Customize

Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

Discussion in 'GoldBase' started by i'mglib, Jan 11, 2009.

  1. i'mglib Member

    Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    The story was put on the wire, and is appearing all over the place.

    Also, looks like it's back on the agenda again for Tuesday. Man oh man.

    AGENDA

    AGENDA
    TUESDAY, JANUARY 13, 2009
    BOARD OF SUPERVISORS – COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
    1st FLOOR – COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE CENTER
    4080 Lemon Street, Riverside, Calif.
    (Clerk 951-955-1060)

    Policy Calendar:
    3.3: SUPERVISOR STONE: ® ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 884, an Ordinance of the
    County of Riverside Regulating Targeted Residential Picketing. (3.28 of 1/6/09)
  2. Ima Nonymous Member

    Re: BREAKING NEWS: RIVERSIDE ORDINANCE

    Dictionary: backpedal (băk'pĕd'l)
    Dictionary intr.v., -aled or -alled, -al·ing or -al·ling, -als or -als..
    To retreat or withdraw from a position or attitude: The county supervisor later backpedaled on the issue.
    To move the pedals of a bicycle or similar vehicle backward, especially to apply a brake on the bad press one is getting.
    To move backward by taking short quick steps, as in boxing, football or looking like a scilon shill.
  3. xenubarb Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    INteresting!
  4. whoever Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    I was never clear (heh) on the distinction between 884 and 888. I know that 888 was considered an emergency measure. And it was 888 that passed, right? Does that mean they still need to pass 884, too? (I admit I have no idea what I'm talking about here--just throwing that out because I never understood the purpose of 888.)
  5. Skeptic1337 Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    hehe

    this should be funneh
  6. i'mglib Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    884 is the actually ordinance banning picketing.
    888 was a related ordinance, making 884 effective immediately. Usually it takes 30 days.

    One would have to assume, that AGP, AO, and Graham appearing at Gold with an LA Times reporter, and the story being put out on the wire, would have something to do with it being revisited so soon. It was supposed to be revisited after 6 months, not 7 days.

    It's obvious it was badly written. The actual outcome was they succeeded in banning pickets at places like sex offenders' houses (which the supervisors themselves engaged in) but not in front of COS.

    I just hope they drop the whole thing, instead of trying to rewrite it yet again.
  7. Obi-Wan-anon Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    In an earlier post, the court clerk stated that since they "fast-tracked" it, there has to be a public hearing before it can be put on the books.

    So SOMEONE should have the transcript of the last meeting, to show where their lawyers stated it was ok to protest outside the gates.
  8. 3rdMan Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    How many Anons can make it to this? Now that we know Stone is a Scilon tool and his sources of information are OSA, time to conquer this bullshit!
  9. Top Grunge Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    I really hope Stone has a new book of "anonymous hate" from the threads directly concerning him, his cult ties, and his overall doucheyness. If not, Anon should bring and show slides.
  10. A.Non Hubbard Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    Wait, if 888 is reliant on 884 (and is also numbered higher than 884) then why was 888 passed before 884?
  11. xenubarb Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    Stone really should be asked where he got the info on Anonymous that he presented at the last meeting.

    Heh. WE know. I just want to hear him tell the Board of Supervisors.
  12. sock Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    Are you sure this is backpeddling and not an attempt to push through tighter restrictions (such as keeping protesters away from the compound entrance)? No doubt the CoS has been bawwing to the county supervisors non-stop since the last Gold protest.
  13. Obi-Wan-anon Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    Both 884 and 888 were posted to the agenda at the same time. 888 was the "emergency" version of 884.

    The emergency provision was considered first. Now 884, which went through the normal way, has to be considered. If 884 passes, they should revoke 888.

    Once again, there has to be a full public hearing in order to put it on the books. Jan 13th is that public hearing. If 884 fails, then the lawyers there can request that 888 also be revoked.
  14. Sam Urai Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    Mr. Stone no like his review in the LA Times? I thought he liked being famous . . .

    On the other hand, he may be trying to get the new restrictions passed that his COS taskmasters want.
  15. Ima Nonymous Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    No, not as sure as I thought I was. Based on the stuff in the "/tuesday-raid-gold-more-stupid-shit-police" it looks like I may have over estimated the intelligence and desire to stay in office of the county supervisors in Riverside.
    I assumed that the big slug of bad press they got in the times, the BFG lawsuit alleging all kinds of crimes at Gold and the fact that the ordnance effectively stops citizens from even picketing pedophiles who have moved in to the neighborhood would cause them to realize they'd made a big mistake.
    Maybe they are so out of touch they think they can up the ante on Tuesday. It means they will lose more when information from the lawsuit starts coming out in testimony.
    Imagine being one who barred citizens from protesting against coerced abortions and slave labor at a slave labor camp that coerces abortions.
  16. Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    with the eyes of major media and all of your voting public upon you
  17. AnonLover Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    anybody think to send the supervisors copies of Marc Headley court dox?

    if this drags out longer, beyond the meeting tmo.... perhaps we should send out a call for victim affidavit/declarations, like og did in years past when ex-members willing to speak out were few and far between.

