BOYCOTT BERKELEY (start of ping list;)

I started to make a list of Berkeley firms to boycott. I don’t lightly believe that firms should pay the economic price for their city council views, but these firms are the enablers of one of the most repugnant regimes in our history and they unfortunately will be innocent casualties in the campaign. The city could not run without their tax dollars. Thus the boycott is on!

Obviously the German run Bayer, Berkeley’s largest corporate job source is a top choice. http://www.bayerus.com/communities/berkeley/index.html

OK how does a boycott work in practice? Let’s use sightspeed as an example. First we dig for information. Here is what 10 minuets of hunting got me. What can others dig up? http://www.sightspeed.com/business/customers

dig, dig, dig… http://digitalmediaupdate.blogspot.com/2007/10/sightspeed-open-for-business-sightspeed.html

Peter D. Csathy email: pcsathy@sightspeed.com; CEO of SightSpeed Inc. (www.sightspeed.com); …. live ….., in sunny San Diego, California; …)

Second we email all the principals. A polite letter. State our case. Ask them to leave Berkeley. Repeat. CC to the Mayor, Chamber of Commerce and the press. We FIRMLY ask them to leave Berkeley. If there is no response we escalate. Email their customers. Escalate. Perhaps we put boots on the ground and picket.

Polite, dignified and steady pressure. Times 10. Times 100. If you are interested please bump this thread or Freepmail me. Eagles up.

A side note: I don’t believe snark or extremely hot rhetoric will achieve what we want. It’s fun to blow off steam here, real fun, but the economic boycott should be above that to achieve success. There are perhaps 100 other Berkeley firms that we need to email or call. From emailing Hilton and asking them to sell the Doubletree at the Berkeley marina, to asking associations not to have a meeting at HS Lordships http://www.hslordships.com/

A search within the archives of the local "Berkeley Daily Planet" newspaper netted a couple of letters to the editor that are incriminating to Mayor Tom Bates. He conspired with Code Pink prior to the City Council actions on 1/29/08 to use his position to assist in their anti-war/anti-military protests.

The resulting action on 1/29/08 by the Berkeley City Council - Item 15 "Permit Wativer and Parking Space Designation Request for Code Pink." Mayor Bates delegated responsibility for his handi-work to Councilmembers Linda Maio & Max Anderson.

I realize this is a bit off-topic in this thread, but I thought some people here would be interested in these items.

EDITOR’S NOTE: The Planet is only printing letters from locals regarding the ruling on the Marine Recruitment Center. Signed letters from non-locals and letters addressed to third parties will be published on our website. Unsigned letters will not be published.

Letter to the Editor (1/25/08)
CODEPINK SPECIAL TREATMENT

Editors, Daily Planet:

I am responding to Cynthia Papermaster’s Jan. 11 letter to the editor regarding the meeting between CodePINK and Mayor Bates. Ms. Papermaster stated that Mayor Bates committed to taking three actions as a result of that meeting. It is my opinion that CodePINK is getting special treatment because of their cause. The first action the mayor apparently agreed to take was to assist the group in drafting a resolution for consideration by City Council. I ask, has the group bothered to attend any Peace and Justice (P&J) Commission meetings? The city’s website shows that there was a P&J meeting on Jan. 7, which included a status report on the Marine Recruitment Office (Section D, Item 8a.). In addition, aren’t there already resolutions regarding Iraq on the table? According to the letter, Mayor Bates also agreed to meet with the officer-in-charge of the Marine’s Officer Selection Office. To what end? What purpose does this serve? Thirdly, the mayor was asked to keep the police from doing their job, which is to keep the peace and cite individuals that are in violation of city ordinances. Having a large, loud group taking up a sidewalk is loitering, and blocking pedestrians from passing is a disturbance. Having a bus doubled parked, blocking car traffic, and parked at meters over the allotted time is an infraction—period.

Lastly, the mayor was asked to consider giving the group their own dedicated parking space in front of the recruitment office. Given the limited parking in Downtown Berkeley, I believe the spaces should be kept for people who have business to conduct in the area. Downtown businesses are struggling as is, and eliminating parking will have the adverse effect of keeping people away who would patronize downtown restaurants and businesses. Furthermore, if the mayor gives CodePINK its own parking space, it would set a precedent for other groups to receive a space in front of City Hall, the Police Department, or any business place of their choosing. Get a grip people! Just because you want to protest an organization located in Berkeley, doesn’t mean your cause is more deserving than any other. It doesn’t allow you to disturb the lives of Berkeley business patrons or residents. You have the right to be heard within the limits of the law. Your message is getting out! You don’t need local government to bend over backwards for you.

