SF Bay Area Indymedia indymedia
Indybay About Contact Newsletter Calendar Publish Community

Santa Cruz Indymedia | Police State and Prisons

Was Tough-on-Crime Take Back Santa Cruz Founded by a Corporate Criminal?
by Postive Loiterer
Wednesday Jun 2nd, 2010 10:05 PM
Take Back Santa Cruz founder Dexter Cube apparently was twice found guilty of fraud by the Security and Exchange Commission.
When Take Back Santa Cruz first appeared as a response to a gang-related stabbing of a high school student last year, it seemed reasonable enough. Why not have an organization dedicated to making our community safer, largely through encouraging people to spend more time “positively loitering” in public spaces? Before long, however, it became clear that TBSC had a fairly narrow vision of what safety means, and from whom Santa Cruz should be taken back. For TBSC, homelessness is a problem not for desperate people scraping by on the street, but for the rest of us who are burdened with having to see and occasionally interact with them. Thus their solution is not to work towards building a community with sufficient jobs and housing and mental health services, but to “clean up” homeless camps in the hopes of pushing them away to someone else’s town. Similarly, their solution to gang violence or any other crime is simply to support the police and prisons; analyzing the causes of crimes, and considering preventative measures are not only not mentioned, but rejected out of hand.

In short, TBSC’s goal is to promote “tough on crime” policies. When asked who they are taking Santa Cruz back from, they reply “criminals”, and they encourage people not only to call the police when they see anything suspicious, but to sit in on court cases to show our judges that Santa Cruzans want tough sentencing. Ironically, it appears that their founder Emmanuel “Dexter” Cube is himself a criminal. In 2002, then an investment broker in New Jersey, he was investigated by the Securities and Exchange Commission and found guilty of violating laws, fined over $50,000 and suspended for over 5 years from trading. This was his second fraud; he was fined $40,000 a few years prior and suspended for a lesser number of days. (http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/33-8201.htm, http://www.finra.org/Industry/Regulation/Notices/1996/P004863).

In the past, when people have criticized TBSC for Cube’s alignment with Republican Meg Whitman and her conservative agenda, the group has responded by claiming they were founded by a diverse group. Yet as of this posting, the TBSC number listed in the phone book has Cube’s voice on the outgoing message, and the address of their “corporate headquarters” is the small office where he works downtown—which is not marked in any way as having a connection to TBSC.

It’s time we take Santa Cruz back from this fear-based organization promoting a vision of community based on unquestioned support for the police, and attacks against homeless, political activists, and undocumented immigrants, throwing around the word “criminal” while they themselves feel they are above the law.
§Dexter Cube
by Another Positive Loiterer Wednesday Jun 2nd, 2010 10:54 PM


Comments  (Hide Comments)

by brent the undertaker
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 12:14 AM
Thank you for this information. We'll put into immediate use.
by -
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 7:40 AM
I always wondered what people did for a living around here. There is a segment of residents here since before 1999, when houses were more inexpensive and property taxes are kept low under prop 13. Many of the students are living off of loans (impossible to cover costs with a part time job in this environment). Some folks who don't mind driving or are allowed to telecommute a couple days a week are employed in Silicon Valley. Locally, there are only a few jobs that would allow you to purchase a house here - doctors at the hospital, a few business owners, the very top tier of university jobs (most university jobs are middle class, and only a few administrators and professors with tenture make above $75k.). One has to conclude that investment profits play a big role in explaining the classes around here.

I like his name.
by Wes
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 8:13 AM

I really really want to like the Take Back Santa Cruz folks. I like the idea of people getting together to make things better. In spite of themselves, it is a very anarchist concept. We disagree about the role of police in our society, but I think we have a lot of goals in common. I have reached out numerous times to Analicia Cube, Heather Babcock, and Take Back Santa Cruz with offers of dialogue, coffee, meetings, etc and have been repeatedly ignored of cut off from conversation. Not only am I blocked from seeing the Take Back Santa Cruz facebook group, but anyone who is merely FB friends with me is blocked. My offer still stands because I think it might be possible to find common ground.

I have read Ms. Cube claiming that TBSC is under attack, that they are unjustly being accused of stoking the fires of May Day, that much has been incorrectly attributed to her and to TBSC. I would like to set the record straight.

This was sent to all of the 4500 members of the Take Back Santa Cruz Facebook group the day after the May Day property destruction:

From: Take Back Santa Cruz
To: members of Take Back Santa Cruz group

Hello My Community-

We have known that the Anarchist in Santa Cruz (one of the most radical groups in the country) have been planning to take our community down. They believe in no economy or business. We have documentation of the plans and threats they have placed on our community. We have no idea why leadership of both our community and UCSC have chosen to not take direct action. Perhaps the people have not demanded it. Perhaps the people are unaware of the threat as we were before we started our journey 6 months ago.

As you can read in the police report that is available on our site. The one person who was arrested received the information to attack us at Sub Rosa Cafe. This is an Anarchist Cafe located at 703 Pacific on the corner of Spruce. They have been preaching to take down our communities economy and people for over 2 years. There is a sign over the door that reads "NO POLICE OR FBI BEYOND THIS POINT". This property is owned by Busenhart. One of their leaders Wes Modes will be in court on May 14th. Here is an article that you MUST read to understand what is REALLY going on. It was published this week in the Sentinel by J.M. Brown

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/ci_14981220?IADID=Search-www.santacruzsentinel.com-www.santacruzsentinel.com

This clock tower dance party was designed to happen so that the criminals could hide in the chaos and then strike. It was not a sudden mob. You don't bring a full black mask and weapons to go get a cup of coffee downtown. The event was posted on IndyBay which is their outlet to express domestic terrorism. This event was posted on April the 26!! They have taken down their flier of course but you can see part of it on our wall. Now, they will also try and hide under the Arizona conflict. Be advised. This is a scapegoat. They have been threatening us for a long time. Yes, city council and the police chief were aware of the threats and the cafe. Many SCPD officers have been fighting for us on this issue every day they go out there.

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/04/26/18645725.php

Also read this. This is when our officers tried to go under cover and squash this in the beginning. As you can see they were not supported. This is the Indy Spin do be advised.

http://santacruz.indymedia.org/

Fliers handed out on campus telling UCSC students:

"This isn't just about you and your problems; this is about us and the possibilities of creating a new form of life that we can build through relations of force. From the indefinite student strike to unlimited human strike!"

"Don't just stop at the university, bring it downtown!"

"LET"S GET GOING, TAKE SPACES, GET WHAT YOU CAN TAKE, SOLIDARITY THROUGH ATTACK."

It goes on for two pages and was given to us 3 months ago. We tried to give the information out but no one seemed interested. So, when someone tries to say this attack on us was due to recent national events it is a lie.

We have stacks of information. Lists of over a hundred names of agitators. I wonder if anyone is going to move on it now? I guess they were a threat after all. Who knew? Oh right we did.

We want to say something very important. We were out there last night and this morning. We saw the shocked faces of your shop owners. Some called asking is "my shop okay". As we walked people were laughing. One guy (who I have on video talking with Robert Norse) was laughing and expressing how much fun it was to destroy our community. I wonder if Mr. Norse plans on helping our community bring these people to justice seeing that he was there. This community had a rough week. We are wounded but we are not beaten. We are tough. Do you hear me? WE ARE TOUGH. We can do this because it is worth it. The time to stand up is now. Do it for the generation before you and the one to come.

Members of the group have told me that the above diatribe, strangely reminiscent of McCarthy era red baiting, was written by Dexter Cube.

And while the Sentinel forums are extremely problematic in that anyone can post anything anonymously, even attributing it to others, there was much incendiary material posted there under the name Take Back Santa Cruz. Here is a sample:

From: Take Back Santa Cruz
To: readers of the Santa Cruz Sentinel Topix forums

The issue was the ANARCHIST that were hiding under the Communist May Day dance rave. The ones that went downtown..oh sorry I mean walked from Sub Rosa Cafe (which is Wes Modes hang out)..with full masks and weapons. Glass bottles full of paint, backpacks full of rocks, sticks and broom handles, torches and flares. That is the ISSUE!! It's not immigration. They have been wanting to do this to us for years. Look at the pictures. ANARCHIST symbols and quotes like "tear you down brick by brick"

Wes Modes is an agitator.

He recruits UCSC students to do his dirty work.

He assaulted a police officer and plead guilty.

He WAS planning on playing a movie illegally tonight to raise money for lawyers.(BOO HOO Someone snitch on him and called the copyright owners) Guess what? shhh they are going to do it EVERY TIME you run your GUERRILLA DRIVE-IN with your buddy AND chemistry teacher at Santa Cruz High Stacey Falls. It's a felony ;-)

He supports Free Skool which says things like "Let's tear down the world around us and make a new one" They teaches classes like squatting 101, surviving county jail and DIY FIREWORKS!! Hummm You see he believes we should have no economy or government structure. No police. Remind you of a recent incident...HUMMMM

Right! Well, turns out our buddies at 703 Pacific with their "NO POLICE OR FBI" signs and their fliers encouraging mayham might have just been busted...FINALLY. Busenhart owns the property so feel free to contact them and express your dis satisfaction.

This was one of dozens of abusive messages posted on the Sentinel forums, including death threats, personal information, personal photos, and suggestions of firebombing and murder targeted at me and others involved in DIY projects.

This constant repetition of fallacious reporting, specious connections, and downright libelous accusations even took root in the press, culminating in what is arguably the worst reporting of Shitstorm 2010. The award goes to KOIN channel 46 Salinas who's lawyers should have immediately broken out into a sweat.

www.indybay.org/newsitems/2010/05/06/18647202.php

KOIN took the report off of their website after a flurry of angry responses, but the damage had already been done.

You'll see in the KOIN reporting a lot of sly connections that were repeated ad naseum by people on the Sentinel forum posting under the name Take Back Santa Cruz.

I hope you'll consider this when you hear members of Take Back Santa Cruz claim that they are a harmless community group open to everyone working for the good of all citizens who have now been unjustly attacked.

by Steve Schnaar
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 8:59 AM
I too have tried to reach out Take Back Santa Cruz. I helped to organize the "Downtown Community Dialogues" a few weeks ago, and our original goal was to get a great diversity of people to sit down for a facilitated discussion--business and homeowners, homeless, elected officials, anarchists, students, etc. I was disappointed to find that business and conservative folks in town were almost without exception unwilling to promote the event or even participate.

I personally reached out to TBSC numerous times, hoping they might promote the event to their members, or at least maybe I could have a one on one discussion with them. I thought they might see some common ground with the Guerilla Drive-in clean up of trash under the Soquel Ave bridge to positively loiter there. (Although I should note that we made a point of respecting homeless folks' personal property, and had no intention of driving them out). But so far, TBSC has continued to ignore my requests. I hope their group is truly diverse enough to move past Dexter Cube's apparent right-wing bent and be willing to at least meet and talk with people.
by So What
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 9:09 AM
You do realize that in the late 90's every stock broker in the business was being sued because people lost their money on stocks THEY invested in. These things are a dime a dozen especially for a person that refuses to scam people with high priced lawyers. I think this makes Mr. Cube look good. He left NYC for Santa Cruz. Are you people also trying to bring down a person that was brought up in a poor immigrant household in the barrio of D.C.? I think this is awful. If he had a hundred excuses about his life and was a criminal then you would support him?
by Auntie Imperial
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 10:18 AM
Right?

We can start there if you're looking for 'a point'.

Convicted means GUILTY of a crime in an American court of law.

You DO believe in the American court system don't you?

by Really
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 11:05 AM
2002 when he was in his 20's. Who gives a F**k. At least he did not assuat someone, like Wes. What is happening now is more important. Santa Cruz is ready for change. Sorry your feelings are hurt, boo-hoo they don't want to be friends with you, get over it. Start doing something constructive not DESTRUCTIVE. Stop your whinning.
by (a)
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 11:20 AM
if by assault you mean getting jumped by a bunch of cops and then get arrested so they could cover their own asses.
by Another (a)
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 12:22 PM
Take back Santa Cruz has become very secretive in allowing the general public access to their FB account and emails. Even their outdated website has an email sign up that did not sign me up. I have serious reservations about a group that excludes people and also asks the public and their members to call the cops on people taking recycled cans from the garbage or panhandling, even legally. Is that what we want our cops doing? Is that what we want to doing as human beings -- calling the cops on some poor soul who is recycling our garbage so he can live? They are not simply anti gang, they are anti poor, anti immigrant, Pro Drug War - a product of fear and hysteria since the economy went down the tubes. They want drug users put in prison, and poor people out of town, more cameras & more cops. Next they will want boxes on every corner where you can turn in your neighbor anonymously.

Refusing dialog with anyone but the cops and their own members tells me they they want SC to be all for them, and the hell with everyone else. They do not wish dialog. This is Neighborhood Watch Gone Wild. They blame innocent people without evidence and without trial simply due to their differing ideals. These are modern day which hunts. I only hope the police tire of all the ridicules calls they get from TBSC... ... ... ...



by sunshine
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 12:55 PM
really? what a piece of work this guy is! taking it back from 'criminals', when he himself is one! what a total looser.

someone should tell tbsc to block him from their group, now that he is a 'known criminal.' i guess it was ok before, because he was an unknown one.

by FB User
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 3:55 PM
The information control at Take Back Santa Cruz however is working overtime to ignore this. Don't worry, 5000 TBSC facebook members won't be bothered with facts.
by Auntie Imperial
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 5:23 PM

...about one ignorant (by definition) percent of Santa Cruz' population who think they are somehow a quorum for a majority opinion about what needs "Taking Back".

by Leigh Meyers
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 5:31 PM
A message to me personally @ FB:

Hello-

I am writing to tell you that the information you are spreading is untrue. My husband was never "convicted" of anything. Our lawyer is taking care of this matter. We are adding all the appropriate litigants to the case. I am not sure whether or not you are aware that it is against the law to say someone is a "convicted criminal" when they are not. I would like to give you the chance to take this post down before we continue the process.