    Magoo's old declaration got good traction in minor media following the jett story who didnt get an interview with her personally. So perhaps gathering a handful of damning affidavits specifically aimed at the abuses that happen at gold base could be a double edge sword both in riverside and as additional canon fodder when Headley's case begins making waves.
  18. A.Non Hubbard Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    Maybe we can do an audiobook version of the Headley lawsuit as read by AnonOrange. He has the voice of an angel.
  19. AngryGayPope1 Member

    AGP bringing photos

    I'm bringing photos, LOTS of photos.
  20. AngryGayPope1 Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    Eh, AnonOrange coughs all the time from stress!
  21. TheBitch Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    LOOK, whoever... NOT AO.. NOT AGP... the next time Stone asks "are you Anonymous," look him straight in the eye and ask "are you Sir, a $cientologist?"

    If he gets huffy, then ask him is it relevant to the conversation of this ordinance? If so, is it his intention to target the ordinance at Anons in particular.

    DO IT FAGGOTS! This man is NOT a prosecutor! He hasn't the right to ask questions liek that unless he is attempting to design an unconstitutional amendment targeting a particular group of protesters. Someone with a modicum of rhetorical skill needs to bait that fucking paper tiger in his lair. NOTE --> A MODICUM OF RHETORICAL SKILLZ.

    FFS! It's LA! Surely some of the West Coast Anons know how to be RESPECTFULLY antagonistic in front of witnesses?
  22. Optimisticate Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    Vids and commentary should also be uploaded here by anyone name/face-fagged already:

    uReport/ uAsk - FOXNews.com

    Yes, I know it's Fox, but any media is better than nothing, at least at this point!
  23. auchraw Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    Whatever the local implications for picketing at Gold, it is now quite clear and widely known that the CoS is trying to push through a ruling limiting freedom and which gives them more rights than they should have. Heads the local protesters win and tails the CoS loses.
  24. Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    I like it.

    I like it a lot.

    For the record though, it's typically Tavaglione who venomously spits the question at the speaker.

    ---

    For a full understanding of genesis of this ordinance, one should watch all three board meetings, including the meeting on 11/25/08 where it was first introduced (my personal favorite, for it shows Bob Buster [before his spine mysteriously disintegrated] standing up to Stone and Alhadeff.)

    http://209.128.123.171/ppportal/agenda/webcast.aspx

    11/25/2008 - 884 Introduced (40 minutes in)

    12/09/2008 - Protesters address board for the 1st time, 884 goes back to the drawing board

    1/6/2009 - Revised 884 introduced, 888 Approved
  25. TheBitch Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    OK, but the media / public attention focus is STONE. Say the same thing just about... reword as...

    "Are you sir, or any other members of the Riverside County Board of Supervisors for that matter, $cientologists?"

    BUT SAY IT STARING STRAIGHT AT FUCKING STONE!

    Look folks, isn't there ONE actor out there among you? Seriously, a BIG part of what I'm seeing in the problem with the tactics before the board is it is clear that nobody's done much in the way of rehearsal. Graham Barry can get away with it, but he's a lawyer and used to speaking publicly; my profession, same shit.

    Speaking in public has both an overt and a covert component, and body language / focus of the speaker's attention are every bit as important as the words you're speaking. If nobody out there has the skillz, send me bus fare and I'll come do it ffs.

    Srsly, ya'll have missed so many opportunities (especially since the LA Times was there last week) to have this thing PUBLICLY QUASHED and to embarrass the shite out of Riverside that I've wept in frustration and anger. I KNOW you want to get outraged and act all indignant, but none of the speakers I've seen at that podium have responded well under pressure.

    They're JUST PEOPLE... moar scared than you are of BAD PRESS AND SMOOTHER TALKERS THAN THEY ARE. Start thinking about that and FFS REHEARSE WITH EACH OTHER!! Role play the question in front of a fucking MIRROR until you've got a well paced, well timed, COMPLETELY cutting to the quick without being "disrespectful" on the overt level, while gutting them and leaving behind their spattered entrails on the front page of the Times on the covert.

    It can be done, ya'll just apparently don't have the skillz or the patience to learn them! Enroll in a fucking acting class ffs!

    /rant ends

    Edit: Better yet, phrase it as follows if you have the skiilz for timing / phrasing it appropriately so that the mental connection is made.

    Response to "Are you Anonymous."

    "Are you now, or has any member of the Riverside County Board of Supervisors ever been, a member of the Communist Party?"

    McCarthyism folks... remember it?