María Ryan

Letter to the Editor (1/11/08)
MARINE RECRUITMENT STATION

Editors, Daily Planet:

Mayor Tom Bates graciously met with CodePink Women for Peace Wednesday in front of the Marine Recruitment Station on Shattuck Square. CodePink wants the City of Berkeley to shut the center down because it recruits people to wage bloody war, against the values of Berkeley citizens. Mayor Bates committed to three actions as a result of the meeting: 1. to work with peace activists to draft a workable resolution or initiative that the City Council can consider, 2. to meet with the Marine Recruitment Center director, and 3. to ask the Berkeley police to stop harassing CodePinkers who are at the Center daily and to help CodePink get permission to have a parking space in front of the Center during the daily action. Readers who want tell Mayor Bates that they are against the Marines recruiting in Berkeley can e-mail, phone, or mail a letter to him: mayor@ci.berkeley.ca.us, 981-7100, 2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704.

Cynthia Papermaster

Melas, those so called innocent people vote and how did they vote.

I think you'd be shocked to find out that the majority of people who'll be affected by the boycott don't get to vote in Berkely.

I'm questioning just how many FReepers live in or understand life in a metro area at this point. For a close to home example: Let's say the Dallas city council does something along these lines prompting a boycott. I would surely be effected by the boycott but I don't vote in Dallas because I live in Garland. My riding buddy would be directly affected since since he owns a Dallas business, but he lives in Plano, so he doesn't get to vote in Dallas either. Ditto for 3/4 of my friends here.

The irony is the Berkeley resident who owns a business in SF proper (which would be MOST Berkely business owners) would be unaffected by the boycott even though he/she did vote for the city council.

I can't abide a boycott that is indiscriminate in who it effects, guilty or not of the offense at hand.

A blocked bill is nothing more than the power of suggestion, my initial premise.

That may have been your "premise", but your statement was that the bill was "just a suggestion" which it was not.

Changing it to a premise now doesn't change the meaning in the post of yours to which I responded:

“Legislation has been started”

Correction!!! Legislation has been SUGGESTED.

My statement was posted to clear up that erroneous statement.

As you so empathetically (with 3 !!!'s lol) "corrected" me, I found it necessary to post a rebuttal, especially as you told me to "Be sure to follow it through the process and see if it actually makes it anywhere."

I was glad to do so for you, as you didn't seem to know at the time that it had been introduced officially.

The rest of your post (not quoted here), well yea.

Pelosi and Feinstein have naturally expressed their negative attitude towards it. The usual "women and children hardest hit" spin.

“I don’t think anyone should want to make themselves feel better.”

I think some people are misguided in attacking the business community (which they do because they are an easy target) as opposed to the real culprits, the City Council. I think they do this because it makes them feel better, that they are “doing something” when in effect they are only spraying their ammo wildly around in the hopes of blindly hitting a target. Then they can come back here to FR and high five everyone for their small victory...while other bodies lie around them.

I don’t know the political make up of the Chamber of Commerce and business community, I would guess that as a group they are more conservative than the rest of the area, so to me this is a situation of a friendly fire attack. IMO, they are most likely people in that area for a partnership and/or cooperation on making something actually happen. Instead, people on this thread treat them as an enemy, attack them, call them names and try to force them into complying with their demands.

This is no way to win a battle like this. The goal should be the removal of these people from the Council at election time and to do that you need allies, not adversaries. Even if you are not successful, you can make them uncomfortable enough that they think twice next time before doing something boneheaded.

Unfortunately, the first reaction among many on FR is to simply and blindly lash out at anyone within arms reach. It’s easy, it’s cheap and you go home thinking you’ve accomplished something, but it really is a selfish reaction with a selfish goal...”make me feel good today”. Why is it the first thought is to destroy something rather than to fix it?

The hard part is thinking clearly and then soberly developing a long term strategy to achieve victory and following it even it takes months or years.

See my tagline.

My letter to the Chamber;

“Mr. Peterson,

The recent issue of the Marine recruitment station has obviously raised some tensions. Unfortunately, in their effort to show support for the military, some have focused their attacks on the CofC and called for not only boycotts but urging business to relocate out of Berkeley. These people are well intentioned but misguided. It would be far more productive to view the Chamber as an ally rather then an adversary.

I noticed your website has a note and pics about your support for the military. In an effort to move the ball in the proper direction would your Chamber members be willing to partner with these groups in an effort to more directly demostrate that support? I believe they would be willing to provide you with window posters that would say something to the effect “Members of the Miltary Welcome Here”. The language could be mutually agreed upon, for instance you may wish to add a little something to soften it for your more neutral customers like “No Matter Ones Position on the War in Iraq, Our Veterans and Military personnel deserve our respect for their sacrifice. They are welcome here”. You get my drift.

If you see some possibilities here, respond and I will help get the two sides together.

Cordially,”

Tis better to light one candle than curse the darkness.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.