORPORATIONS have to be weaned-off the tax-payers.
(THIS HAS the largest Budgetary impact); and also
b) INDIVIDUALS have to be weaned-off the tax-payers.
Our citizens have to be educated and/or trained to compete, and be self-reliant in this global economy. (Where ever there are Deadbeat parents they must be found and be responsible for the upbringing of their off-spring).
And Citizens will be most able to compete when they know that the system is NOT stacked up against them and their self-reliance efforts.
No, again you are wrong, they are not cutting down on welfare in Cuba, Spain, Greece, Ireland etc……They are cutting out the welfare.
And yes, any bail out of any kind is short lived and most likely will lead to government dependence. Welfare is welfare, it neither works for individuals or companies. Nothing is too big to fail and only a company worth anything will rebuild it self. Just as giving someone a hand up other than a hand out!
As far as military spending; this country with all the whack jobs in the world, needs a strong military. But we should not be the worlds police. We should be a country that says, “We will leave you alone, unless you try to kill us, then we will kill you first”. Would like to spend more time on this subject, but got to go and look after my huge corporation……
Corporate welfare!
Amber, It was a pleasure to meet you Saturday. Fun times.
Likewise. You’ll be seeing more of me very soon!
How many of the protesters got hurt? How many were mugged, raped, murdered or assaulted?
None? Is that correct?
Seems to me that the SAPD was very successful in defending the assembled cattle. Just like I said before, they were there to protect the “Occupy Santa Ana folks”
Cook, when someone comes by trying to sell you alligator repellent, correctly noting that no alligators have been seen on the streets of Orange County in the past however many years and that proves how well it works, how many bottles do you buy for your home?
[Just like I said before, they were there to protect the “Occupy Santa Ana folks”]……. Hmmmm
Cook,
The protection is relative term!
I do not care about my life but i care about the life of the USA constitution.
I would prefer if the SAPD was there to protect the constitution and allow me to carry the gun so I can protect myself.
Remember that during the WWII Japaneses were sent to the concentration camps for their own protection.
Again, Cook. are you calling the Iraq War vets who participated in our protest defenseless cattle? Or are you merely referring to the Vietnam vets who were there, as defenseless cattle? Or are you trying to say me, Greg, Duane, Amber, and Marine Commander Francisco Barragan aren’t up to protecting ourselves against petty street criminals? Everyone wants to know!
Vern, I did not see anyone carrying a side arm (pistol) (Who were not cops)
And the SAPD officers are told by their commander’s on their rules of engagement.
And they did their job, regardless of a few individuals who can take care of themselves.
Greg, alligator’s are not the problem, the 5 or so active gangs within a block of that location is the concern.
Stan, you can carry your weapon, but they will not let you into the council chambers with it. I think the city and county should have a gun locker in the lobbies so we have a safe place to store our firearms when we visit the government offices.
I think what Cook meant is that the police were doing their job by protecting the flea baggers from the mentally ill, criminals and low lives that seem to be drawn to the federal and state buildings of Santa Ana; for got reason, I might add. And as seen by most of the No brain Occupation demonstrators, they seem to get a wee bit out of hand at times. I am no fan of the SAPD, they are one of the reason why we have rapid illegal immigration in Santa Ana, and the reason why crime is spilling out of this area to other communities.
The bottom line is that anything that has to do with demonstrations in Santa Ana is going to be no good! It’s a horrible place with a lot of horrible people and a lot of trouble makers, racist, dead beats, single mothers, drug addicts, which seems to make up the whole Occupy a dirty space theme! As you can see from my very hard core response, I think the whole occupiers are just wasters, low lives and moan bags and people who have made really bad choices in their lives and want the workers of the world to feed and look after them and their many broods! It has become a world wide demonstration of the many who are not use to working and kids who have no intention of working. Greece, Spain, Europe as a whole has way too many flea baggers and now America has seen if they don’t start getting their education up to power, stopping illegal immigration from third world countries and getting the stupid liberals out of the power chair, America is heading into flea baggers land!
I use to laugh at the cute little out fits the tea party people would wear and I am just disgusted at how many wasters and losers we have and will have in this country, if we don’t just say NO to them!
It is amazing that Michelle Q lumps and makes “Single Mothers” a crime. (and by extension Mr. Mom’s).
My brothers and sister and myself lived with a single mother.
My father passed away when I was about 10.
I worked in the fields of Northern California from about 12-19, together with all of my siblings. My mother only has an elementary grade level education, but she taught us to get ahead in life through our own efforts and with a strong work and moral ethic.
I won’t even get into all of her other hasty generalizations.
It should be a crime, especially when it is done out of the stupidity of the mother that will most likely cost the child his/her quality of life. No, Mr. B. It’s not a crime, but it is stupid and thoughtless and selfish. I too lived with a single mother and it was hard both on her and my brothers and that is usually the case. But, my mother lost her husband to violence, most single mothers as it is in todays environment, loss their men because of the stupidity of father and the ignorance and failure to see a bad thing coming with the mother. The truth is most children of single mothers are either in gangs or in jail and that is a fact! Most single mothers account for most of the poverty, and that is a fact. And the fact is that most people like yourself have values when it comes to yourself. Would you leave your wife and your kids? And would your wife have had children out of wedlock; I think not. And what happened to your father Mr. B, it seems to be a trend with Latin Mexican men to leave their children is it not? And why? Like you, I was fortunate enough to have a brilliant, responsible mother. That is not always the case hence all the children looking for a family within a gang. You see Mr.B. Being a goody two shoes, giving back to your hispanic community, does nothing but allow bad behavior to continue, due to all the resources that allows children to become single mothers and men to leave their families! Its easy to be Mr. Nice guy, hard to be Mrs, reality check!
