From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Related Categories: San Francisco | Anti-War
Sexist pro-Israel Activist Dan Kliman Attacks QUIT Activists At Palestine Protest
by Z
Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 4:28 PM
Near the end of today's proPalestine protest in SF, an activist from QUIT told me that a man from Blue Star PR had been yelling at her and calling her a bitch and saying that she should die. I went over and got these pictures of Dan Kliman yelling at her. I didnt hear his exact threat (perhaps someone who was there can provide more details) but I did get some video of him yelling in people's faces and accusing QUIT (Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism) of being suicide bombers for opposing the occupation and the wall.
Dan Kliman ( ) used to do work with Critical Mass in Saint Louis ( see and ) When Dan moved to the Bay Area he started going after Palestinian activists and even tried to get people to call the FBI on the ISM ( see )

I'm not sure if Dan works for Blue Star PR ( ) but it is the company behind all those ads for Israel around town. Blue Star PR had signs online that proIsrael people brought to the counter protest today. Blue Star PR is partly funded by the Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund who gave its San Franicisco branch $450,000 over the past two years ( see )
§Dan Kliman
by Z Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 4:28 PM
§Dan Kliman
by Z Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 4:28 PM
§Dan Kliman
by Z Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 4:28 PM
§Dan Kliman
by Z Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 4:28 PM
§Dan Kliman
by Z Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 4:28 PM
§Dan Kliman
by Z Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 4:28 PM
§Dan Kliman
by Z Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 4:28 PM
Dan had a still camera and video camera and was filming people for most of the protest. While most people taking pictures just put them on their websites and it amounts to little, Dan has in the past tried to mobilize people to call the FBI on Palestinian activists.
by Z Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 4:28 PM
My camera also does video.This may be useful for legal reasons If Dan attacks or threatens someone at a future protest.
(thats to whoever reposted it smaller)
§another pic
by background Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 5:17 PM
From what you can find on Google, Oakland internal medicine physician Dr. Daniel Kliman (see picture at bottom of ) seems progressive on a bunch of different issues. He's gay , hates cars and is a member of at least one vegetarian activist group. Its scary to think that someone you might work with on one issue can be so conservative on another that they actually tried to get the FBI to arrest people for protesting. Its especially sad since it seems like his father (who passed away a few months ago) saw his proudest achievement as "bringing together members of the local Muslim and Jewish communities for mutual dialogue" ( ).
§people change
by people change Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 5:24 PM
"Critical Mass founder Dan Kliman stops traffic at the corner of Delmar and Kingshighway and hold his bicycle above his head as a show of pedal power on the traffic-dominated city streets. "

Comments  (Hide Comments)

by Well, that's one option.
Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 5:28 PM
The other is that you don't have hegemony on the issue.
by but...
Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 5:47 PM
Dan used to risk arrest blocking trafic and is everything the protest warriors hate (a vegetarian, an environmentalist and queer) Now he hangs out with people who would have hated his younger self (right-wing goons from the Free Republic who made up about half the proIsrael people at the protest today), wears American flags and has tried to get the FBI to arrest people he calls terrorists because they go to Israel and protest in front of the wall. Since in many places right-wingers accuse Critical Mass of engaging in terrorism by tying up city traffic for hours, calling the FBI on actvists and taking part in Critical Mass seem pretty contradictory.
by mm
Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 6:02 PM
This guy is a disgrace to the jewish people. He is the reason there is anti-Semitism in the world.
by On the other hand...
Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 6:22 PM
Maybe leftie intolerance drives out pro-Israel comrades.

If the issue is so important to you, might it not be likewise for someone who disagrees?
by Dan Kliman fan club
Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 6:34 PM
by Looks like a lot of screaming to me.
Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 6:37 PM
From both sides. At a glance, I can't tell y'all apart, except for the flags of competing nations.
by rephrase
Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 6:38 PM
Well, that would be like saying that hatred of Germans is okay because a minority 10-15% were nazis in the 1930s and only 10-15% visibly opposed them and were sent to camps etc. and the rest quietly hid from the issue. You could point to suspect people in any culture.
by to discuss it on its own terms.
Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 6:41 PM
I'm deeply suspicious of those who need Germany metaphors to discuss Israel/Palestine.