Analicia Cube

I reported it as spam.
by Peace on the streets
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 5:53 PM
Live and let live.
by Leigh Meyers
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 5:58 PM
Reporting her note as spam is that... To prevent a re-occurrence.
by I just read the details
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 6:00 PM
Looks like he made a bad investment for a customer....hardly a criminal. It slso looks like his employer advised him to do so. READ ALL THE FACTS. Basically what you posted makes him look more like a victim then a criminal. Sorry you lose agian.
by is not criminal?
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 6:42 PM
defrauding customers.... well, if that is not criminal, it should be.
by clearly said
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 6:44 PM
CUBE DEFRAUDED CUSTOMERS.
by chuckles
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 7:05 PM
this article illustrates the hypocrisy of tbsc's founders, which unfortunately is found most everywhere in the world.

it is VERY IMPORTANT to point it out in a case like this though, because the founders are completely self-righteous and trying to turn this town into an 'us' vs 'them,' a 'good' vs 'bad', telling perhaps naive people untruths about WHO is bad..... when they too, like most, are shades of gray.

plus, the fact that they support meg whitman tips their hand on the kind of hate-filled place they want santa cruz to become.
by Leigh Meyers
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 7:07 PM
...to sell securities his boss's say so means squat one way or another. He's supposed to know better, and is AN AGENT for the purchasing customer.

GUILTY!
by smokey
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 7:35 PM
"Cube willfully violated Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule... made untrue statements of material fact...."

Untrue statements of material fact.

Has not changed much, has he.
by Not Clueless
Thursday Jun 3rd, 2010 9:05 PM
I'm not sure what the point of this post is. Dexter is not the "founder" of TBSC. Besides that from what I can tell he wasn't convicted of anything. Grasping...
by buttugly
Friday Jun 4th, 2010 1:29 AM
he has a muthafrick'n cool ass name.
by TwentyFour
Friday Jun 4th, 2010 12:03 PM
You can call this anything you want in an attempt to downplay the fact that TBSC founder Dexter Cube is a crooked, dishonest fraud.

It will not change the fact that he is.

A 'smear campaign'? Give me a break. This is the truth. Sorry if you do not like it.
by Dude
Friday Jun 4th, 2010 2:33 PM
Man what have we come to. This is it? That's all we got? Some lame ass suit from a million years ago. The one from 1996 lists tons of people. I looked this shit up and it happens daily. LAME!! We should stop trying to pointlessly attack these dudes and find common ground man. Making us look even worse.
by Auntie Imperial
Friday Jun 4th, 2010 3:04 PM
Dude! Why not.. He'd hold some impoverished person responsible for a shoplifting-for-food conviction from years ago... Gar-Auntied(sic)!

by Conservative Agenda
Friday Jun 4th, 2010 5:57 PM

As part of a national conservative effort to take control through local-level politics, the founders of Take Back Santa Cruz have used their cover as a concerned community group to consistently hammer a safety and anti-crime message home to the local press, the police, and elected officials, while at the same time rejected any offers to dialogue with anyone who remotely disagrees.

Dexter Cube, local business owner and conservative lobbyist, is one of the Take Back Santa Cruz founders and administrators along with his wife Analicia Lesnowicz Cube, Heather Lesnowicz Babcock, and Ian Blake Babcock. Both Mr and Ms. Cube have been removed from the list of administrators from the Take Back Santa Cruz Facebook group since the publishing of this article.

To be clear, the important question isn't whether Dexter Cube is or isn't a convicted SEC trader. He is. And though it was a few years ago, it is not irrelevant to the discussion about "crime" in Santa Cruz and the focus of Take Back Santa Cruz in particular.

Take Back Santa Cruz is described in the press as an "anti-crime advocacy group." Their website says TBSC was "founded by a group of community leaders willing to take action against criminal and abusive behavior."

However, TBSC's view of criminal behavior is inconsistent and myopic. TBSC tends to lump murder and assault with other serious social problems like drug use, property damage, and sleeping outside when you don't have a home.

At times, merely having opposing viewpoints is enough the raise the wrath of TBSC. After the May Day events, TBSC sent and posted calls for action against anarchist cafe SubRosa, Indybay as a domestic terrorist organization, Guerilla Drive-In, Free Skool Santa cruz, and specific individuals seen as "agitators."

Much has been made on the TBSC site over the minor infractions of homeless people and activists. Clarkie Clark and Kirsten Attlesey, two TBSC admins, regularly post updates and snarky editorials about the arrests, court appearances, and trials of people trying to make change outside of the system or those merely struggling to survive within it.

In this self-righteous and hysterical context, Dexter Cube's criminal record is relevant and illuminating. Whether two years ago or yesterday, it clearly says that there is a standard of justice for us over here in our suburban westside neighborhood, and another standard of justice for the rest of you criminals.

After TBSC accused them of planning and coordinating the May Day violence, SubRosa Cafe wrote that "most of the accusations leveled at SubRosa are coming from Take Back Santa Cruz, a group of white, upper-middle class, vaguely conservative people." Nothing could be further for the truth. Dexter Cube, whose family is of Filipino origin, is himself a person of color, and many TBSC members are non-white. The categorization of TBSC members as mostly upper-middle class may be more accurate, though there is a wide breadth of socio-economic levels.

The claim that TBSC has a "vaguely conservative" agenda is the least accurate. The founders of TBSC are very conservative for Santa Cruz and talk openly of a pendulum swing to the right, toward law and order, vigorous policing, and an end to criminals and agitators. TBSC members have called for the replacement of most of the city council, and tougher judges. They have alternately railed against the Santa Cruz City Council for not taking a serious enough stand against crime, and praised them for their anti-crime stands, such as hiring more police officers.

The council and SCPD in turn have courted Take Back Santa Cruz with vigor, praising not only their clean-up efforts, but their vigilante, pro-cop stance against crime, vagrancy, and community organization. Ryan Coonerty (who teaches constitutional law) echoing the words of TBSC, suggested that you should reclaim space for the community and, seemingly contradictorily, if you see people standing around in parks you should call 911.

The name of the group itself echoes conservative efforts to "Take Back America." This is a resurgence of Regan's Moral Majority for a more-militant 21st century, going back as least half a decade with GOP strategy manuals and far-right conservative books: "Taking America Back: A Radical Plan to Revive Freedom, Morality, and Justice," "Taking America Back," and "Rules for Radical Conservatives: Beating the Left at Its Own Game to Take Back America." In "2010: Take Back America: A Battle Plan," a GOP manual for a conservative takeover, the author suggests "Your attacks don’t have to be ideological. They just have to resonate with the voters."

by Auntie Imperial
Friday Jun 4th, 2010 6:14 PM
"...though there is a wide breadth of socio-economic levels..."

That's true. Blackshirts, Skinheads and Neo-Nazis come from "...a wide breadth of socio-economic levels..." too.

As far as racist goes... Filipinos can be racists too, and the Japanese think Koreans are kin to dogs... what of it?
by ahem
Friday Jun 4th, 2010 6:31 PM
While I have heard many racist things attributed to TBSC in the last month, I haven't seen a verified attribution. I know that it is easy when there is a clamor to think that all of the folks against you are speaking with one voice. I feel the TBSC agenda is deeply mired in classism and right-wing politics, but I don't have any information that they are racist.

You may have different info, but in this debate, I honestly don't think reckless innuendo helps. We've already seen too much of that from the right-wing nutjobs.
by Willis
Friday Jun 4th, 2010 10:05 PM
"A smear campaign is an intentional, premeditated effort to undermine an individual's or group's reputation, credibility, and character."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smear_campaign
by Oh really?
Friday Jun 4th, 2010 10:37 PM

Help me understand the difference between posting factual things about Dexter Cube and the fictional things he posted on behalf of Take Back Santa Cruz here:

We have known that the Anarchist in Santa Cruz (one of the most radical groups in the country) have been planning to take our community down. We have documentation of the plans and threats they have placed on our community.

The one person who was arrested received the information to attack us at Sub Rosa Cafe. This is an Anarchist Cafe located at 703 Pacific on the corner of Spruce. They have been preaching to take down our communities economy and people for over 2 years. There is a sign over the door that reads "NO POLICE OR FBI BEYOND THIS POINT". This property is owned by Busenhart. One of their leaders Wes Modes will be in court on May 14th.

Wes Modes is an agitator. He recruits UCSC students to do his dirty work. He assaulted a police officer and plead guilty.

He WAS planning on playing a movie illegally tonight to raise money for lawyers. (BOO HOO Someone snitch on him and called the copyright owners) Guess what? shhh they are going to do it EVERY TIME you run your GUERRILLA DRIVE-IN with your buddy AND chemistry teacher at Santa Cruz High Stacey Falls. It's a felony ;-)

Well, turns out our buddies at 703 Pacific with their "NO POLICE OR FBI" signs and their fliers encouraging mayham might have just been busted...FINALLY. Busenhart owns the property so feel free to contact them and express your dis satisfaction.

Until you can address this hypocrisy, maybe you could shut the fuck up about a smear campaign.

by None
Friday Jun 4th, 2010 11:17 PM
Do you have proof of who wrote the things you claim Dexter Cube wrote? A link, a Facebook wall, a message with his name on it..anything factual? You want everyone to just believe that TBSC is run by this one person that isn't even a founder. Just because you dug up one little piece of nothing. You have to convince 5,000 plus people that they all received these messages. So they are all crazy and just don't see the radical racist Nazi "oz". You are just mad because even some of us see them as community friends. They clean up and gather in the hundreds with no problems.

Have you pondered the fact that this fiction is only going to make all of us that want a free DIY community look like witch hunting kooks? These are lies. I know because one of the things you claim he said was on the Sentinel "Coo-Coo" Topix Boards without a name. What, now you are Oz?

This is big brother BS!! Mole Hill meet Mountain.
by Right-Left Mediation
Saturday Jun 5th, 2010 10:17 AM
This is a question I will put to both the anarchist community and the Take Back Santa Cruz movement.
What it comes down to is this:
Would you be willing to meet together for the purpose of increased understanding
and the potential to make Santa Cruz better?
Do we(and Santa Cruz) have something to gain from such a meeting?
If so, lets stop the name calling.
and begin a dialogue.
by Auntie Imperial
Saturday Jun 5th, 2010 12:37 PM

Illegal camping in front of a downtown theatre... Ten AM the next morning, and NOT ONE FUCKING CITATION! At lest ONE officer refused to do his duty with the comment:

"I'm MUCH to busy right now..." as he rolled up his cruiser window and drove slowly away"
-----------------------------------

A group of officers stopped by the drum circle early last week.

A location, by the SW corner of the Soquel bridge, officer Harms had indicated just two weeks before WAS appropriate as long as we "didn't fuck up the plants".

We didn't "fuck them up."

This group of occifers on atvs, ostensibly patrolling the 'heroin highway'(tm)(C) by the levee, told us that we couldn't be there. They claimed it as a 'planter' (wood chips, no irrigation, no batterboards or signage).

When I pointed out that I had MORE than clarified what Harms meant when he said "Don't blah blah", this officer said, and I quote...

"So?"

Later, the sergeant said "I'll talk to Harms about it..."

Yeah... RIGHT! Over a beer and laughing about it.

These people, as a cohort, are INTRINSICALLY HYPOCRITES, and anything they say will be used to stall, confuse, and confound.

They HAVE their agenda...

As one person put it on the Topix Forum:

"Westside Dad": "We don't want Santa Cruz to be unique anymore. Get It?"

http://www.topix.com/forum/city/santa-cruz-ca/T8MQPL9AP9V0V0CK3/post210

Got it!

Too bad YOU AREN'T gonna "get it".

Dialog puts them one step closer to having it...
Their words mean shit...
They'll SAY anything.


(They'll even sign things with their fingers crossed behind their backs and a 'so sue me' attitude about the future of the agreement)

Heck! They routinely ignore their own laws when it's to their advantage.

That's where the picture above comes in... Illegal camping in front of a downtown theatre... Ten AM the next morning, and NOT ONE FUCKING CITATION! At lest ONE officer refused to do his duty with the comment:

"I'm MUCH to busy right now..." as he rolled up his cruiser window and drove slowly away"

The problem is corruption, NOT misunderstanding or understanding, or anything else.

They're used to just taking what they want, and if you talk with them... dialog, whatweverthefuck you want to call it, they'll just take it behind your back, while your doing that.

That's what's been happening all along... and that's the way it WILL continue if we compromise with them.





by Auntie Imperial
Saturday Jun 5th, 2010 2:39 PM
Taken yesterday evening at about 7:30pm...

Saw them on routine patrol down or non-emergency detail down the block.

This image: SW corner of Lincoln & Pacific - The supervisory type SUV (License plate: CA EXEMPT 1153569) was parked NOT ONLY in front of a fire hydrant, but so close to the intersection that at least one pedestrian I observed (in the three minutes or so I hung around) almost got run down attempting to cross because he couldn't see around or over the SUV and the driver of the car, who rolled thru the as yet skeletal stop line, couldn't see the ped.

by Auntie Imperial
Saturday Jun 5th, 2010 2:40 PM
supervisorssuv.jpg
supervisorssuv.jpg

The picture
by Auntie Imperial
Saturday Jun 5th, 2010 2:51 PM
nodonut.jpg
nodonut.jpg


They do this with arrogant impunity.

Harms was spotted driving this one away at 8:30 pm or so.

License: CA EXEMPT 1156720

That's an hour of absolutely illegal parking after first observation

Like the people who cut their paychecks, and their 'cheering section' TBSC, the DTA, they ARE corrupt.

From enforcement practices to parking practices, to their failure to comply with the state charter in re housing, to what they tell their own citizens about crime and WHY the crime they so fear seems rampant, they, the city of Santa Cruz, it's police department, and it's hypocritical (KNOWINGLY) cheerleaders ARE institutionally corrupt, and it precludes ANY 'dialog'.

A state AG investigation for a RICO ACT conspiracy indictment is more in order.

by Wes
Saturday Jun 5th, 2010 5:37 PM
Yes. I am willing to talk with TBSC folks and have tried numerous times. I'm not sure how much good would come of it, but I still remain open to it. I guess in my mind that is the telling difference.

After the May Day property damage and after we'd been directly attacked by law and order groups in town, I still wanted to talk. I had hundreds of conversations with anarchists, shop keepers who's windows were busted, radicals who supported attacks on capitalism, liberal little old ladies, angry local valley-go-home bro dudes, homeless people, conservative homeowners, neighbors, anyone who was interested it expressing their thoughts and feelings. We talked about violence and anarchism and community and doing-it-ourselves and the town and cops and things we love and things we hate.

I wanted more people to be talking, so I helped organize the Downtown Community Dialogues with NVC Santa Cruz and the Hub. And I reached out several times by email and phone, as did others, to Take Back Santa Cruz.

