That's 12 (2 + 5 = 12). And counting. wanzala@xxxxxxxxx wrote: As a member of the short lived pacifica listeners union of old, I would join up, for more or less the same reasons I did back then. Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T -----Original Message----- From: Emmett Abati Doe Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:19:18 To:NewPacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Cc:pacificaradiowaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, pacifica_now@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, realpacifica@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, PacificaRadiowaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [NewPacifica] The "JUDGE'S" REPLY TO US ALL Anyone else wiling to invest $20 a month to fund a Pacifica Listener Union to represent us? Jim, can you/are you able to accept the money while there is still time and a Foundation to preserve? Or do we keep fiddling (excuse me, emailing) as Rome Burns? If future generations retain the rights/technology to learn of this time, they may be dismayed at how little blood was shed to resist enslavement, by a so called "Free People". $20 bucks is a cheap-out to avoid bleeding folks. Advise, ...made in america jdemaegt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: As long as we "take it to the Judge" - the corporate appointed and corporate controlled JUDGE - and we do not use the tools of organizing and Democracy to control Pacifica problems then well - the corporate system will control Pacifica. So it is the corporate controlled media that Pacific is supposed to be an "alternative" to and then we turn over control of Pacifica to the corporate controlled legal system and ask the "Judge" to solve all Pacifica disputes. Hey we just forgot the Listener-Sponsors and we just forgot trying to be "alternative" to the corporate media in any way. Jim "Oh well one more corporate control media in the U.S. will not change things much. So if the 'take it to the Judge" trend continues then we will have 'Pacifica one more corporate controlled media' and an 'alternative' to nothing" " D. JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE , PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA. JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE , PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA. JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE , PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA. JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE , PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA. JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE, PACIFICA, JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE, PACIFICA JUDGE ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frank LeFever" com> To: ai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 10:13 PM Subject: [rocklandfriendsofwbai] Re: Robert Goldberg's reply to Sheila. > --- In rocklandfriendsofwb ai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, FAN wrote: >> >> Bylaws can be superseded by a judge. They do not have force of law. > > Oh? > >> Corporations operate at the pleasure of the general public which can > revoke their charter if there >> is malfeasance or if the public is not served. >> Pacifica is no exception. > > Precisely why we need to get JUC and their protected managers out of > there before it reaches that point. > > >> If a bylaw is stupid, a judge by law can say, this bylaw is stupid > and I can void it or supersede >> it. > > Oh? > >> That's what the judge did. > > Oh? > >> The law of the land does not bow to corporate bylaws. >> That would be stupid. > > Very funny, Fred. Very funny. > > --Frank LeFever > > ========================================================= > --- Frank LeFever wrote: >> >> > In other words, those two attorneys reject the stipulations of the >> > ByLaws (election period ends Nov. 15; extension only if ballots have >> > been counted and it is found that quorum has not been achieved, and >> > such an extension is for only two weeks)? >> > >> > Do they also agree with Pacifica's iED (Dan Siegel) in rejecting the >> > law that protects directors' right to inspect the records of the >> > stations those directors are legally responsible for? Do they agree >> > with his violating the law which protects members' right to see and >> > use membership rolls? >> > >> > Just how far do these three attorneys take their disregard for the >> > law? And how long do they expect to disregard the law and retain their >> > licenses to practice law? >> > >> > --Frank LeFever >> > >> > ==================================================== >> > --- In rocklandfriendsofwb ai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, sheila hamanaka >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > Please stop trying to use the Warrens. >> > > As I said, it was technical, not political. >> > > Believe me folks, they DO NOT SUPPORT