Do your own thinking.
by observer
Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 7:44 PM
After he called the QUIT woman a bitch (and before the above video started), he reapeatedly screamed right in her face: "You're a self hating queer! You're a self hating Jew!" The woman had to hold her hand up to her face to keep some distance from his yelling and finger pointing.
by protestwarrior
Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 7:48 PM
How can a gay man be sexist? even after you go and proove he's gay by doing a search on google.

you guys sure like to point fingers around alot... maybe you should try doing that in the mirror some day.
by protestwarrior
Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 7:48 PM
one more thing....

he's gay and he's antigay?

you sound like john kerry.
by Critical Thinker
Saturday Jul 24th, 2004 11:16 PM
>>>"This guy is a disgrace to the jewish people. He is the reason there is anti-Semitism in the world."<<<

No. The reason for anti-Semitism is the existence of anti-Semites and the ignorance of others who are too ignorant of its real causes and don't rail against it as they do against other forms of racism.

by what?
Sunday Jul 25th, 2004 12:36 AM
About as many gay men are sexist as straight men... I don't see any contradiction....
by pudge
Sunday Jul 25th, 2004 11:54 AM
ad-hominym attacks like this are immature, unproductive and take away from the real questions.

I am disappointed and expect a whole lot more IndyBay people than this type of personal attack.

It's about the ideas!!! Not the calling out thought police when someone disagrees with the "party line"

by Z
Sunday Jul 25th, 2004 2:21 PM
"focus on ideas not the individual"

I usually agree, but I was requested by a woman who felt personally threatened by Dan to post a picture of him. I included the stuff about him being progressive on other issues to make it seem less like a smear and focus more on his acting inappropriate at this event.

His calls to get the FBI to arrest local activists also seemed like it needed pointing out since acting out at one event is one thing but threating people with arrest or worse is not something that should be taken lightly as just a political difference. I'm sure that even among many of the counter protesters the idea that antiWar or proPalestine protesters should be watched and arrested by the FBI seems to cross a line (I'd hope that at least some on the right still believe that people have a right to their opinions and to protest). If the point of Dan or others was to intimidate activists into being silent by making a point of taking pictures, calling the FBI and making people feel like they no longer have the freedom to speak out, covering the counterprotesters actions seems like a legitimate response (it exposes the hatred behind many of the counter protesters and is one response to their picture taking which seems to always carry a message designed to scare off many paranoid activists from comming to protests).

The picture of a woman with a dog staring in an angry manner at Dan I think is pretty powerful. That woman was not part of the protest but I'm sure after seeing the actions of the antiPalestinian protesters she is probably more likely to think about and oppose the occupation and the apartheid wall.
by Ted
Sunday Jul 25th, 2004 6:16 PM
You guys make too much of this being a right vs.left issue and therefore get confused when a gay progressive supports Israel.

This is about the attempt to destroy of Israel. If you can't see that, then I recommend taking a harder look at what you're doing.

by progressive?
Sunday Jul 25th, 2004 6:40 PM
Dan yelled "you dead bitch" at a queer woman repeatedly and said a few other things she constured to be a death threat. He also has in the past tried to organize people to contact the FBI to arrest activists he disagrees with. Ignoring one's views on Israel, what Dan's actiions towards Palestinian activists can in no was be construed to be "progressive". If I were a proIsrael progressive I would be ashamed to be associated with Dan Kliman.
by not really
Sunday Jul 25th, 2004 6:55 PM
Dan is a progressive on many issues who happens to feel strongly enough about Israel that he violates much of what he belives in terms of civil liberties when it comes to protests related to Israel's actions.

The protest warriors on the other hand are center-right Republicans who hate progressives and come to protests to make fun of the protesters. They shout over people and act like jerks but I would doubt they would try to get the FBI to go after any individuals and since they come to protests to yell at people they dont seem to get very angry.From their t-shirts and stickers on the back of their signs I would bet they feel stronger about things like having worked to get Davis kicked out of office than they do about Israel or other foreign policy concerns (they are not far right in that they supported Arnold and believe getting centrist Republicans elected is a victory) Since Israel isnt a personal issue to most Protest Warriors (and their basic message is one of supporting the President for partisan reasons) protest warriors would never get into a confrontation like Dan did Saturday.

