SAN DIEGO -- The San Diego Police have cited Iraq war veteran Marine Lance Cpl. John Canter for carrying an American flag at Civic Center Plaza, home to the Occupy San Diego movement.
At approximately 9:40 p.m. on Dec. 22, Canter was cited under an obscure municipal code, section 53.30, which prohibits certain items at protests and other such events.
San Diego municipal code section 53.30 states: "No person shall carry or possess while participating in any demonstration, rally, picket line or public assembly any metal stake, club, or pipe, or any length of lumber, wood, or lath, unless that wooden object is 1/4'' or less in thickness. and 2" or less in width. If not generally rectangular in shape, such wooden object shall not exceed 1/2" in its thickest dimension."
In an interview with signonsandiego.com, San Diego Police Department assistant chief Boyd Long said officers could tell the flag pole was larger than regulations allowed.
"I don't know that it takes an expert to make a determination on what is or isn't thicker than one-half of an inch," Long said. "They got back to the station. They did measure it. It was three-quarters of an inch thick. So it is in violation."
Canter said he was in shock when they told him he couldn't carry the flag. "I have never in my life been told I couldn't carry an American flag. It's clear they were just looking for a reason to cite me specifically, as a veteran," Canter said.
Canter elaborated that many members of the Occupy San Diego movement appreciate the presence of veterans at the occupation of Civic Center Plaza and look to veterans of the community as a source of strength and pride. Canter, who served in the Al Anbar province of Iraq from April 2007 to November 2007, is a regular at the plaza in his Marine Corps desert combat uniform.
"The cops saw this as a chance to say 'we're not afraid to go after a veteran,'" the young Marine said. "It was a chance for them to say 'we're in charge.'"
Following the incident, calls went out on the Occupy San Diego Facebook page for an impromptu rally to, as described by rally organizers, take the American flag back from SDPD.
At 4 p.m., Dec. 23, protestors from Occupy San Diego, Veterans for Peace and MoveOn.org rallied at the corners of 4th Avenue and B Street in downtown San Diego. Nearly all of the protestors, numbering more than 70, carried American flags on illegal sized poles while others draped the flag around their necks.
"I was really surprised by the number of people that came out for this," said Canter, who led the march. "We had already planned a rally in support of Occupy Egypt for later that evening but to see this many people come out for the flag was really inspiring."
Reflecting back on his time in Iraq, Canter said he and his fellow Marines often looked to the flag as a source of pride and something they could rally around.
"It's really important to me," he said of the American flag, "especially when you're away in a foreign country, to see the flag and be reminded of what America -- at least used to -- stand for."
Canter clarified that while the flag is being held under his name by the San Diego Police, it actually belongs to Occupy San Diego, having been given to the group as a gift.
After nearly an hour protesting at Civic Center plaza, protestors marched nearly five blocks to the San Diego Federal Courthouse for a solidarity rally in support of the Occupy Egypt movement.
Since the Occupy San Diego movement began in early October, nearly 139 protestors have been arrested. Charges have been brought against only 29 of those arrested.
Earlier that same evening of Canter's citation, another protestor was arrested for lighting a bundle of sage in celebration of the Winter Solstice.
Benjamin Cossel is a San Diego writer; this is his first piece for Off the Bus. If you would like to contribute as a citizen journalist to the Huffington Post's coverage of American political life, please contact us at www.offthebus.org.
"); jQuery('#campaign_title_container_124').append(" "); jQuery('#campaign_title_container_124').append(""); }, defaul_design:function(){ jQuery('#campaign_name_124').addClass('campaign_title'); jQuery('#campaign_title_124').html(Campaign_124.campaign_info.campaign.campaign_title); jQuery('#campaign_bottom_124').remove(); jQuery('#campaign_124').addClass('campaign_container'); }, CampaignLogin : function(){ HuffConnect.Login.onLoginSuccess = function() { window.location.hash = 'join_campaign'; window.location.reload(); } QuickLogin.pop(); }, CampaignJoin : function (join_control, campaign_id) { join_control.style.display = 'none'; jQuery('#btn_take_part_in_survey_124').css("display", ''); jQuery('#campaign_name_124').html(Campaign_124.campaign_info.campaign.thank_you_email_subject); jQuery('#campaign_text_124').html(Campaign_124.campaign_info.campaign.thank_you_email_body); Campaign_124.CallPostJoinAction(); }, GetFormFail:function(){ alert('Sorry, unable to procees your request'); HuffConnect.hideModal(); }, CallPostJoinAction:function(){ jQuery.ajax({ url: Campaign_124.post_join_actions_url , success: function(data){ huff.use('modal', function(m){ m.show({ content: data, width: 750, height: 500 }) }); HPUtil.EvalScript(data); } , cache: false }); } };
What are the campaigns doing where you live?The 2012 races are already out in full force in many early primary states. We want to hear about the campaign ads, robocalls, mailers and signs you're seeing in your community. Tell us about it here or send us information via email at offthebus@huffingtonpost.com.
Thursday, 29 December 2011
Benjamin Cossel: San Diego Police Cite Marine Corps Vet for Carrying American Flag
Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Mark Hurd made brazen sexual overtures to actress, Gloria Allred's letter claims - San Jose Mercury News
Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Mark Hurd made brazen sexual overtures to actress, Gloria Allred's letter claims
Posted: 12/29/2011 04:02:33 PM PSTUpdated: 12/29/2011 04:05:28 PM PST
Click photo to enlargeOracle President Mark Hurd speaks during the Oracle OpenWorld Keynote in San... ( Jeff Chiu )Former Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) CEO Mark Hurd made repeated, unwanted sexual overtures -- including a brief kiss, touching and requests to spend the night -- to the woman whose harassment allegation led to Hurd's ouster from HP, according to the letter that celebrity attorney Gloria Allred prepared on the woman's behalf.
Hurd also acknowledged having other mistresses and bragged of his popularity with women, including the singer Sheryl Crow, during a series of overtures that left part-time marketing contractor Jodie Fisher feeling "violated, used and disregarded," according to the letter Allred sent to Hurd in June 2010. Details of the letter, which was obtained by this newspaper, have not been previously reported.
But Fisher, whose previous career included acting in racy films and appearing in a short-lived reality TV show, also issued a statement in August 2010 that said her attorney's letter contained unspecified inaccuracies. And Fisher followed up her meetings with Hurd, during which the alleged overtures took place, by sending a series of enthusiastic emails to Hurd that didn't mention any improprieties or concerns, according to an internal HP investigation.
Hurd's sudden resignation from HP in August 2010 was a Silicon Valley
bombshell from which the shockwaves are still rippling. The 54-year-old Hurd, who is married and now a president at tech rival Oracle (ORCL), had been widely praised for building HP into a tech industry powerhouse. The Palo Alto company has been on a roller-coaster of successive upheavals since he left.AdvertisementFisher dropped her claim of sexual harassment after Hurd paid her an undisclosed sum. Both parties denied ever having sex. HP said in 2010 that its own investigation found no basis for the harassment claim, although the company also said the probe found Hurd showed poor judgment and was responsible for expense account inaccuracies involving dinners with Fisher.
Since then, Allred's letter has been the subject of widespread speculation, and litigation, as attorneys for Hurd and for investors suing HP have battled over whether it should be made public.
The letter also contains a potentially explosive allegation, which this newspaper has previously reported, that Hurd told Fisher in advance about then-secret negotiations for HP to buy the tech services company EDS in a $13.9 billion deal. The allegation reportedly prompted a review by federal regulators, although no evidence surfaced publicly to indicate anyone used or profited from the advance information.
Evaluating the allegations leveled by Allred is difficult, because the attorney and her client have never said which points in her original letter were untrue. It's also unclear if the emails sent by Fisher are a direct contradiction of her claims, or if she simply was following through on what Allred has described as an attempt to hold onto her job while struggling to keep the relationship with her boss on an appropriate basis.
Both Allred and attorneys for Hurd have argued to keep the eight-page letter confidential. After Allred sent the letter to Hurd, he promptly turned it over to HP's top attorney. HP later surrendered it to a lawyer for an HP shareholder, and a Delaware court ruled Thursday that the letter should be made public, with a few sentences blacked out to protect the privacy of Hurd's family.
The letter contains numerous salacious details, in keeping with Allred's stated intention of impressing on Hurd that he should resolve the claim rather than let it proceed to a formal lawsuit. Allred has handled similar claims against a variety of well-known figures, including the golfer Tiger Woods.
"You had seen Ms. Fisher on the NBC television show 'Age of Love' that she appeared on in May/June 2007 and were quite taken with her," the attorney wrote to Hurd on June 24, 2010, adding that this was apparently the reason Hurd's executive assistant contacted Fisher's agent to recruit her for a job appearing with Hurd at high-end conferences with big HP customers.
Based on ensuing events, Allred added, "it is clear you had designs to make her your lover from the onset, using your status and authority as CEO of HP."
The letter claims Hurd first asked Fisher to spend the night in his hotel room after they appeared together at an HP sales conference in Atlanta in 2007. According to her attorney, Fisher had already become uncomfortable when the two had dinner together -- as arranged by Hurd's assistant -- and Hurd said he wanted to show Fisher some documents in his hotel room.
Fisher had misgivings but went to the room, where Hurd sat next to her and twice touched her breast with his hand, according to Allred's letter. When Fisher said something about the touching, the letter claims Hurd apologized and laughed it off.
When Hurd subsequently asked her to spend the night, the letter says, Fisher was "horrified" but "tried to be low key" in her refusal, because she didn't want to lose her job.
A few weeks later, Fisher sent Hurd one of several emails that did not mention any improprieties. "Great to see you," she wrote in the subject line, according to documents obtained by this newspaper, which indicate that Fisher also wrote that she was "looking forward" to the next event in St. Louis.
Allred's letter, however, describes a similar "uncomfortable dance" over the next several months, as Hurd allegedly shared a variety of personal information and made further overtures to Fisher. The letter says Fisher had dinner on additional occasions with Hurd, at the invitation of Hurd's assistant. Allred characterizes Fisher's stance as attempting to stay on good terms with Hurd without crossing a line into illicit behavior.
Hurd declined comment on the letter, through a spokesman, on Thursday. His attorney, Amy Wintersheimer, released a brief statement on the Delaware court's decision to make the letter public.
"We requested the court keep the letter confidential because, as Ms. Fisher has acknowledged, it is filled with inaccuracies. The truth is, there never was any sexual harassment, which HP's investigation confirmed, and there never was any sexual relationship, which Ms. Fisher has confirmed," Wintersheimer said.
An HP spokesman also declined comment on the court decision, as did Allred. Oracle senior vice president Ken Glueck said in a brief statement: "This letter was recanted by Ms. Fisher. She admitted it was full of inaccuracies."
As previously reported, Fisher wrote Hurd a letter on Aug. 5, 2010, after receiving an undisclosed payment to settle her claim. Without offering specifics, that letter said: "there are many inaccuracies in the details of the June 24, 2010 letter. I do not believe that any of your behavior was detrimental to HP or in any way injured the company or its reputation."
A spokeswoman for shareholder attorney Greg Del Gaizo, who sought to make the June 2010 letter public as part of his lawsuit against HP, said in a statement: "We are pleased with the Supreme Court's decision and will continue to fight for transparency and accountability at public companies on behalf of shareholders."
The letter prompted a falling out between Hurd and HP's board, which forced his ouster on Aug. 6, 2010. HP's stock plunged nearly 10 percent, and didn't recover until months after the company named German software executive Leo Apotheker as Hurd's replacement.
But Apotheker's tenure was itself brief and tumultuous. HP's stock sank even further after he repeatedly lowered earnings forecasts, then negotiated a high-priced software acquisition and unexpectedly announced the company was exploring whether to spin off its flagship personal computer business.
HP's board, which included several members who joined after Hurd left, ultimately fired Apotheker and named valley veteran Meg Whitman as CEO in September.
Hurd's ouster, however, also escalated a growing feud between HP and Oracle, a rival tech giant whose founder, Larry Ellison, publicly lambasted HP for pushing Hurd out and quickly hired Hurd as a co-president at Oracle.