TBSC and the DTA boycotted the dialogues and didn't inform their memberships. They made it clear, dialogue is off the table. They aren't interested in talking to me, or to others they disagree with. They have blocked anyone from their group who is supportive of DIY projects or anyone who is a friend of someone supportive of DIY projects.

Still to this day, I am trying to see the members and administrators of TBSC as human beings and am open to talking with them to try and find common ground. But to be honest, I don't think it's going to happen. I am loosing faith that Take Back Santa Cruz is about community and working to solve problems together and doing good work in the world.

There is a smear campaign going on here, yes, but it's not about Dexter Cube being a corporate criminal. It's a campaign of fingerpointing and misdirected blame directed at real community groups, working within our communities, providing community space, education, and entertainment for free, connecting people, and giving from their hearts
by Pick and choose time
Saturday Jun 5th, 2010 9:11 PM
I find it somewhat...disingenuous...to say the least, that Wes is now portraying himself as the one who has opened his arms and looked for dialogue.

I say this because, as I recall, neither he nor anyone else as Subrosa wanted to say a word after the damage done on May 1. "No comment" seemed to be the only comment. I found it particularly humorous watching Jennifer Charles tell the reporter from Channel 6 that she wasn't going to speak with him because "he wasn't very nice to me this morning".

So. If Subrosa and company get to pick and choose who and when they speak to someone, why should it be any different for others?

Wes, you can speak about DIY and all the peaceful activites of the Subrosa family all you like, but it won't erase the real history of the cafe in the minds of many of us here in Santa Cruz.

-You were at the spearhead of the tree sit and the violence that occurred there. Jennifer the spokesperson, you the band leader.

-You were throwing fundraisers for AETA 4 while they were being charged with issuing death threats to UCSC faculty.

-Your trash orchestra was posting on Peter Youngs website that you'd be happy to help create a distraction while he robbed a bank; "seriously".

-You scrubbed the two pictures that showed you instigating the contact with the cop at the Farmers Market. Scrubbed it here anyway; while leaving Grrants before and after pictures to try and look the victim. But I remember the two that showed you going at it, and the cops have those two, and I suspect its why you had to plead guilty.

So bottom line? What I see is you picking and choosing when you admit to your radical leanings, and when you try to portray it as nonviolent community building. Personally, I see the violent side. And as such, I find this sudden "namastay" presentation as unbelievable.

Put it this way? I don't believe that, were it not for the fact that the town is suddenly down on you and your Subrosa crew and watching you like hawks, that you'd be spending any effort to engage in dialogue with TBSC.
by also watching
Saturday Jun 5th, 2010 11:10 PM
unwelcome here....

What a crock of shit. Do you think that if you string a bunch of accusations together and randomly conflate hella shit without proof that people are such sheep that they will believe you?

This is a pretty desperate grasping at straws. But, hey why stop there?

* SubRosa staff are responsible for the string of bank robberies in Santa Cruz in the 90s
* There is documented proof that the tree sitters gave material support to the Taliban
* Wes Modes carries a sawed off shot gun in his car
* A group of old ladies walking along the levy were beat up by black-masked anarchists as recently as LAST TUESDAY
* I personally saw Jennifer (real name Bukowski or something Polish) Charles break all the windows out of Urban Outfitters
* The four kids charged under AETA were under watch by the FBI for a decade and are going to be strung up for a string of ELF arsons across the states
* Free Skool Santa Cruz teaches people TO MAKE BOMBS!
* Local anarchists have killed 1 person a day since February AND THE POLICE DO NOTHING!
* Wes Modes is a leader of Hamas
* SubRosa staff have devil-worshiping orgy bible burnings WITHOUT A PERMIT
* Trash Orchestra paid drum circle bums 5 dollars a piece to annoy Farmer's Market vendors
* People HATE SubRosa and has no support! None! EVERYONE hates it! HATES IT! it is loathes and abhored, absolutely disliked. And I will keep repeating it until I believe it!
* The police will arrest anyone even talking about the concept of anarchism BECAUSE THEY ARE TERRORISTS

by Wes
Saturday Jun 5th, 2010 11:28 PM
I've been trying to connect with the TBSC people since well before the New Year, asking them to pick the place. And I've been working on community projects here in Santa Cruz since 1989.

How about you? Get here a few years ago? In the tech boom, maybe?
by Auntie Imperial
Sunday Jun 6th, 2010 8:41 AM
"* SubRosa staff have devil-worshiping orgy bible burnings..."

...and *I* wasn't invited?

Dang 'Vanguard' Anarchists, they always leave the proles out of the GOOD stuff!

You forgot one tho... Barack Obama, a Muslim, and sleeper agent for Osama bin-Laden, is part of the Subrosa collective and has been seen hanging around 'outside the wire' with the roadie kids exchanging Pruno and Kief recipes while bogarting a bottle of Two Buck Chuck.
by Dexter
Sunday Jun 6th, 2010 9:26 AM
is a hypocritical convicted white collar criminal.
by Pick and Choose Time
Sunday Jun 6th, 2010 10:31 AM
I've been here for over 3 decades, and I don't work in high tech. (And on a side note? Is working in high-tech a bad thing? Seems a strange comment from someone whose job is running a computer system.)

And yes, I'm aware of the community events you've been involved in. And imo, some are good and some are bad. And that's essentially my point: its a package deal. Your spectrum of participation shapes your reputation. And I believe your spectrum, and Subrosas, to be a bit more radical and confrontational than its attempting to be presented since May 1.

If you believe I've misrepresented your or the cafe's role in regards to my above comments about your prior actions, from my original post, I invite clarification.

Albeit different ideology, I see little difference between the tactics of TBSC and yourself. You both appear to be unahappy with current community conditions, and as such feel compelled/justified to motivate and activate your respective communities . TBSC with gatherings where violence has occurred or with a cleanup. You by rallying at the treesits or Farmers Market. I have never engaged in either groups activity.
by The Real Story
Sunday Jun 6th, 2010 10:37 AM
Let's clear up a few things, you never asked to speak with TBSC until you/SubRosa were feeling the heat from the May Day Riot. Since New Years? I don't think so. Actually YOU tried your best to spread lies and demonize the group. YOU held a BBQ on Lower Ocean to counter TBSC's Positive Loitering event and told people that TBSC was "A well heeled group that wanted the neighbors to not speak to each other but to call the police and ask questions later" You called them "fascist" you told people that TBSC was going to call "ICE". MORE LIES WES! YOU said "a event I could support would be one that went and spoke with the neighborhood first". TBSC met with the neighbors of NOLO before their Positive Loitering event to discuss the neighborhoods fears. But I'm sure you don't care about that because the facts aren't as interesting to you. The only reason from what I can see that you wish to have a dialog now is to try to find a way to continue with your DIY projects, which by the way TBSC could care less about. Unless they involve teaching people how to do illegal activities that can harm our city. You and your friends love to talk about the double standard for requiring permits for events. TBSC has NEVER held an event without a permit. Enough with the poor me, I'm trying so hard blah blah blah.
by Wes
Sunday Jun 6th, 2010 10:52 AM

Wes Modes November 4, 2009 at 6:28pm
Heather, I applaud your efforts to take back Santa Cruz. Though I have concerns about the group's support for the other armed gang in town, the police. While I know at times they can be helpful, often they escalate violence, alienate victims, cast suspicions on survivors, and enforce destructive laws. New Year's last year in Oakland was but one of many examples.

Do you think it is possible to take responsibilities for our streets and our own safety without having to court the police and the violence and coercion they represent?

Wes

November 4, 2009 at 8:17pm
Thanks for your ideas, but that is not the aim of this organization. Good luck with your ideals.

Wes Modes November 5, 2009 at 11:25am
Thanks. No I really meant it as a real question. I'd like to hear your thoughts if you have time. Or I guess a related questions is: Why do you and others think it is necessary to court the police in order to take back our town? I'm trying to understand where others are coming from.

Wes Modes November 5, 2009 at 11:28am
Heather, did you block me from this group because I asked questions about how we might Take Back Santa Cruz without relying on the police?

November 5, 2009 at 4:26pm
Wes-

First, I did block you from the group. The reason that I did is because of the statement you must of read on our site that is located under the info tab and to the left of the screen. It states very clearly "We support the Santa Cruz police department. We support emergency services. We support the Santa Cruz fire department." We only want members that agree with that statement. There are many other groups on facebook that share your views.

Second, in regards to your question. "Do you think it is possible to take responsibilities for our streets and our own safety without having to court the police and the violence and coercion they represent?" I wonder if that is truly a question. It looks more like a loaded statement to me. However, I will answer it. We are working on things that the people of Santa Cruz can do to take personal responsibility for their town. None of which will be against the police department or without their knowledge. We here at Take Back Santa Cruz believe that we can achieve our goals by working with as many people as possible.

Again, good luck.
HBabcock

by Wes
Sunday Jun 6th, 2010 11:01 AM
The quote from February you were referring to had a context and I still stand by it:
A community group that I'd respect is one that works in its own neighborhood to try to unite people around common issues they share (as did the door-to-door organizers of this block party), poverty, violence, security, and so on. Not one that goes to other communities as an intimidating presence. I want to see less, not more, coercive solutions to our communal challenges. I'm in favor of communities of mutual support, not reactionary authoritarian vigilantes.
by The Real Story
Sunday Jun 6th, 2010 11:05 AM
It looks like an argument to me. I noticed you didn't address the other statements. Very telling.
by Wes
Sunday Jun 6th, 2010 11:17 AM
I would have been happy to address any of Heather Babcock's questions except that after that diatribe she blocked, as did the Cubes. It is the Facebook equivalent of saying your bit and then slamming the door behind you.

Since then (and well before May Day) I sent emails and made phone calls to initiate dialogue.

So let's be real. TBSC doesn't want to talk to anti-authoritarians, and honestly that is fine (a basic tenant of anarchism is voluntary association). But the claims that the anarchists in town are "tearing down our community brick by brick" seem a little flat when we work with community groups all the time and have been reaching out to you since the creation of Take Back Santa Cruz.
homelesswheel_3_1.jpg
homelesswheel_3_1.jpg

To see something that could of been a beautiful way to change
the atmosphere of SC from what has been an ugly, greedy class war into
a positive meeting of minds and a caring approach to what has been
wrong in SC for too, too long is a disappointment. again.
The real criminals are the ones allowed to steal the public blind on
Wall St. and walk away on probation (Twice). Or to spend 100's of
millions for campaigns in a year when they want to cast grandma out into
the street. My advice? Leave SC to the dogs that scratch there.
Nothing more pathetic than a beautiful place with such ugly ass people.
They make the Homeless look down right pretty.
homelesswheel_1_1.jpg
homelesswheel_1_1.jpg

I have known Norse for many, many years through many, many, battles.
Here in Berkeley we have alot of the same problems, and yes, and even the same
type of Assholes with the "can't we all get along"crap. All the while, people are dying and the
moneyed interests are not a whit interested in "getting along". Norse understands this.
While you have your "Save the Vegetable Garden." Fundraiser and have endless
"Community meetings" to toss your ex-friends out of the squat. We are doing ALL
the heavy lifting. When the going gets tough up here in B-Town I can always count on
seeing Norse. But I have NEVER seen or heard of you. When the War is over I'm
sure I will though. We know this is a thankless task that is made only for someone
who can appreciate the spiritual rewards it brings. But to see a snot, put down someone
who you are not worthy of, just takes the cake. I don't know Wes. but you not liking him
makes him O.K. in my book.
by Robert Norse
Sunday Jun 6th, 2010 8:22 PM
It's interesting how the focus of this thread has shifted from a critique of the founder of Take Back Santa Cruz to attacks on and defense of Wes.

I may be considered naive or unfashionable, but I don't really think Dexter Cube's background is terribly relevant. It's not clear to me TBSC has attacked people for their past "criminal history" so they can't really be called hypocrites for supporting Cube.

The important thing is what he, TBSC, and the rest of us are doing now.

Likewise, I think it's a waste of time to respond to ideologically-motivated attacks on Wes. He has his faults; he has his virtues. He's not holding closed meetings with the City Council and the SCPD and motivating the hiring of 8 more cops downtown to crack down further on the poor there.

I could critique Sub Rosa, Wes as a leader, etc., but that's not the topic of this thread.

The issue, as I've seen it, is not whether Cube was a convicted corporate criminal a decade ago. But whether TBSC is a functionally anti-homeless group in its actions regardless of its protestations in 2010. Turning in panhandlers, destroying homeless camps, conflating "drug use" with major crime, attacking the downtown scene as unusually dangerous because of the presence of the street scene---all these seem to me the earmarks of an anti-homeless worldview.

Does TBSC view panhandlers as criminals?

Does TBSC back the useless endless "more police" meatgrinder "war on drugs"?

Is TBSC a stalking horse for political candidates coming up this fall who would back the reactionary Robinson/Coonerty agenda at City Council--which involves more repressive laws against the poor, more power to the cops, and less transparency in government?

Does TBSC have nothing to propose but "more prisons", "deport immigrants" (as an unspoken theme), and vigilante support of a reactionary police agenda?

Is TBSC masquerading as a "public safety" group, but is really a police empowerment group, using the deaths and injuries of the last year as a platform to fan hysteria?

I suppose my conclusions are foreshadowed by my questions. I don't have lots of patience with anti-homeless bigots. Trying to convert racists is not something I want to spend my time doing. People have a right to their opinions, draw their own conclusions from their experience, and we can then judge from what they say and do whether we want to join in or not.

On the other hand, TBSCans have always been invited to call in to my radio show--and have almost never responded. Why bother with your critics if you have the ear and the balls of the City Council in hand?

The focus on Wes is a diversion and smacks of the anti-Communist hysteria of the 50's. Why look at the whole repressive system of Downtown Ordinances creating anger? Why challenge a police force that regularly humiliates poor people and tickets them for non-offenses? When rage erupts, why not blame anarchists, communists, aliens, and jews?

The whole anti-anarchist hysteria has little or nothing to do with real public safety, but seems to be part of a broader cultural war to "clean out" downtown of visibly poor people, particularly rebellious poor people.