Which is worse, someone who has morals and goes overboard because they feel so strongly about an issue, or people who see politics as a game and protesters as "the opposing team". If someone like Dan sat down with progressive Palestinians supporters and dicussed what he thought, I bet he would find more agreement than disagreement (the ISM who he sees as a terrorist organization is composed of many Jewish activists who belive in the same two state solution Dan believes in and most ISM supporters are also opposed to suicide bombings) Its a shame dialogue couldnt occur and it ended up with people threatening each other. The right-wingers who come to protest are not there to debate but some of the proIsrael protesters are merely mislead into believing that most Palestinian activists are extremists who belive that Israel should be wiped out. The lack of debtae between "Israel supporters" and "Palestine supporters" is largely a result of each side branding the other as secretly being supportive of the most extreme views that can be seen at protests; Israel supporters see Palestine suppoters in the light of the one or two antiSemites who show up mainly at the larger protests and Palestine supporters see the proIsrael camp as being reprented by protest warriors or freepers (who are even more right-wing).
by heard it before
Sunday Jul 25th, 2004 7:07 PM
The Nazis have a left wing, too. So what? A racist is a racist is a racist.

Left wing Zionism is a Trojan horse. Left wing Zionism Is inherently racist for the same reason that left wing Nazism is inherently racism. The left wing Zionists blather on about the “the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza,” but conveniently ignore the occupation of Israel itself. Israel itself is occupied territory. It is occupied by a racist cult for which no IMCista should ever apologize.

The left wing Zionist strategy is to further institutionalize the apartheid by creating a state-like entity for the Palestinians who weren’t fortunate to have been born in the right place or of the right mother. If we let the left wing Zionists set the agenda, we are complicit in the crimes of all Zionists. The *only* just solution is a single society, secular and egalitarian, in which every Palestinian is equal, no matter what their ethnicity or religion.

by well
Sunday Jul 25th, 2004 7:21 PM
Zionist, antiZionist, these are words with little or no meaning.

People who claim they are strong supporters of Israel at root are usually just concerned that their friends and relatives in Israel can live, work and practice their religion in peace (and there is a fear that calls for a one state solution are really calls for a nonJewish majority that will oppress Jews).

People who call themselves antiZionists are on the whole good hearted people who see Palestinians being oppressed and want it to stop.

There is no contradiction between the two sides if you ignore people's paranoid views of what people think the other side supports. One does see antiZionists on the internet who are really antiSemites and one does see proIsrael Freepers on the internet who really just hate nonwhites, but both groups are small and play little part in the politics of the region. In Israel one does have settlers who believe in a greater Israel for religious reasons but Ive never seen them on online dicussion boards like this and while they do hold some power in Israel (by blocking the destruction of settlements) they are still a minority that the majority of Israelis disagree with.
by Palestine &quot;versus&quot; Israel
Sunday Jul 25th, 2004 8:56 PM
One of the primary problems blocking a mutually-satisfactory solution is the polemicization of the dispute, particularly by people who aren't Palestinian or Israeli.

Or, put another way, American ideological hotheads demanding people pick either-or sides and throwing around incendiary labels, make the problem worse not better.

But what do they care? They don't have to live the consequences. That always makes it so easier to be so much more purist.

I feel for Dan. He's likely been pushed away form some things that mattered a lot to him, because he wouldn't forswear his people's dream of a homeland, and the left is so knee-jerk on the issue. I'd imagine that's frustrating and it's easy to end up yelling about it, and saying things one wouldn't say in conversation.

What, no one else here has? No one in QUIT has ever called names or been aggro?

Well? Under the circumstances, what could one reasonably expect?
by listen
Sunday Jul 25th, 2004 9:52 PM
"well" sounds like a namby-pamby Zionist Jew who is in denial about how Israel is a racist, Jewish supremacist, ethnic-cleansing, genocidal, anti-democratic, apartheid state. Hellooooooo!

If you were a Palestinian, I am very sure you would not be able to overlook these facts, yes, facts.

Even in the one-state solution that we anti-Zionists advocate and push for, it is quite apparent that in many ways, Jews would still dominate, just as they do here in the USA. HOWEVER, the Palestinians would at least have equal rights before the law, something which they do NOT have now in apartheid Israel.

In fact, the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories must pay taxes to Israel without any representation or vote or anything in Israel which IS as you may recall: TYRANNY.

So, get with the program:

Zionism will be defeated!

FREE PALESTINE from racist Zionism!
by sounds more like
Sunday Jul 25th, 2004 10:54 PM
a source of shit.
The beginning is to develop something entirely missing from both Israeli and Palestinian realities today: the idea and practice of citizenship, not of ethnic or racial community, as the main vehicle for coexistence. In a modern state, all its members are citizens by virtue of their presence and the sharing of rights and responsibilities. Citizenship therefore entitles an Israeli Jew and a Palestinian Arab to the same privileges and resources. A constitution and a bill of rights thus become necessary for getting beyond Square 1 of the conflict because each group would have the same right to self-determination; that is, the right to practice communal life in its own (Jewish or Palestinian) way, perhaps in federated cantons, with a joint capital in Jerusalem, equal access to land and inalienable secular and juridical rights. Neither side should be held hostage to religious extremists.

Yet feelings of persecution, suffering and victimhood are so ingrained that it is nearly impossible to undertake political initiatives that hold Jews and Arabs to the same general principles of civil equality while avoiding the pitfall of us-versus-them. Palestinian intellectuals need to express their case directly to Israelis, in public forums, universities and the media. The challenge is both to and within civil society, which has long been subordinate to a nationalism that has developed into an obstacle to reconciliation. Moreover, the degradation of discourse - symbolized by Arafat and Netanyahu trading charges while Palestinian rights are compromised by exaggerated ''security'' concerns - impedes any wider, more generous perspective from emerging.

The alternatives are unpleasantly simple: either the war continues (along with the onerous cost of the current peace process) or a way out, based on peace and equality (as in South Africa after apartheid) is actively sought, despite the many obstacles. Once we grant that Palestinians and Israelis are there to stay, then the decent conclusion has to be the need for peaceful coexistence and genuine reconciliation. Real self-determination. Unfortunately, injustice and belligerence don't diminish by themselves: they have to be attacked by all concerned.

The One-State Solution (Truth and Reconciliation)
by Edward Said

Q: Your vision of inclusion and the one-state solution actually follows one of the old streams of Zionism.

Said: As many Palestinians have, I've read the history of debates within the Zionist settlers' movement. There were people of a fairly important caliber, like Martin Buber, like Judah Magnes, who was the first president of Hebrew University, like Hannah Arendt, who realized that there was going to be a clash if the aggressive settlement policies and the ignoring of the Arabs pressed ahead. David Ben-Gurion actually said, "There's no case in history where a people simply gives up and allows another people to take their territory over."

So they knew that there would be a conflict, especially Magnes, who really was an idealist. He was a man way ahead of his time, and a remarkable spirit also. He said, "Let's try to think in terms quite morally and profoundly about the Arabs. Let's think in terms of their presence, not their absence."

That spirit is to be found in the work of the new Israeli historians, who have gone back over the national narrative of Israel and reexamined the myth of Israel's independence and discovered how much of it was based on the denial, or the effacement, or the willful avoidance of the Arabs. All that Israel has been able to do for the last fifty years is not, of course, to get security for itself. There is no security of that sort. But it has been maintaining a kind of holding operation by which the Arabs are simply kept out. Over time that can't work because of demographics and the fact that people don't give up if they're beaten down. They hold on even more resolutely and more stubbornly.

So there's a new climate of opinion. I think you could see it as coming out of Zionism. I don't want to appear negative or critical of it. A lot of it is an inter-Jewish debate, not something that's taking place between Palestinians and Israelis. It's taking place within--as it did in the case of Magnes and Arendt and Buber--the Zionist or Jewish camp.

People like myself, who luckily don't have to face the daily pressures of living in either Israel or Palestine, but have time to reflect at some distance, can play a role in terms of seeking out discussion and debate with their opposite numbers in the other camp. That's beginning to happen, more or less systematically. There are frequent dialogues, frequent conferences between Palestinians and Israeli intellectuals, not with an eye towards--as there have been for so many years--settling the problem in a governmental way, as an adjunct to the peace process. That's led nowhere.

This is a new kind of discussion, one that is based upon patient scholarship and scrupulous archival work. It's not carried out by people with political ambitions. It's mostly people who have a certain standing in their community as academics and intellectuals. It's quite a new phenomenon. I don't think it's been too focused on by the media, which is completely obsessed with the failing peace process.

Edward Said Interview
by anti bigot
Monday Jul 26th, 2004 8:44 AM
Windy: "Jews would still dominate, just as they do here in the USA."

Ah, Windy Wendy, just to clarify -- you *are* calling the US "Jew-dominated" here, right?

by well
Monday Jul 26th, 2004 9:15 AM
"Jews would still dominate, just as they do here in the USA"
does seem antiSemitic. On first reading I thought whoever wrote that was just trying to argue that with current populations a one state solution would be majority Jewish (and thus be a larger Israel with a larger Palestinian majority).

When Said spoke of a one state solution it was before Sharon got elected, before the major raids by Israel on the West Bank and now Gaza and before the war in Iraq. Hatreds have built a lot since then, and a one state solution seems a lot farther off now than ever. Now that the cause for a one state solution has been taken over by people who have equated Zionism with evil and racism (unlike Said who read and quoted many famous Zionists) it seems unlikely that anyone will see it as a novel approach to the conflict (proposed by Said since two states looked impossible) since its now seen as really a demand for the destruction of Israel and the creation of a Palestinians state (something quite different from what Said was writing about).
by well
Monday Jul 26th, 2004 9:30 AM
"larger Palestinian majority"
I meant "larger Palestinian minority"
I need coffee.
by protestwarrior
Monday Jul 26th, 2004 10:52 AM
you like to lump us protestwarriors into name calling categories. we are there because we think people like you are nut jobs. not because we are right wing republicans.

your movement is not going to go, un heard. you are right there. that is why we are there. we are sick of people like you having your little nut job protests, you won't go un heard with us thats for sure. we are sticking around.

by Protest Warriors are DittoHeads and Freepers
Monday Jul 26th, 2004 11:19 AM

I'd bet you that a majority of the proIsrael people who showed up HATE Rush and are going to be discouraged from showing up again at counterprotests over Israel since they dont was to be associated with you guys

For those who just think the protest warriors are a group that organizes around Israel or Iraq and has not ties to other right-wing causes see:
(I cant tell if the "Still believe in Darwin" thing is supposed to be antiDemocrat and Creationist or if its just antiDemocrat)

So to sum up what protest warriors stand for:
1. they oppose "socialized medicine" (see )
2. they oppose the ACLU's actions that have prevented prayer in schools ( )
3. they hate Democrats (see )
4. they opposed the war in Kosovo (see )
5. they supported the war in Iraq
6. They think Islam is an evil religion (ie the signs that say say "Islam is a religion of Peace" with suicide bombers in the background )
7.they hate the Green Party (see )
8.and they hate blacks and are openly racist (see )
by Fuck Racism
Monday Jul 26th, 2004 11:31 AM
I wonder what protests they carry this sign to?
Most of the time the right-wing tries to at least hide thir racism behind double speak but this pretty straight forward with its bigotry.
by GENUINE anti-racist
Monday Jul 26th, 2004 3:34 PM
"Listen" was of course Wendy Klanbell the Nazi activist as her typically seething anti-Jewish bigotry makes clear.
by Smash racists, smash racism
Wednesday Jul 28th, 2004 7:29 AM
So was Roy Cohn. So what? This man promotes racism, colonialism, apartheid and aggression. He shoud be, at the very least, ostracized and condemned. Cutting him slack because he is gay, is sexist.
by gehrig
Wednesday Jul 28th, 2004 9:56 AM
Please take this to SF-IMC. They need the traffic.

by such rhetoric
Wednesday Jul 28th, 2004 10:52 AM
>So was Roy Cohn. So what? This man promotes racism, >colonialism, apartheid and aggression. He shoud be, at the >very least, ostracized and condemned. Cutting him slack >because he is gay, is sexist.

You're so silly. Cutting Dan some slack because he's gay would be "homosexist."

Your wild rhetoric obscures the real point here - you probably agree with Dan on just about everything in this world, including the Middle East. But it's so much easier to accuse someone of supporting 'apartheid' than to bother trying to find some common ground and actually understand what they're trying to say.
by cp
Wednesday Jul 28th, 2004 11:10 AM
I don't know much about Dan Kliman. My experience has been that really outrageous people often are the ones who most dramatically flip their position later on - like 'Luke Sissyfag' in Seattle, or David Horowitz.
A lot of people are naturally emotionally inclined to seek compromise, and with some people this can be rewarding, but with others it just isn't worth it. There are other people out there in the world who you could spend your energy with. In the spirit of compromise, you can sometimes degrade yourself - like if you seem to be sitting with someone who also wants to work out common ground, and they symbolically recognize one of your points, and then in exchange you're supposed to weaken one of your own positions. If your first position was extreme, maybe this is good. But sometimes the extreme minority is right. John Brown was one of the only 'right' people in his day. If he had met slavers halfway by going to a compromise position where he would have slaves but be nice to them and teach them to read, that still wouldn't be right. Yet this is actually where lots of 'nice' white people in the south were at
by Mary Varalli
(maryvaralli [at] Thursday Aug 16th, 2007 12:15 PM
I was assaulted by Dan Kliman on Sat. August 11, 2007. I am a 60 yr old very small woman. When I refused to take literature he was handing out and told him I was pro Palestine he chased me and began taking my picture. I told him to stop, he backed me up against a tree and kicked me very hard in the knee and ran. He ran back to his group of pro Israel and the put together a story that I assaulted him. By the time the police arrived despite all neutral witnesses saying he assaulted me the police charged us both with battery.
It is distubing to know this man is a physician. He is very dangerous.
by old lady
Friday Aug 17th, 2007 10:14 AM
I appreciate your pictures. I know this was a long time ago, but I was physically assaulted by dr. dan. I am elderly and very small. He was doing the exact same thing to me, about 5 inches from my face screaming "you will die" I pleaded with him to back away, he kicked me very hard on my knee and ran away. I must say he is one of the most violent persons I have ever encountered. What really went through my mind was if he had been a person of color he never would have been allowed to lie his way out of it. He said I assaulted him. He is a calculating evil man. He will seriously injure someone, if he hasn't already.
by ??
Monday Aug 20th, 2007 5:06 PM
"The phemonena of attacks on kippah wearing Jews seems to have spread to the Bay Area."

The Bay Area seems more inclusive than most parts of the countries. It would be horrible if antiSemitic attacks have increased.

One thing that complicates hate crimes is determining why someone was attacked. I'm Jewish but don't wear a kippah but if I worse nice dress clothes and walked though some of the neighborhoods near my house and looked at people the wrong way I would probably get beat up. It wouldn't be antiSemitism but it could be people being angry at me for being a yuppie. While getting beat up I might get yelled at for being white or other aspects of how I look but if some yuppie looking African American walked through the same neighborhood and looked nervous it would probably be even more dangerous for them. The root of people beating up people who walk through their neighborhoods at night seems to be more one of xenophobia rather than racism, classism or antiSemitism even though racist, antiSemitic or antiyuppie things might get yelled at you. In other parts of the country the same factors exist at about the same or worse level (think of racist attacks in Queens in the 80s or the continuation of the KKK, NeoNazis and Minutemen across the US)
by sad
Tuesday Dec 2nd, 2008 8:17 AM
The gruesome discovery Monday of a man's body in the elevator shaft of a historic San Francisco high-rise has investigators and the property manager scratching their heads trying to figure out how the man got there.

The victim was identified early this morning by the San Francisco Medical Examiner's office as Daniel J. Kliman, 38, of Oakland. Kliman is believed to have fallen down the shaft at the historic Sharon Building, at 55 New Montgomery St., last Tuesday evening, according to Brad Bernheim, the building manager.

Bernheim said the elevator was not working last week and had been secured so that no one could enter it. Workers showed up Monday to repair the elevator and discovered the body.

Last Tuesday, a surveillance camera recorded Kliman waiting for the elevator in the lobby. It wasn't clear, however, how he ended up in the elevator shaft or whether he fell from that floor or higher, Bernheim said.

He said the victim was a student at the Pacific Arabic Resources School on the seventh floor of the building. He said there were no classes last week.

"I don't know why he was there. That's what we're investigating, how he got down there," Bernheim said. "Yeah, it's strange. You don't normally find bodies in the elevator shafts."

Police said Kliman accidentally fell after summoning the elevator.

Sgt. Wilfred Williams said investigators got the call at 12:30 p.m. from the workers who had found the body at the bottom of the shaft while inspecting the elevator. Williams said the investigation is focusing on what exactly went wrong with the elevator, how secure it was and whether it is possible for a person to unhook the door-locking mechanism when the elevator isn't there and fall into the shaft.

"That is all part of the investigation," he said. "Cal/OSHA and our inspectors are investigating exactly when and how and at what point he fell."

by pro peace
Tuesday Jun 9th, 2009 1:32 PM
fortunately the peace movement will never have to deal with this slime again.