HP is also still battling a series of shareholder lawsuits filed over the company's handling of Hurd's departure, including the board's decision to let Hurd leave with a multimillion-dollar severance package in spite of his alleged behavior.
While many analysts have praised Whitman's initial efforts to get HP back on track, the company's stock closed Monday at $25.62 -- a far cry from the levels above $46 where it was trading before Hurd's departure.
How America And The Mainstream Media Got Breitbarted On NDAA December 18, 2011 - By Jason Easley and Sarah Jones
An edited video of Carl Levin claiming that Obama wanted the language in the NDAA caused outrage among many Americans, but the full Levin video reveals the opposite.
The YouTube video claimed to be proof that Obama is going to sign a citizen imprisonment law:
However, in the first 30 minutes of the debate Sen. Levin stated that the NDAA provisions do not apply to US citizens:
Hours prior to the YouTube proof video Sen. Levin stated on the Senate floor that the Obama administration requested that the provision be changed so that it does not apply to American citizens, but he explained the provision wasn’t changed because it already didn’t apply to American citizens, “The administration officials reviewed the draft language for this provision the day before our markup and recommended additional changes. We were able to accommodate those recommendations, except for the administration request that the provision apply only to detainees who are captured overseas. There is a good reason for that. But even here, the difference is relatively modest, because the provision already excludes all U.S. citizens. It also excludes all lawful residents of the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution. The only covered persons left are those who are illegally in this country or who arrive as tourists or on some other short-term basis, and that is a small remaining category, but an important one, because it includes the terrorists who clandestinely arrive in the United States with the objective of attacking military or other targets here.”
People need to stop believing everything they read from certain pundits and every claim made in a two minute video.
Yes, NDAA was poorly written originally and even after the changes is a crappy bill; it was written in the Senate Armed Services Committee (McCain/Graham- hello), and as such is a nod to Republican authoritarian stances of the Bush administration. It was co-authored by a Democrat, whom many saw in the above shortened video from C-SPAN claiming the President had asked for “this language”.
Of course, the President did not ask for this language, and this is a matter of record, see the November Senate Armed Services Committee mark up of their original NDAA bill referred to by Levin with objections from Obama:
The new bill would also clarify a number of provisions addressing detainee matters in an effort to address concerns raised by the Administration and others. As requested by the Administration, the new bill would clarify that the section providing detention authority does not expand the existing authority to detain under the Authorization for Use of Military Force Force and make Guantanamo- related restrictions one-year requirements instead of permanent restrictions.
The new bill would also modify a provision requiring military custody of al Qaeda members who attack the United States (subject to a national security waiver) to clarify the President’s authority to decide who makes determinations of coverage, how they are made, and when they are made. As modified, the provision makes it clear that these determinations will not interfere with any ongoing law enforcement operations or interrogations. Under the modified provision, the Executive Branch has the flexibility to keep a covered detainee in civilian custody pursuant to a national security determination, or to transfer a military detainee for trial in the civilian courts. The Administration agreed to have military custody apply to al Qaeda members captured outside the United States (subject to a national security waiver) but disagrees with the committee decision not to preclude the application of the provision inside the United States.
You might be wondering why the video was edited to lead you to believe that he did. That’s a great question.
You might also be asking yourself if the same people who were so willing to believe the author of the bill, Carl Levin, will be as willing to believe Levin’s full statement, in which he clearly says that the President did not want this language.
Had Obama not objected to the language, we would be stuck with the original bill since 83 senators voted yes on the original bill which also passed through the Senate Armed Services Committee unanimously.
People should be asking themselves about the agenda behind not holding the authors of the bill and indeed the Senate accountable for the language in this bill, as it is the same Senate who refused to fund Obama’s executive order to close Gitmo. We note their attempt to run an end-game around Obama’s push for civilian courts and their attempt to slide in permanent changes to restrictions regarding Gitmo. The President objected to those permanent changes.
One would think that anyone who cared about the issue of closing Gitmo would be up in arms at the Senators’ attempt to use a funding bill to get around Obama’s attempts to get around their refusal to fund the closure of Gitmo.
