Willie Says SF Could Have Saved Money if They'd Handled the Protests Oakland's Way

Yes, I saw that interview with Willie this morning on KRON channel 4 around 7:20 a.m. Willie stated that the Protests in SF cost the city 2.5 billion dollars because the SFPD allowed the protestors to do their demostrations, although they were distrupting the public.

In comparison, Mr. Brown noted that the Oakland Police saved a lot more money because they had less people and made a preemptive attack againist the protestors before the demostartion could begin. When Phil made the suggestion that Mr. Brown hinted that the SFPD could have saved money if they handeled their protestor the way that Oakland did, Mr. Brown stated "Hey I didn't say that" with both his hands up, although he was smiling at the camera. (hint Hin)

That was my take on it! Thanks for reading

$2.5 will be a drop in the bucket compared to what it will cost this city when the protesters strike back. They WILL take revenge. They're most likely to take it out, not on the SFPD, but on deserving corporations, the only taxpayers in town who actually get their money's worth.

Willie should suck on some tear gas; instead he's too busy sucking down cocaine with his mob-pimp buddies, while he sells SF to the lowest bidder.

Wanted to correct myself about the cost. It was 2.5 million rather than 2.5 billion.

"$2.5 will be a drop in the bucket compared to what it will cost this city when the protesters strike back. They WILL take revenge."

Please do it. SF is one of the few anti-war cities with political clout, and anything you can do to weaken it, is welcome by us right-wing militant nutballs.

So maybe the protesters will take it out on the freepers. Wouldn't that be sweet.

What the heck, why wait. Take preemptive action. It's the American way.

http://peacetool.8k.com/

Remember the dockworkers who were hit by OPD's pellets and projectiles?

If the SFPD had used similar tactics there would have been much more "collateral damage" than there was in Oakland. Just imagine the lawsuits that would come from hitting the dozens of lawyers and businessmen who were standing around, watching activities that day.

At $2.5 million, SF made the right decision and got off cheap. The total bill after Oakland lawsuits will likely dwarf that amount.

Kudos to SF Protesters

Organizers should be proud that they run up the arrest numbers the day the war started with largely peaceful direct action protests and were able to channel all that anger into making a huge statement that day without violence.

Back in Gulf War I there was full-scale rioting in the streets, including a cop car turned over and set on fire on the Bay Bridge. The evolution of the spokescouncil and affinity group process made things much more peaceful this time and delivered a strong message heard around the world.

Congrats to everyone who was on the street that day!

BROWN: My guess is that it was a lot less expensive for Oakland when they did their demonstrations because they did a pre-emptive [strike] and they removed the protesters. We allowed the protesters to do their thing and we didn't block 'em until it was over with.

PHIL: So the next time they come you might shoot rubber bullets? Huh? Save a little... couple of bucks?

BROWN: No no no, I don't want to be tagged with that. I don't want to be tagged with that. No no....

Here's the link.

http://playlist.yahoo.com/makeplaylist.dll?ID=1181906

"So maybe the protesters will take it out on the freepers. Wouldn't that be sweet. What the heck, why wait. Take preemptive action. It's the American way."

Why arn't freepers subject to anti-terrorist laws like pro-democracy people? These enemies of democracy and the free speech on which it depends are a far greater threat to America and the world than Saddam Hussein ever was. The idea that they can attack with immunity the only "patriots" in this country with hack attacks and denial of service attacks , those who understand and oppose the brutal fascism* that has consumed and nullified our democratic principles and constitution, is a symptom of our collective demise at the hands of the ignorant tools of fascism*.

Their support for the brutal totalitarian agenda of this administration and it's owners is treason in itself. Where is Ashcroft when we need him? What is TIPS phone number?

*Fascism is a much used word and often taken to mean simply mean, aggressive and violent. but the dictionary definition makes it clear that it is a very appropriate term for this administration and it's owners and particularly the bush family who were in alliance with Mussolini's Fascist party when they both empowered Adolf Hitler in the 1920s and 1930s.
fas-cism (fash-is-em) n. A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with a belligerent nationalism. -The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language

Wendy Linka must be dealing Willie a whole lotta blow for him to make a stupid statement like this. Stupid cokeheads. Of course, the SFPD would never crack down on Willie's crack habit. I bet SF would save a whole lot of money if it got rid of Willie instead.

How did the Bush family empower Hitler with the aid of Mussolini? I'm not sure but I think they were both (especially G.W. ) a bit young for that.

No, we won't go live in Iraq, because we are needed more right here in the USA to preserve the freedoms of our nation and to put a stop to the many abuses done in our names. That is what we're trying to do with protest: "We're fixing it HERE."

The next time some Rush-Limbaugh-wannabe/hanger-on tells you to "go to Iraq then", just respond with "No, thanks. I'm working on fixing things HERE."

Dubya's grandfather, Prescott, laundered money for the Nazis. He had 42% of his stock siezed by leo Crowley, the Alien Property Custodian.

See:

http://www.dogonvillage.com/wwwboard/messages/731.html

the city of SF could've saved a lot of money giving Willie the treatment reserved for corrupt officials in China - a bullet to the head, with the ammo bill sent to "duh mayor's" relatives. i vote for a public execution in pacbell stadium, after Willie's confession of course...

E-mail Willie and ask him about the black marble bathtub in his office chambers.

Ask him why the cops all talk about him and Don Johnson being coke buddies, and how that was the reason Nash Bridges was filmed in S.F., even though no one else could film here.

Ask him about Dolores Evans, a Bayview poll worker who was to give deposition on election fraud, and why her house burned down with her and her children in it just days before her testimonial.

Ask him.

Thank you, "Linker".

I agree, shooting at peaceful demonstrators would be a cheap erway of stopping peaceful protests. There would soon be no more mass protests, no protestors peacefully blocking streets, etc. There would be no more peaceful protests.

I also agree that the powers of the state would win against the resulting violence. But would it be cheaper?

That's what George III thought. So did Louis XIV, Nicholas II, Charles I and Ceausescu.

When you consider the costs of lawsuits and settlements for cities like Oakland and SF with particularly corrupt and brutal police departments, I doubt that it is cheaper. But since the city's money is our money anyway, the police department doesn't seem to consider it much of a disincentive.

I take issue with Bob's statement that "Back in Gulf War I there was full-scale rioting in the streets ..." I was there, too. There was NO rioting, though a small number of people broke windows and, yes burned a Highway Patrol car (hooray for them and fuck cops, the army of the rich). We mainly blocked streets and sometimes the Bay Bridge, but it was completely peaceful (I don't consider mere property destruction to be violent and there wasn't that much, anyway). And, the burning cop car made national news, which was great as far as those of us not encumbered by liberalism were concerned. One professional activist who was in DC at the time told me that he thought the burning cop car was the best image he saw on TV of all the anti-war demonstration footage.

The main difference between now and '91 is that we had a much cooler mayor back then (Art Agnos), who said -- in response to complaints that the cops should crack down on demonstrators because we were making it hard for people to get places on time -- that the war was far more important than petty concerns of how long it took to get from one place to another, and that we had a right to demonstrate in the streets. Now, we have a totally pro-corporate mayor who thinks that maintaining business as usual (keep the trains running on time!) is more important than the fact that his beloved corporations are responsible for killing thousands of people and destroying the Earth in Iraq.

Okay, I'll bite, Insider. Tell me more about Dolores Evans. I did a web search and got didily. Dish, damnit!

Go to http://www.brasscheck.com. It is pretty damn amazing.

From reading these accounts, Brown simply pointed out that SF had absorbed additional expense as a result of not preemptively attacking protestors. He specifically denied that he was implying that SF should have adopted Oakland's tactics when prodded by the interviewer. That doesn't sound so bad to me. Maybe Brown thinks that the additional cost is worth it.

Let's not attack people who, with proper urging and lobbying, may actually end up on our side. We don't want Willy Brown to start sucking up to the right wing like Jerry Brown down in Oakland.

Here's something:
http://brasscheck.com/stadium/

Prescott Bush was George Herbert Walker's father. His bank was convicted of trading with the enemy during WWII. It's public record. No one seems to care what these people do as long as they say the "right" thing.

"His bank was convicted of trading with the enemy during WWII. It's public record."

If this is in the public record, kindly point me to a link. I was unable to find it in the law records.

Thank you.

In which "law records" did you look? be specific.

The story made the New York Herald Tribune in July, 1942. The assets were seized from the Union Bank, of which Prescott Bush was the director.

The article was entitled "Hitler's Angel Has 3 Million in US Bank".

Here's some logic: police brutality saves money at first, but with class action lawsuits pending, individual lawsuits pending, internal investigative legwork, you are going to spending a lot more money. Better to just let the protest happen, let some stupid multinational corporation suffer while protesters swarm into convenience stores for water and cigarettes and whatever else they need while in the streets all day, and go home for the day.

What they are paying for is the decreased publicity for anti-war sentiment. And that's a price tag that protesters should not have to shoulder the burden for. The corrupt politicians who use oppression to silence dissent are the ones to blame for that.

There is one reason that this demonstration, like all antiwar demonstrations, won't bring the desired results: all it did was blow off steam. For that reason, it is hardly surprising that demonstrations are tolerated by the establishment.

Antiwar demonstrations, like all demonstrations for social justice, won't work until we--all of us who are serious about a just society--define exactly what a just society would look like and how we are to arrive at one. Until then, the antiestablishmentarians will continue to be co-opted.

Examples of co-optation are innumerable. For example, can Naomi Klein be credible with her book No Logo when she also works for the conservative Canadian newspaper Globe and Mail and receives a top business journalism award for the book?

Can the Green Party of California be credible when most of the candidates were connected in some way with the financial industry, including financial consultant Peter Camejo?

Can Lula be credible when he addresses a huge anti-globalization forum in Porto Alegre one day, addresses the Davos conference the next, and promises to service the unservicable debt that his predecessors have incurred for Brazil?

Can Thabo Mbeki and the African National Congress (ANC) be credible when they promise social justice one year and impose hefty charges for water and electricity on the poorest segment of South African blacks and Indians the next? Don't believe me? Read We Are the Poors by Desai.

All these, plus talk about supporting candidates to run in the Democratic Party, the very party that brought us NAFTA, the Kosovo War, and the missile attacks on Afthanistan and Iraq in 1998, makes the movement less than credible.

Paul V. McDowell is wrong that anti-war demos "won't bring the desired results." Nixon admitted in his memoirs (public record) that the ONLY reason he didn't nuke North Vietnam was that he was afraid that the 500,000 demonstrators who were outside the White House would be inside it if he dropped nuclear weapons on Vietnam. Those of us who demonstrated and otherwise worked against it also brought the Vietnam War to an end, though it took much longer than we would have liked. Demonstrations can have very real effects, but one can't expect those results to manifest immediately. I realize that Americans have no patience and a very distorted idea of time, but come on!

I do agree, on the other hand, that what we do, especially with our money, is far more important than what we say, such as demonstrating. It's hypocritical to demostrate against a war for oil while living a life that revolves around massive consumption of oil. If people oppose this kind of behavior by the U.S. government, they must arrange their lives so that they don't consume so much stuff, especially oil. Living far from a job or shopping is a choice; live near your job and other necessities so you won't consume oil!

If Poster or anyone else thinks that Willie Brown "can be won over to our side with the proper urging and lobbying," is way behind the times or incredibly naive. Whether it's approaching the S.F. Republican Party brass during the last S.F. mayor's race and offering to make Republican-friendly changes to his political platform in exchange for their help, or stating just before that same race that "I don't think democracy would be served by me having an opponent," or his higher-than-Matrix level of harrassment of S.F.'s poor and homeless population, his "my police department, right or wrong" policy of oversight of the police, or his statement during the dot-com boom and the accompanying obscene rents, "Anyone who can't afford to live in San Francisco should just go live somewhere else," among his other acts of pimping San Francisco and everything in it to his primarily-from-out-of-town, well-moneyed cronies, make it plainer than plain that believing that like Jerry, Willie Brown is just another Demo-rat, in other words, Republican lapdog.

Woof Woof. Sniff My Butt.

On the Prescott Bush - Nazi connection, check this page:

http://www.mbpolitics.com/bush2000/VestingExplain.htm

The links under "Vesting Order 248:" are scanned images from the Federal Register. Anyone with a little Google skill can find this stuff.

During the 1991 Gulf War protests in San Francisco, there was this skinheadish kid next to me who said to his friend, "If we fuck up a police car, maybe they'll start bashing heads." He disappeared for a few minutes and then came back, claiming he'd set a police car on fire.

Naturally this sort of thing got all sorts of media coverage, only it was attributed to the peace protesters, with the usual phony irony about peace protesters getting violent.

"Those of us who demonstrated and otherwise worked against it also brought the Vietnam War to an end"

I think the brave resistance by the people of Vietnam also had something to do with it. Why do Americans think they are the only ones who bring about change?

In 1991, bonfires were set in front of the Chevron building on Market Street. They burned a hole into the pavement where the F line tracks now run.

Almost every trash can had been torched. Most "news" boxes were kicked over, to which one Volvo driving yuppie from Marin screeched: "STOP THE VIOLENCE!" Parking meters, suprisingly easy to take down, were also removed.

The crowd then headed south down 2d Street towards the Bay Bridge. An astonishingly small handful of CHP had stood down the mob of 3000 or so well up onto the entrance (or was it exit) ramp off of 2d, but had foolishly left their cruisers parked under the structure.

So, at 2d between Folsom and Howard, skateboards broke the windows of a CHP cruiser, flares were ignited, tossed into the seats, and the vehicle proceeded to ignite and finally explode, ordnance and fuel while a few hundred anarchists danced around.

We were all thrown several feet by the explosions when the shit hit the fan.

A friend was contacted a year or so later for questioning, probably on the word of a gruntled ex friend, by the cops at his job, but no charges were ever filed and the statute of limitations has expired.

I'm sorry, officer, but I didn't catch which file you were getting your bogus information from?