Nice, I can comprehend based on my cultural upbringing.
@ Michelle Q:
You say, “And what happened to your father Mr. B, it seems to be a trend with Latin Mexican men to leave their children is it not? ”
My Response:
I assume you did not read carefully (I am sometimes guilty of that myself).
My father “left” us because he died.
I know he would have preferred to be alive, than to be dead.
It seems that sooner or later (and hopefully later) that is a “trend” with everyone including Non-Hispanic people, we all die.
@ MICHELLE Q:
You say, “You see Mr.B. Being a goody two shoes, giving back to your hispanic community, does nothing but allow bad behavior to continue, due to all the resources that allows children to become single mothers and men to leave their families! Its easy to be Mr. Nice guy, hard to be Mrs, reality check!”
MY RESPONSE:
Again, Michelle you can Join me in this gravy train of “Being a Goody Two Shoes”, and a “Mr Nice Guy”, and help improve the WHOLE community regardless of race, ethnicity, or religious background, so that communities can be self-sustaining.
You can help me and others mentor and empower parents and youth to overcome some of the challenges (economic, linguistic etc) that they face.
You can also meet some of the orphaned children, and you can help me and others prepare them for a successful career, and/or you can help me/others create and implement social entrepreneurship programs so that they learn to be self-sustaining.
You can meet some of the school-age youth that are also dropping-off high school to help provide in the home because of their economic hardships. (And unfortunately, some do get into the gangs because of the allure.)
You can also meet some of the veterans that are struggling with some of their physical and reduced cognitive abilities as a result of their service. You can help us help them navigate the bureaucracies, and advocate for their needs.
You can also helps us stop and prevent domestic violence and human trafficking. Unfortunately, there are sick people out there that kidnap women and children (annually about 50,000 US born and immigrant children) and sell them into prostitution or modern slavery.
You can help us raise awareness, advocate for survivors, and mobilize people to action.
Again my contact info:
Francisco “Paco” Barragan
Barraganfj@gmail.com
(714) 605-2544 cell
Sorry about your dad, it is harder on the mothers and the sons I think, than it is on the female children. That is why, I think so many young men, join gangs. And of course which leads to a huge degree of young men in jail. Back to hispanics leaving their children. Again your father died, most single mothers are single because the men do not stay with them and as seen in Santa Ana it is becoming an alarming rate. If you look at the Orange Country Grand jury reports, there are some good reports regarding young hispanic teen pregnancy, Most of the Cal-works recipients I was told are single hispanic mothers without supporting fathers. It is a trend and it will only continue, if hispanic are not weened off welfare.
I have no interest in perpetuating the problem of orphans Mr. B, I would like to stop it. Orange Children’s home is full of abandoned children because the parents are either on drugs or to young to look after them. Most of the children in Orange wood are hispanic. Most of the kids in Child protective service are hispanic and most of the children in Juv hall are hispanic gang members and lost teens. We need to start making the parents accountable for looking after their kids, not giving them more resources to screw around.
You can develop all the programs in the world, it will do nothing to stop the real reason for social ills, “Bad parenting”.
Human abuses cannot be fixed, if most humans in third world countries don’t care about their own children. We can fix human misery, by giving people the resources and the only resource they need is a good education and better parents!
I suppose this comment thread is as good a place as any for three anecdotal observations from Saturday’s Santa Ana event.
Showing up late (I had to visit my brother in the hospital who got knocked off his bike onto his head the night before – he’s OK now) and walking fast trying to catch up with the march, Francisco and I passed a group of five cops standing around and joking with each other. All I caught was one young cop chortling, “Well, then I guess I better not go home this afternoon and get fucked up!” and they all laughed. I figure what must have led up to that comment was talk about how they’d all be back later in force, on overtime, to deal with the peaceful protesters.
Later when we had caught up with the march, I observed an unmarked car repeatedly circling the block where we were standing and chanting. The driver held a long night stick tightly in his hand as he drove, while the passenger trained a huge video camera on each of the protesters as they slowly passed. Neither were in uniform. Duane chuckled, “Standard operating procedure for these Santa Ana cops.”
Then as we left we saw the famous toppled planter. I guess it sustained some chips when being overturned (by nobody-knows-whom, either some overly enthused idiots or someone trying to make us look bad.) It had just been hoisted up onto the back of a city pickup, and a photographer took pictures of it from every angle while five solemn cops stood and watched. It was almost like a memorial service for the planter. I asked, “What happened here, officers?” but they just ignored me. I felt like getting on the camera and reminiscing tearfully, “I remember that planter .. it was the best one … it wasn’t like the others … it’ll never be the same again [choking up] … we will never forget this planter!”
But it was too late, we were already on our way to Irvine!
——– Original Message ——–
Subject: Stanislav Fiala is asking: Should I commend Paul and Miguel?
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 15:25:19 -0700
From: Standa standa@merlin4x.com
To: Walters, Paul PWalters@santa-ana.org, Pulido, Miguel MPulido@santa-ana.org DMcGeachy@santa-ana.org, Straka, Josef jstraka@ci.santa-ana.ca.us, Alvarez, Claudia calvarez@santa-ana.org, Sarmiento, Vincent vsarmiento@santa-ana.org, Benavides, David DBenavides@santa-ana.org, Martinez, Michele mimartinez@santa-ana.org, Bustamante, Carlos cbustamante@santa-ana.org, Tinajero, Sal stinajero@santa-ana.org
Dear Paul and Miguel,
In appreciation to ripoff $2.5 Million from the City of Santa Ana
coffers and for training SAPD officers in Muammar Gaddafi’s police
academy with objective to shoot mothers in front of their children, I
commend you both Paul and Miguel.
Santa Ana Gang members needs male role models like you two are!
Respectfully submitted
-Stanislav Fiala