We are in no way defending NDAA. However, the language was changed, and when taken in total (instead of parsed), courtesy of Mother Jones:
It does not, contrary to what many media outlets have reported, authorize the president to indefinitely detain without trial an American citizen suspected of terrorism who is captured in the US. A last minute compromise amendment adopted in the Senate, whose language was retained in the final bill, leaves it up to the courts to decide if the president has that power, should a future president try to exercise it. But if a future president does try to assert the authority to detain an American citizen without charge or trial, it won’t be based on the authority in this bill….
The language in the bill that relates to the detention authority as far as US citizens and permanent residents are concerned is, “Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.”
The bill is still rotten. It takes us in the wrong direction, moving us toward the militarization rather than the civilian courts this President and the majority of the American people desire. The bill represents the Republican approach to national security; one that the American people soundly rejected in 2008. Luckily the President got the language changed, because even if he chose to veto it, it would be for naught, as the Senate had 83 votes for it and it takes only 67 to override a Presidential veto.
In the House the first NDAA vote was 322-96. The final vote was 283-136 with 43 Republicans voting no. If Obama would have vetoed and 35 of those 43 Republicans flipped to yes, the House would have had the votes to override a presidential veto.
The real focus should be on why this bill was written in this way in the first place, when we the people were very clear about wanting civilian trials, and this president has been clear about his desire to close Gitmo.
In the meantime, we urge you to watch the entire C-SPAN video of Levin, lest we all be Breitbarted, because it matters that we are all clear on exactly who is trying to take our country in the wrong direction.
Founded in 2010 with the intention of creating a database of medicinal cannabis users and a source of information for education and research it attracted immediate support from l...
These attacks meant that the register was permanently handicapped shortly after its birth. From a very encouraging start, within a few weeks those opposed to it had sown sufficient fear and uncertainty that registrations dried up. Medicinal users had been terrorised into fear and silence.
Through 2011 a considerable investment was made by both the founders and a number of volunteer workers. A website with online registration was created and the Facebook page was updated on an hourly basis with new information about medicinal cannabis.
The register set out from the beginning to be a non-campaigning organisation. However its driving force was Peter Reynolds and when he was elected leader of CLEAR in February 2011 his attention wss diverted and the register's impartiality compromised. Shortly afterwards the Home Office applied pressure and required Professor Les Iversen to resign from the council.
Registrations did begin to recover through 2011 but health problems intervened for those involved in administration and there were technical problems with the hosting company which meant that some data was lost.
In recent months the register has been subject to further attacks from Alan Buffry and Peta Lee. Mr Buffry was using it as a pawn in his personal vendetta against Peter Reynolds. Ms Lee's motives are unclear.
In fact the motives of all those who opposed the register are difficult to understand. There was never anything constructive about the criticism. The noble and compassionate aims that is set out with were trampled over and no alternative was proposed. Undoubtedly the idea will resurface one day as it is so clearly needed. Let us hope it receives more encouragement next time. It seems to be an unfortunate characteristic of the cannabis community that it frequently turns on itself and allows petty rivalries and tribal behaviour to destroy good work.
All data held by the BMCR has now been permanently erased. This Facebook page will be closed at the end of January 2012.
Those who participated in the destruction of the BMCR know who they are and their conduct rests on their own consciences. We acknowledge and honour those who made a positive contribution and who set out to help those who need cannabis as medicine.
Jim Alekson, Medical Marijuana Delivery Systems
Matthew Atha, Independent Drug Monitoring Unit
Chris Baldwin, Medicinal user
Carolyn Cameron, Medicinal user
Paul Flynn MP, House Of Commons
Clark French, Action4MS
Victor Hamilton, Medicinal user
Elliot Haughin, Apple Computer
Professor Les Iversen, University of Oxford
Baroness Molly Meacher, House Of Lords
Stevie Powers, THCTalk
Colin Preece, Campaigner
Jason Reed, Cannabis Law Reform
Peter Reynolds, Cannabis Law Reform
Jim "Pinky" Starr, Medicinal user
Dr Malcolm Vandenburg, Consulting Physician