As I and others have said, the stupidity of blaming and targeting the poor for the crimes of wealthy is ageold. It also seems to be an inevitable part of a deteriorating economic scene.

by Ben
Tuesday Jun 8th, 2010 12:23 PM
Robert, quite honestly you and HUFF are the only ones equating the actions of TBSC with an attack against the homeless. You're always the first person to bring it up. I'm not a member of TBSC and have had no contact with the organization. But when I look at what they are doing it seems that they are anti-gang, anti-drug sales and use on public spaces, and anti-bad behavior. So far they have cleaned up the cemetery of waste and drug paraphernalia, cleaned up the levee of the same, held a few positive loitering events in areas of high crime, and held vigils for children killed by gangs. These events have been in different areas of town, some poor, some wealthier. The people involved with leaving the drug paraphernalia and waste in the areas cleaned up have not been identified, so they could be both poor people as well as wealthier people. I've never seen them print anything directly targeting panhandlers. As a matter of fact, most all of their events have taken place in other parts of Santa Cruz other than downtown, where the panhandlers tend to congregate out of necessity.

If you're saying that in doing these events they are attacking the homeless, then are you admitting that it's the homeless committing the drug sales and use, leaving garbage in our open spaces, and committing gang activity? If this is the case, then shouldn't that fact be looked at? If this is true, then shouldn't you be working with that segment of our population to try and dissuade that kind of behavior rather than enable it?

You also seem to be drawing a correlation between Wes being discussed and that being an attack against the homeless. Wes is neither homeless, unemployed, or poor. Quite the contrary. Please explain why you think talking about Wes and his activities is an attack on the homeless. There seems to be no connection.

As for the behaviors TBSC speaks up about. How do we know for sure that the drug activity, vandalism, littering and gang members are not from housed, employed people/families? When I read what TBSC has to say I don't automatically think it's pointed at homeless. I don't think many people instantly think it's about the homeless. But for some reason you do. Again, are you saying based on first hand knowledge that the connection is because people you know ARE doing these things?

I just see you trying to insert something here that is not obviously connected.
by RIGHT not WRONG
Tuesday Jun 8th, 2010 9:13 PM
While TBSC was planning a Positive Loitering Event to honor two young men that were recently shot and killed Wes was devising a plan to derail them.
Here is the ACTUAL invitation sent by Wes on facebook. It is FILLED with lies intended to scare people away from TBSC. Notice the free food, nice touch. I like that he also says that he lives in Lower Ocean, when we all know he lives in Felton. This article about Dexter appears to be another attempt to smear TBSC's good name.
I would like to add that on the photo image for this invitation was an African American being handcuffed by a white police officer:

On Feb 26th, a group called "Take Back Santa Cruz" will descend upon the Lower Ocean Neighborhood (in front of the Little Caesar's at Ocean and Barson @ 6:30pm).They will be advocating an increased police presence, more surveillance cameras, and for neighbors to "call the cops first and ask questions later".

While this group claims to promote a "safer" Santa Cruz, we feel that their goals will make most of us in the Lower Ocean neighborhood less safe.

We will not be safer if cameras watch our every move or if the police feel welcome to enter people's homes, harass groups hanging out, and report people they detain to ICE.

Rather than create an atmosphere of suspicion and distrust, where we jump to calling the police before we talk to each other, we want to live in a community where we know our neighbors and take care of each other.

Let's get together to have a good time and talk about the future of our community.

FRIDAY
FEB 26th
@The end of Barson street (down the stairs as you cross the Laurel bridge, at the corner of Laurel and San Lorenzo)

BBQ/Potluck
music
discussion
FREE FOOD!
by contrabanned
Wednesday Jun 9th, 2010 12:01 PM
what lies? i like this 'actual invitation.' it really gets to the crux of the matter. 'positive' loitering is ludicrous, artificial, and a way to make lame people feel like they are doing something when they are not.

loitering is a naturally positive occurrence that builds community. your event had no lasting effect as it was merely reactionary. if you really want to 'take back' santa cruz, become the people that you want to be on the streets. you do not need an event to do it, just the willingness to actually get to know your neighbor. all your 'they will fear us to' surly is an awful way to let peace be on the streets of this town.

tbsc sucks ass.
by Wes
Wednesday Jun 9th, 2010 1:31 PM
I didn't plan the event or (since I had a conflict) attend it. I merely passed the word along on Facebook by creating an event for it.

Whatevs... Keep telling yourself whatever you need to.

Here's something that might help: wikipedia.org/...

by Zakari Adams
Thursday Jun 10th, 2010 8:54 PM
...rings a bell with team Subrosa. I'm betting it does.
by WGT
Saturday Jun 12th, 2010 12:29 AM
If the right can organize enough to do this very "direct action" type of networking and "defense," then we should be able to as well.

We've done it before-- the Black Panthers, the Brown Berets, the Motherfuckers.
This is even more necessary for the colored people. With all the pressure of ICE and TBSC cracking down on our immigrant and brown-skinned populations, there is no better time for this than now. I will not sit by and watch ICE deport my people. Let TBSC and ICE try to harass us when we challenge them openly in public. Who's with me?

ya fucking basta.
by Robert Norse
Saturday Jun 12th, 2010 12:50 PM
Some homeless people peacefully panhandle to survive. Others sell small quantities of marijuana. All have to exist in public spaces in spite of merchant paranoia and conservative resident scapegoating.

Many homeless people with medical conditions use marijuana medicinally (or recreationally), yet because of their visibility they are police targets---and the targets of vigilante groups like TBSC.

Santa Cruz has been the leader (shamefully enough) in a series of laws criminalizing innocent behavior like sleeping at night, non-obstructive sitting, peaceful sparechanging, playing music for donation, and even political tabling (in reaction to homeless protests).

When TBSC announces it's going to “clean up” areas and “turn in” “illegal” behaviors of panhandlers, campers, etc., then it doesn't take a law degree to know who is either being targeted or swept up in their shotgun targeting.

Particularly when they call for “more police”, one of whose main major visible pastimes seems to be harassment and ticketing of poor and homeless people downtown and around town.

Using recent shootings and knife-slayings to pump up the fear and hysteria to encourage “community action” around a police department-approved agenda (with many meetings in the police department itself) is additionally misguided if not cynical.

TBSC has never specifically called for the protection of homeless people by reforming the laws and police practices so that we, at least, accord with the legal situation in Los Angeles, San Diego, Fresno, and Richmond—whetr the Sleeping Bans, for instance, have been repealed.

Nor have they responded to many invitations to come on Free Radio Santa Cruz. Perhaps they don't want to "lower themselves"?

One reason TBSC prefers not to be transparent and engage in open dialogue may be that they don't feel their prejudices are strong enough to withstand a public debate. Another may be the kind of arrogance we find in City Council members--why bother to engage in dialogue, if you have the power already--or think you do?
by Auntie Imperial
Monday Jun 14th, 2010 10:48 AM
UAW/MF! E.S.S.O... the Subrosa kids could learn A LOT from Ben and his crew, and Emmet Grogan, and so many others they've probably never heard of.

The Motherfuckers, even as they served free meals, and 'free stores', scared the living crap out of glorified street thug Bill Graham and his Hells Angels 'protection'... put the HAs on notice about 'fucking with the hippies' and told Billy to his face, that if he didn't let them have a free night at the Fillmore East, there would no longer be a physical entity called the 'Fillmore East'.

Serious biz.

Ben's still out there. Writing poetry with a political edge.
http://e-blast.squarespace.com/

Makes one kind of wonder what Wes and friends will be doing in 40 years considering they run scared over threatening phone calls from do-nothing loudmouths.
by Beeuwheat
Monday Jun 14th, 2010 10:46 PM
From Wikipedia:

Up Against the Wall Motherfuckers (often referred to as simply "the Motherfuckers", or UAW/MF) was an anarchist affinity group based in New York City. This "street gang with analysis" was famous for its Lower East Side direct action and is said to have inspired members of the Weather Underground and the Yippies.

The Motherfuckers grew out of a Dada-influenced art group called Black Mask with elements of another group called Angry Arts. Formed in 1966 by painter Ben Morea and the poet Dan Georgakas, Black Mask produced a broadside of the same name and declared that revolutionary art should be "an integral part of life, as in primitive society, and not an appendage to wealth."[1] In May 1968, Black Mask changed its name and went underground. Their new name, Up Against the Wall Motherfuckers, came from a poem by Amiri Baraka. Abbie Hoffman characterized them as "the middle-class nightmare... an anti-media media phenomenon simply because their name could not be printed."[2]

Early Motherfuckers included Tom Neumann, the stepson of Herbert Marcuse, John Sundstrom, and Alan Hoffman.

The Motherfuckers contributed to New York City's counterculture by setting up crash pads, serving free food, starting a free store, and helping radicals connect with doctors and lawyers. They were opposed to and resisted on principle any attempt to impose order on the political demonstrations they participated in. Among other things, the Motherfuckers instigated brawls with Maoist groups such as the Progressive Labor Party.[citation needed] They were the first to use the term "Affinity Group".[citation needed]

* 1967 - Forced their way into The Pentagon during an anti-war protest.[3]

* Became the only non-student chapter of Students for a Democratic Society.[citation needed]

* 1968 - "Assassinated" poet Kenneth Koch (using blanks).[citation needed]

* Helped occupy and hold one of the buildings at the Columbia University takeover.[citation needed]
* Dumped uncollected refuse from the Lower East Side into the fountain at Lincoln Center on the opening night of a gala "bourgeois cultural event" during a NYC garbage strike (an event documented in the 1968 Newsreel film Garbage).[4]

* 1969 - Organized and produced free concert nights in the Fillmore East, featuring such groups as the MC5, after successfully demanding that owner Bill Graham give the community the venue for a series of weekly free concerts. These "Free Nights" were short-lived as the combined forces of NY City Hall, the police, and Graham terminated the arrangement.[5]

* Cut the fences at Woodstock, allowing thousands to enter for free.[3]

Eventually, as the political and economic climate changed toward 1970–1971, the Motherfuckers ceased concentrated activities in New York City, stopped referring to themselves as UAW/MF, and many members moved to New Mexico, California, and other states. Morea himself moved with his wife to the Sangre de Cristo Mountains, where they lived for five years on horseback, gathering and poaching game. Other UAW/MF members became loosely absorbed into an interconnected network of communes and collectives known as Armed Love (a term coined by Ben Morea). With Black Bear Ranch as a spiritual center, the Armed Love collectives spread out along the rural and urban coastline of California and Oregon, existed in Vermont, New Mexico, and other locations. As Motherfucker Terry C. once stated, "Motherfuckers was just a form. That time is past. It's time to move on."

This and more at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_motherfuckers
by Auntie Imperial
Tuesday Jun 15th, 2010 10:25 AM
The Columbia occupation was most likely NOT UAW's shtick. I believe (because I was there) the building in question, The Courant Institute(Physics) was occupied by Transcendental Students, the NYU/Village chapter of Weather.

UAW may have ben involved in the occupation of Loeb Student Center, but there were a number of players in that 'game' seeing as it was the largest part of the occupation at the Downtown campus

An illumination... TS was using an old LARGE storefront by NYU. The shell of a short-lived restaurant called 'Hungry Charlie's'. They attempted, as Subrosa is doing, a 'community space' and hangout for the movement people and 'hippies'. After the WU came under intense pressure following the Chicago "Days of Rage"(aka "Days of Stupidity") and the deaths of 3 WU members in a failed attempt to build a bomb, also destroying a Village townhouse (AFAIK, by people NOT affiliated with TS), Transcendental Students inexorably hunkered down in their storefront, became increasingly paranoid, institutionally sociopathic as a matter of fact, and eventually blacked out their windows becoming totally, ineffectively, insular.

There's a lesson for the Subrosa kids in there somewhere. Because, in my estimation, you're already insular... A clique', NOT a collective, and therefore easy to isolate and neutralize, or certainly, infiltrate.

To the best of MY knowledge, NO ONE ever infiltrated UAM/MF, but I'm sure TS had been, and the agents probably resided comfortably behind those blacked out windows with the rest of them.

Dudes! All it took were a few crank calls, and it UTTERLY disrupted your storefront operation.

I can only imagine what would happen if the 'weather'(sic) got bad.
by Auntie Imperial
Tuesday Jun 15th, 2010 10:30 AM
Sorry... on a tangent.

UAW WAS involved @ Columbia, but they were not, to the best of my knowledge, 'building occupiers' except for the fact that, like 'Yippie!', with who they were closely affiliated, and damn near every other radical group in the city, they were in the masses occupying the buildings.
by Marie Meroke
Wednesday Jul 7th, 2010 3:21 PM
The May Day "RIOT" appeared to be a simple student and anarchist peaceful march and protest like many others held in Santa Cruz carried on since the sixties in this beach/University town. Santa Cruz has secret haters or timid bigots as in many other towns in the US causing an undercurrent of potential violence. The longterm harrassment of street people and musicians is recorded in Free Radio documents and other publications. Ticketing is used to force the homeless poor to leave town or become criminals for being unable to pay the tickets. Students should know that tickets were given to civil rights protestors in the sixties to discourage participation in protests in the South.

As for those living in vehicles, parking on the One between Santa Cruz and Davenport is subject to ticketing. There are no rest stops on the One between Santa Cruz and San Francisco. The refusal of City leaders to understand and acknowledge the true causes of violence in Santa Cruz has made the problem worse by now fining homeless people $1,000 for sleeping outdoors. Street people and other homeless refuse to leave Santa Cruz as their friends are here and there is no other place like Santa Cruz in California.

I am sure SubRosa's owner did NOT instigate the breaking of windows on May 1 as that is not the means of anarchism. The shutdown of the Guerilla theater and harrassment at the drum circle are signs that the Bush/Swarzenegger political agenda has not abated despite Santa Cruz being known as a "liberal" town. Liberal politicians should be informed of these oppressive conditions in California as well as tourists who visit Santa Cruz. Causes of violence cannot be buried.
Hi Dexter or Analicia Cube, other Take Back Santa Cruz founding members and admins...

Take Back Santa Cruz claims to be open to the community but the Facebook group, Take Back Santa Cruz is a closed group.

why?

I wouldn't really care other than I've submitted a request to join the FB Take Back Santa Cruz group perhaps 6 times in the last 2 months and each time my request seems to be denied. Does Take BAck Santa Cruz approve all people on Facebook attempting to join or is there a secret password or handshake we need to do to get in?

by Robert Norse
Saturday Jun 15th, 2013 4:09 AM
Not that it's terribly relevant to Take Back Santa Cruz's anti-homeless agenda, but since this thread is about the case, it's at http://www.sec.gov/news/digest/04-25.txt .