SHUTTING OUT VOTERS as of > 11/15. >> > > Evelyn Warren WOULD LOSE HER VOTE IF THE > ACE/"INDEPENDTS"/"PLAINTIFFS" >> > > GOT THEIR WAY... and do would other voters! >> > > >> > > "Timing is everything": Election Violations, Lawsuit. Election >> > > Violations, Lawsuit... DUH. >> > > >> > > I'm for a new election, too. >> > > But, WITHOUT the $$$ mailings which always work to the advantage > of $$$ >> > > millionaires offering freebies with misappropriated station > logos on >> > > em. >> > > It's just like mainstream politics. >> > > Money should not be a factor, especially when there seems to be >> > > virtually no control over CAMPAIGN LIES. >> > > >> > > >> > > On 19 Feb, 2008, at 4:29, mitchelcohen2001 wrote: >> > > >> > > Sheila Hamanaka is incorrect, here. >> > > >> > > Michael Warren and Evelyn Warren filed papers with the Court > seeking >> > > to JOIN THE PLAINTIFFS. These documents are matters of public > record. >> > > >> > > The relief they sought was to do-over the entire elections > from start >> > > to finish -- something that I, for one, am not adverse to if > it is not >> > > salvagable in any other way and if the lists are upgraded and >> > > maintained by an independent agency that does these sort of > things for >> > > union elections. But I do not believe that that should be our > first >> > > priority. >> > > >> > > Mitchel >> > > >> > > --- In rocklandfriendsofwb ai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, sheila hamanaka >> > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Mr. Goldberg >> > > > You wrote: >> > > > "The Warrens attempt to join my law suit proves they agree > with my >> > > > analysis. Are >> > > > you condemning them?" >> > > > >> > > > Wrong, to the point of absurdity. Evelyn Warren, represented > by her >> > > > husband, the famed human rights attorney Michael Taril > Warren, whom >> > > one >> > > > of your colleagues maligned on this list by questioning his > legal >> > > > credentials, was not in court to agree with you. If you want > to be >> > > > embarrassed, repeat your theory to their faces. How they > entered the >> > > > case was only a technicality. >> > > > >> > > > First of all, Evelyn was there because she had heard about a one >> > week >> > > > extension from Nov 15 to the 23rd. So, she decided to mail her >> > ballot >> > > > in rather than hand deliver it on Nov. 15th. SHE WENT TO COURT >> > > BECAUSE >> > > > YOUR LAWSUIT, IF SUCESSFUL, WOULD HAVE MEANT HER VOTE WENT > INTO THE >> > > > GARBAGE. >> > > > >> > > > Last, but not least, the Warrens have dedicated their lives to >> > > > fighting racism. >> > > > I'm sure they, like me, would rather hand a dead rat from their >> > necks >> > > > than associate with Steve Brown. >> > > > If you can't see the racism in the rumors spread by Steve Brown, >> > then >> > > > obviously Pacifica needs to do long and intensive antiracist >> > > training. >> > > > Have you even read the statement of the LSB about > disassociating >> > > itself >> > > > from Brown? >> > > > >> > > > As for the most of the rest of what you say, You may believe it, >> > but >> > > I >> > > > don't. >> > > > You have no proof of any "illegal behavior" on the part of > Justice & >> > > > Unity or her supporters.. >> > > > Nor, of Bernard White. >> > > > None. >> > > > Theft? >> > > > Violent behavior? >> > > > Tampering with zip codes? >> > > > Do you know the difference between proof and hearsay? >> > > > Steve Brown feels free to make false allegations about > anyone he >> > > wants >> > > > to, and like all commercial advertisers, works on the > principle that >> > > > you can make people believe anything is you say it often enough. >> > > > Think about this: the KKK has criticisms of the government. > So do I. >> > > > But would I accept their endorsement or allow them to pay for my >> > > > mailer? No. >> > > > >> > > > If you or Brown have proof of anything, please produce it. >> > > > >> > > > On 19 Feb, 2008, at 0:08, Frank LeFever wrote: >> > > > >> > > > So far, Sheila has apparently not replied. Bob said I could > share it >> > > > with people here. >> > > > >> > > > [For documentation of what Bob says about the injunction and for >> > some >> > > > updates, see http://radioactivis t.net ] >> > > > >> > > > --Frank LeFever >> > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> > > > Sheila, >> > > > >> > > > Thanks, this time, for sending a coherent message. But your >> > questions >> > > > to Mitch are not constructive to the future of > WBAI/Pacifica. They >> > > > serve only to show a narrow, partisan outlook that is > striving to >> > > keep >> > > > the Foundation and stations in the hands of many incompetent, >> > > > self-serving people. >> > > > >> > > > I can't speak for Mitchell Cohen or anyone else, but myself. > As a >> > > > plaintiff in the current law suit, Cohen vs WBAI/Pacifica/the >> > > Election >> > > > Supervisors, I helped to bring a law suit in reaction to