    FFS start drawing the fucking parallels without being so bloody whacko heavy handed. If they want to ASK QUESTIONS ON YOUR TIME, then penalize them for it! WTF is with all the direct answers to illegal / inflammatory / set up questions designed to fuck ya'll up the arse?

    Note: If you're not going to put in serious time into learning how to be argumentative in 180 seconds BEFORE that's all the time you have to speak, then don't fucking speak!
  26. adhocrat Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    ^^^
    You can be sure any scientologist speaking has been drilled to within an inch of her life before speaking in front of this forum.

    TheBitch is right.

    Rehearsal time
  27. LilDebbie Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    how about this:

    too much?
  28. TheBitch Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    Why is that your understanding? Are you trying to bait him? What's the purpose of the statement and intended audience? Is this part of a 3 min statement to the Board? If so, doesn't your statement back to them sort of depend on what they say the purpose of revisiting the issue is?

    Is anybody workshopping a statement for someone to read tomorrow? Why hasn't anybody considered sending a message FROM ANONYMOUS to the Board? We could do a video and have it played into the record, provided it was 2 minutes or less long to allow for time to set it up or make an intro statement. Alternatively, if someone yielded their time, we could go 180 seconds with a "Statement from Anonymous to the Riverside Board of Supervisors."
  29. Obi-Wan-anon Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    Or, ask them if the protests held in front of that sex offender's house would have been been disallowed under this ordanance? IIRC, Stone was there as one of the protesters.

    Would he have argued against the restrictions on his rights?

    I still like the question/answer/retort that can come from a "I am not a Scientologist" statement:

    "Well thank god for that. At least you still have control your own mind".

    "Not a Scientologist? Why not, too crazy for you?"

    "Good. The Scientologists have enough problems without adding yours to the mix".

    "We can see that. If you were a Scientologist, you'd be on the other side of the barbed wire fence."

    In other words, think ahead. Think of that one, quote-worthy reply. We know what they're going to ask. We know the truth about Scientology, and they don't. With the attention this is bringing out, the press will be there.
  30. basil Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    I have the perfect solution for that. Just hold these cans a moment...
  31. themadhair Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    As much as I like this idea, is it really feasible?
  32. TheBitch Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    If the time constraint is too tight, that's fine. It's not liek there won't be another meeting on the subject. Legally, technology wise... either of those ways, I don't see a problem so long as the video is simply posted to the web for download then played by the person who shows up to present testimony. That way there's a separation between the video and them, and they can say truthfully when asked that they were just delivering a message.
  33. adhocrat Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13



    For the past 6 months or so there have been protestors in front of Golden Era Productions, known as Gold, outside Hemet. Scientology had reacted to these peaceful protests with the Gold Note, an illegal 110 dB G augmented chord, designed to set people's teeth on edge. The fact that they are willing to subject their own people to this assault is very instructive. I wonder if ear plugs have been passed out to staff on Golden Era property as the law requires?

    Scientology has also been willing to resort to violence, as was shown last October when they lured a protestor with a flare, then viciously jumped him, then held him under citizen's arrest for being on a public road. If he were trespassing, the legal response is to ask him to leave the property, not attack him, dogpile on him, then make an unwarranted citizen's arrest.

    The police have ignored this Gold Tone, as it's called, and they arrested the man who had been dog piled, so we have to wonder what is the intention of the supervisors.

    The scientologists have shown their willingness to use any tactics, legal or not, in order to prevent legal, lawful protests from taking place.

    We ask that this ordinance be rescinded, and the protestors allowed to continue their protests.

    Thank you.
  34. EpicSwordGuy Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    180 seconds of desu?
  35. LilDebbie Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    needs moar desu

    oh yeah, and can we get that LATimes dude back out for the hearing? that would be win with extra lol.
  36. RightOn Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    Would these two vids which show Scilon protestors at a private gated residence help or hurt the Ordianance?
    Maybe I didn't read everything,,, but wouldn't Gold ARSE have to show EXACTLY where the poor Sea Org members actualy reside or sleep in order to put up a fuss as to where the protestors are near them in relation to where they protest?

    YouTube - Scientology: Fair Game still in effect at 5:45 AM pt 2/9 !
    YouTube - Scientology: Fair Game still in effect at 5:45 AM pt 9/9 !
  37. restim Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    The issue is not whether or not picketers would be successfully prosecuted. The existence of the ordinance, regardless of how it is worded, allows the cult to pressure the Rivercide County authorities to charge picketers, at which point the picketer gets to choose a guilty plea or a costly and potentially unsuccessful defense.

    Revising the ordinance doesn't help. Repealing it does.
  38. Optimisticate Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    Maybe a recording of the brown note should be played during the entire meeting. See how that works out for em :)
  39. TinyDancer Member

    Re: Riverside Ordinance to be Revisited 01/13

    Done.

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins