Occupy Davis

CALL FOR SUPPORT FOR OCCUPY UC DAVIS BANK “BLOCKADERS”

sarenasoccupy — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 18:17:15 +0000

http://www.sacbee.com/2012/04/06/4395011/hed-here.html

Prosecution of UC Davis protesters sparks anger, occupation

By Darrell Smith
dvsmith@sacbee.com
Published: Friday, Apr. 6, 2012 – 12:00 am | Page 1B
Last Modified: Friday, Apr. 6, 2012 – 8:32 am
Several dozen UC Davis students are protesting the upcoming court date of the “Bankers’ Dozen,” the 12 students linked to demonstrations in January and February that shuttered an on-campus U.S. Bank branch.

About 400 students rallied Thursday afternoon at the university’s Memorial Union to speak out against allegations of conspiracy and blocking access filed against the dozen in late March by Yolo County prosecutors. The event was peaceful and no incidents were reported.

Students and supporters then marched across campus to Mrak Hall, chanting “Drop all charges,” occupying stairwells and the building’s lobby. Some students quickly set up tents and tarps planning to bed down for the night.

“We don’t know what might be planned,” university spokesman Barry Shiller said. “But, we’ll be patient, monitor the situation this evening and plan that the building will be open for business when people return in the morning.”

However, Claudia Morain, a campus spokesperson, said this morning that the students had been cleared out by 6:30 p.m. Thursday.

The dozen protesters cited in March face an April 27 court date in Yolo Superior Court connected to blocking the entrance to the on-campus bank branch.

The conspiracy allegation carries a maximum penalty of a year in jail. Each of the 20 access allegations filed carries a maximum six-month jail term.

Minnesota-based U.S. Bank closed its University Union branch Feb. 28, potentially severing an agreement with UC Davis that gave the campus its first bank branch.

Bank officials later cited Occupy protests and the university’s refusal to disperse demonstrators as reason for the closure.

Following strongly worded exchanges last month, UC Davis and U.S. Bank continue to work to repair their rift over the bank’s decision.

Shiller this week described the university’s talks with the lender as “cordial conversations.”

“We’d love the relationship to be salvaged,” Shiller said, adding that UC Davis students would lose out if the bank branch remained closed.

But students say the protests center on the bank’s presence on campus, its relationship with the university and what they see as the continuing privatization of the university.

Many students declined to identify themselves Thursday, afraid that university authorities would retaliate. But some carried placards that read “Fighting privatization is not a crime.”

Others, including history graduate student Andrew Higgins, said the university is using county prosecutors as cover to appease U.S. Bank, avoid a repeat of the public relations firestorm that erupted after last year’s pepper-spraying of UC Davis students by campus police, and to quash free speech.

“This administration is relying upon the state to deal with the protests. Because of the bad PR, they feel they can’t address that,” Higgins said.

UC Davis’ Shiller denied the assertions, saying the Thursday rally was “a great demonstration of protected, expressive free speech. Had the bank protest been similar, we’d have no issues here.”

The dozen, he said, “are accused of well beyond that.”

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/04/06/4395011/hed-here.html#storylink=cpy

We support Eco-Occupy’s April 4 action on clear-cutting of California’s forests

Lorenzo — Sat, 24 Mar 2012 15:03:02 +0000

On April 4 at 11 am Eco-Occupy will convene “Occupy the Forest,” a rally starting in Cesar Chavez Park in Sacramento (between I and J streets, and 9th and 10th streets) to draw attention to the massive clearcutting that is devastating California forests and to call upon the agencies responsible for protecting our forests to halt the destruction and require sustainable logging practices.

Eco-Occupy, created as a working group within Occupy Sacramento, is an alliance of individuals, environmental groups and Occupy groups working to restore sanity and reverence to the relationship of human beings to the earth and all its inhabitants. Eco-Occupy draws attention to and opposes human and commercial activities that value profit over life and are destroying our planet, and promotes desperately needed, sustainable alternatives.

To the members of the Davis City Council

Lorenzo — Sat, 25 Feb 2012 06:07:10 +0000

Many thanks for the Council’s unanimous resolution to support Assembly Joint Resolution 22. It is something to be proud of when your city takes a stand for something so right.
AJR 22, proposed in January by Assembly members Bob Wieckowski (D-Fremont) and Michael Allen (D-Santa Rosa), calls on the U.S. Congress to pass a constitutional amendment to overturn the 2010 Supreme Court decision on Citizens United vs Federal Election Commission. This was a momentous decision that allowed corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money in our elections. In the two years since this decision, we have seen a grotesque growth in campaign spending and an ever coarsening of political campaigns.
How right is the Council’s decision? On 2/17/12, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer were quoted in the Washington Post of 2/18/12 as calling for the Court to revisit their Citizens United decision. These Justices said that experience since this decision does not bear out the majority opinion that corporate expenditures “do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption.”
Following on this theme, a NY Times editorial on 2/22/12 calls on the Court to reconsider their “their disastrous Citizens United decision.” The court has an opportunity to revisit their 2010 decision in a Montana state case before the court that pits corporations wanting unlimited spending vs the Montana Supreme Court that upholds corporate campaign spending limits. Justice Ginsburg is further quoted: reviewing the Montana case “will give the court an opportunity to consider whether, in light of the huge sums currently deployed to buy candidates’ allegiance, Citizens United should continue to hold sway.” The editorial concludes, “A factual record would show that unlimited independent expenditures can have a corrupting effect, without qualifying as quid-pro-quo bribery. It’s hard to see how the court’s conservative majority could contend these expenditures pose no threat to American democracy.”
Clearly, Citizens United was a wrong decision and must be overturned if we are to keep our democracy. So thank you, Davis City Council, for that very right decision.
Mary M Zhu – February 22, 2012