an >> > > > incompetently-administered and probably corrupt election at > WBAI. We >> > > > asked a court to intervene and get Pacifica management and the >> > > > Election Supervisions to follow the Foundation bylaws as > they define >> > > > the election of Delegates to the Local Station Boards. >> > > > >> > > > Are you defending the way this election was run? If so, what >> > basis do >> > > > you have besides the bylaws? The dates during which the >> > elections are >> > > > to be conducted are clear and the only basis for extending is >> > lack of >> > > > a quorum. What other basis can you cite--your convenience? The >> > > > Election Supervisors failed to send ballots in first class > mail by >> > > the >> > > > due date. Was that my fault? The Election Supervisors failed to >> > > > notify the membership of their illegal extension of the > election's >> > > > closing date and then, inadequately notified only some of the >> > members >> > > > very shortly before the original date was reached. The Warrens >> > > > attempt to join my law suit proves they agree with my > analysis. Are >> > > > you condemning them? >> > > > >> > > > The questions you ask deserve to be applied to the management of >> > > > Pacifica, not to me or any of the other plaintiffs. The > facts are >> > > > that the Election Supervisors failed to provide ballots to large >> > > > numbers of eligible members, even after they were repeatedly >> > > notified. >> > > > Doesn't your knowing that Sara Flounders, etal. are > attempting to >> > > > join me, for some of the same reasons, convince you of this? > Do your >> > > > sources deny any of the implications of my questions? >> > > > >> > > > WBAI has failed to keep a consistent, complete list of > members. Is >> > > > that my fault? Why are there multiple lists of members and > who set >> > > > them up and for what different purposes? The member of this >> > > > Foundation would like to know. >> > > > >> > > > Your venom against perceived racism has twisted your > thinking to the >> > > > point where you may never be able to recover. I hope you do - >> > because >> > > > you have an otherwise fine mind and the creativity to try to > fill >> > > > important needs in children's books. The one I looked at would >> > be far >> > > > better if it included a wider spectrum of human beings and > concern. >> > > > >> > > > Bob Goldberg >> > > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: NewPacifica@ yahoogroups.com >> > > [mailto:NewPacifica@ yahoogroups.com] >> > > > On Behalf Of hudsonhemingway >> > > > Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 10:57 PM >> > > > To: NewPacifica@ yahoogroups.com >> > > > Subject: [NewPacifica] BREAKING NEWS! COHEN LOSES BID FOR > TRO #2 IN >> > > > COURT >> > > > >> > > > Apparently Mitch Cohen was back in court on Friday. >> > > > >> > > > I'm not sure of the details, but according to my sources > JUDGE BRAUN >> > > > SAID NO to Mr. Cohen's bid for anothter Temporary > Restraining Order. >> > > > >> > > > It seems the "Plaintffs" as NOT AS HAPPY WITH THE VICTOY > they were >> > > > claiming in court. >> > > > >> > > > Mr. Cohen: >> > > > >> > > > Tell the truth: Aren't you really pissed with Braun's ruling to >> > count >> > > > the votes cast AFTER NOV 15? >> > > > >> > > > Tell the truth: Aren't ou really pissed with Braun's ruling > to count >> > > > the votes of people who requtested ballots between Nov 15 and >> > Feb 15? >> > > > >> > > > Tell the truth: Aren't you really pissed that WBAI members > can PICK >> > > UP >> > > > BALLOTS and CAST THEM on Feb 22 and Feb 23? >> > > > >> > > > OR, is it going to work like this? >> > > > >> > > > 1. Ballots cast before Nov 15 are SEPARATED FROM ballots > cast after >> > > > Nov 15 >> > > > >> > > > 2. The two groups of ballots are _TALLIED SEPARATELY_ >> > > > A. Only ballot cast before Nov 15 are counter >> > > > B. Ballots cast between Nov 15 and Feb 23 are included >> > > > >> > > > 3. If Candidates on Brown's slate mailer WIN more seats in >> > scenario A >> > > > -- The Plaintiffs go back to court and say: "DON'T COUNT THE > VOTES >> > > > CAST AFTER NOVEMBER 15!" >> > > > >> > > > 4. If Candidates on Brown's slate mailer WIN more seats in > Scenario >> > > B, >> > > > then the Plaintiffs say: "OKAY, WE AGREE TO ADMIT THOSE POST > NOV 15 >> > > > VOTES." >> > > > >> > > > Well, Mr. Cohen? >> > > > >> > > > What DID YOU GO TO COURT FOR? >> > > > >> > > > DID YOU ASK THE COURT TO SEPARATE THE BALLOTS? YES OR NO? >> > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.8/1287 - Release Date: 2/19/2008 > 10:55 AM > > ?Put Some Kegler?s On It! ? It?s Good For What Ails Ya!? www.OnePainFreeSolution.Biz ---------------- Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. Yahoo! Groups Links ?Put Some Kegler?s On It! ? It?s Good For What Ails Ya!? www.OnePainFreeSolution.Biz --------------------------------- Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.