Davis City Council Action

Lorenzo — Wed, 22 Feb 2012 08:55:01 +0000

On Tuesday, February 21, with a unanimous vote the Davis City Council passed a resolution in support of Assembly Joint Resolution 22 to Overturn Citizens United v. Federal Election Committee Supreme Court Ruling. By doing so, Davis joins the growing number of communities that have passed similar resolutions, creating a nationwide backlash against the U.S. Supreme Court’s January 2010 Citizens United ruling.

Thank you, Josh Jones and Jim Leonard, for spearheading this drive! Thank you to Mary, April & Jam who also spoke at the City Council meeting in favor of passing the resolution. Tom, Ian, Phillip and I were present to offer our support. So wonderful to see an informed citizenry in action! Wow! Just, Wow! And kudos to the Davis City Council of course!

Learn more about the Citizens United Ruling.

Obama signs National Defense Authorization Act

Lorenzo — Sun, 01 Jan 2012 01:02:58 +0000

Breaking news – heartbreaking, that is – HR 1540 signed on 12/31/11. All the troublesome provisions suspending constitutional due process and civil liberties that we’ve been concerned about are still in there, of course, so we’re starting off the new year with a clear national emphasis on protecting us from terrorism as brutally and unconstitutionally as necessary, no matter where the authorities might want to think they see the possibility of a threat. Well, perhaps there’s a little glimmer of hope in the text of President Obama’s signing statement, though it’s not terribly reassuring. This link contains full text of the signing statement. Expressing his “serious reservations with certain provisions” he says, “My administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation.” Happy New Year. – Lorenzo

Update on National Defense Authorization Act

Lorenzo — Sat, 17 Dec 2011 15:32:26 +0000

Senate and House versions of the 2012 NDAA have been reconciled and passed by both houses as of 12/16/11; it now goes to the President to sign. Retreating from his earlier threat to veto the bill for its embedded “indefinite military detention” provisions, Obama appears ready to sign, based on the rationale that changes in the reconciled bill have made it acceptable, and that it just wouldn’t be right to hold up vital military appropriations to quibble about constitutional protections of due process and civil liberties. Columnist Glenn Greenwald clearly dispels three myths about the detention bill, revealing its key offending passages and comparing them to the corresponding but narrower provisions of the bill’s predecessor, the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) enacted right after 9/11, which the NDAA would now expand and strengthen.

The immediate action item is to write, and get everyone else to write and call, President Obama stating your strong opposition to these provisions and calling for his veto of the 2012 NDAA or any other legislation that would overturn these foundational constitutional rights. – Lorenzo (12/17/11)

SAMPLE LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA

[DATE]

President Barack Obama, The White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC 20500

Honorable President Obama,

I strongly urge you to veto the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, which contains provisions for indefinite military detention without trial or charges of persons suspected of performing or supporting terrorist acts, even if those persons are U.S. citizens apprehended on U.S. soil.

These provisions would violate human rights, undermine the rule of law, and conflict with fundamental principles of justice, due process and civil liberties that are guaranteed in our Constitution. Moreover, such provisions would not contribute to our safety and security. Quite the contrary, by suspending the right of habeas corpus and other constitutional rights and protections, these provisions threaten our very identity as a free and democratic society and add to a general atmosphere of fear. In essence, if we resort to such dire measures in the name of security, the terrorists have won.

You had originally threatened to veto the legislation over earlier versions of these provisions. Since then, the changes adopted in the final bill do not relieve any of the concerns described above. I therefore call on you to follow through with a veto of the 2012 NDAA or any other legislation that would similarly violate Constitutional and basic human rights.

Respectfully yours, [SIGNATURE + ADDRESS]

Paradigm for a New Economics

Lorenzo — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 02:30:42 +0000

In a recent interview on Democracy Now!, Chilean economist Manfred Max-Neef offers a sane, reverent basis for economics, to replace the disastrous neoliberal paradigm that currently rules economic policy. He states it in the form of five postulates and one fundamental value principle.
1. The economy has to serve the people, and not the people to serve the economy.
2. Development is about people, not about objects.
3. Growth is not the same as development, and development does not necessarily require growth. Growth is a quantitative accumulation; development is the liberation of creative possibilities. Every living system in nature grows up to a certain point and then stops growing; each of us as individuals stops growing, but we continue developing ourselves. Development has no limits; growth has limits. There is a threshold principle, that growth increases the quality of life only up to a point; beyond that point, if there is further growth the quality of life begins to decline.
4. No economy is possible in the absence of ecosystem services.
5. The economy is a subsystem of a larger finite system, the biosphere, hence permanent growth is impossible.
The fundamental value principle to sustain a new economy: No economic interest under no circumstance can be above the reverence for life. Nothing can be more important than life. Life here means more than human beings, it means all life.
Listen to the entire 30-minute interview with Manfred Max-Neef (the second half of the program is with Derrick Jensen, also highly recommended). – Lorenzo

National Defense Authorization Act 2012

Lorenzo — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 06:29:33 +0000

At the December 4 Solutions Forum, we decided to write personal letters to President Obama to urge his veto of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) authorizing indefinite military detention of US citizens. The following is a sample letter others are welcome to use.

President Barack Obama, The White House, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC 20500

Honorable President Obama,

I strongly urge you to veto the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, because of detention provisions it contains that would violate human rights, undermine the rule of law, and conflict with the fundamental principles of justice and due process that are guaranteed in our Constitution.

Sections 1031-1032 of the Senate version passed earlier this month authorize indefinite military detention, without charge or trial, of civilians suspected of performing or in some way aiding terrorist acts, even if those persons are U. S. citizens apprehended on U. S. soil. I believe that such provisions do not contribute to our safety and security. Quite the contrary, by suspending the right of habeas corpus and other constitutional rights and protections they threaten our very identity as a free and democratic society and add to an atmosphere of fear. In essence, if we resort to such dire measures in the name of security, the terrorists have won.

You have rightly threatened to veto the legislation over these provisions. I call on you to follow through with a veto if these or similar provisions that violate Constitutional and basic human rights are included in the final legislation, or any other legislation.

Respectfully yours,

Occupiers are our wake-up call

Lorenzo — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 03:41:37 +0000

Letter to the Davis Enterprise, published Dec. 8, 2011

The title of your Dec. 2 story on Occupy Davis (“Rights vs. Rules”) is ironic in view of the US Senate’s latest draconian measures to further suspend the constitutional rights of those non-corporate persons known as human beings and citizens. Last Tuesday the Senate voted – with bipartisan support – to allow the military to detain terrorism suspects, including US citizens, on US soil and hold them indefinitely without trial.

As the latest and most alarming incursion into our constitutional rights, this continues a decades-long political program to increase the ability of authorities to monitor and ultimately silence whomever they see as a threat, bypassing constitutional protections with virtually no oversight or recourse.

Each step of the way, US citizens have gone along with the program, perhaps believing these measures are needed to fight the war on terror or the war on drugs or some other war, or expecting naively that they would never affect us if we obey the rules.

But what if the rules are changed so that what was lawful yesterday is redefined tomorrow as a terrorist threat? When do our supposed protectors start to become our tyrants? Does anyone feel safer because of the annoying and intrusive airport security measures, now including full body radiation scans and invasive pat-downs?

Each step of the way, the intrusion gets a little bit worse to see if we are still willing to tolerate it. We are like the frog in the pan of water being brought to a boil so gradually that we don’t notice until we’re practically cooked. When do we say “that’s enough!” and get out there with the Occupiers to take back our country?

Instead of continuing to argue about how the message is being delivered, let’s start talking as a community about the message itself. This is the truly urgent matter at hand, because what’s happening in the country – endless corporate impediments to sane and humane public policy, and militaristic responses to everything – is slowly cooking us all. The Occupy Movement, however we might critique it, is the wake-up call we desperately need.

Lorenzo Kristov

New Directions for Occupy Davis

ian — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:53:30 +0000

December 7, 2011

Dear friends,

I was asked by camp meeting participants to write to you. I have clearly used the word “we” a lot. I am the author of this letter, but these are things I was asked to write.

Occupy Davis will no longer be maintaining a continuous occupation of Central Park. Our tents and structures are coming down this morning. This does not mean that our movement is ending or that we will stop having actions, rather that our movement will now be proceeding in a new way. At Monday’s camp meeting it was decided that our goals can best be served by regrouping and refocusing on more targeted political actions. 24/7 occupation has been a valuable tactic for us so far, and an immensely successful strategy for the wider occupy movement, but now we intend to set aside continuous occupation for the time being, so that we can gather ourselves and strengthen our movement.

There will be a General Assembly tonight at Central Park and regular General Assemblies will continue. Your participation in General Assemblies and continued support are greatly appreciated. Please watch for announcements of future marches and other actions.

We would like to thank all of you for your participation, donations, and other forms of support. We have already achieved a lot together: we maintained a continuous occupation of Central Park for over seven weeks. We have also learned much about each other as well as the challenges we face and power we posses. We would like to emphasize that the wider occupy movement and our own local manifestation of it are only just beginning. The movement will continue to grow and become stronger. We look forward to working together in the future.

The emergency SMS list will now be used to announce major actions rather than emergencies. Please text @dtdavisoccupy to 23559 to be added to our SMS alert list for major actions.

–Skyler