BOYCOTT BERKELEY (start of ping list;)

Drango | 2/16/08 | Drango

[USMC Brat]

Please let us know if you get a reply.

I’m anxiously awaiting Tuesday’s Council meeting to see if they rescind all of their anti-military actions of Jan. 29.

[444Flyer]

I added a paragraph and sent it earlier today to Mr. Garrett. I will definately let you know if he replies.

[USMC Brat]

2/26/08 City Council Agenda
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/ContentDisplay.aspx?id=13892

Unfortunately there is nothing listed regarding the Marine Corps/Code Pink issue. However, on the last page listed under “NOTICE CONERNING YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS” there are details to object to a decision by the City Council regarding a use permit.

I’m going to assume only a Berkeley resident can file an objection. This offers resident business owners, or the Chamber of Commerce, a procedural means to register thier complaint regarding the free use permits granted to Code Pink.

Hopefully someone here knows of someone in Berkeley who would be brave enough to challenge the City Council.

[USMC Brat]

RecruitMilitary Responds to Berkeley Marines Incident
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1975804/posts

[444Flyer]

Thank you for the link.

Any news on the Council meeting last night? Conveniently, I haven’t heard a peep back from Mr. Garrett of the C of C. I may follow up and say, “Haven’t heard back from you, did you have any thoughts on the letter I sent you?” The least they could do is send a polite “Thanks for your concern” which would be the professional thing to do, but we’re talking Berkeley here. My expectations of them are ground level low.

[JAG2]

There are some other avenues of attack which might help to produce results.

One: Urge every group that supports the troops to apply to the Berkeley City Council for its own reserved parking spot in front of the business of its choice (perhaps City Hall?). The precedent has been set; there can be no legitimate reason for denial of similar accommodations as have been granted to Code Pink. When enough reserved parking spaces are issued, there will be no customer parking. (And someone must be sure to fill those parking spaces.)

Two: Write the US Attorney and request that his office vigorously prosecute the members of the Berkeley City Council and Code Pink for their unlawful activities. Interfering with military recruitment has been a federal offense since World War I. The mayor and every other council member who participated in Code Pink's protests would be liable to prosecution for this offense. The ones who didn't personally participate may be liable for conspiracy to interfere with military recruitment.

In addition, if it is true that Medea Benjamin and Code Pink sent $600,000 (or any other sum) to families of terrorists in Iraq, they should be prosecuted for treason (providing aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States), for which the death penalty is authorized.

Three: In addition, IF the mayor is a retired Army captain, as his bio claims, he is subject to military jurisdiction so long as he draws military retired pay. In addition to the federal offenses mentioned above, Mayor Bates' conduct also makes him guilty of conduct unbecoming an officer, which is a violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Ask the US Attorney to pass along a copy of your letter to the appropriate General Court Martial Convening Authority who would have jurisdiction over Mayor Bates, requesting that an Article 32 investigation be conducted to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to prosecute the Mayor in a military court, where forfeiture of his retired pay is among the possible punishments. THIS would be justice!

And if the Mayor is not a retired Army captain as his bio claims, he can be prosecuted for that, too!

Send your letters to:
Mr. Joseph Russoniello, U.S. Attorney
United States Attorney's Office
450 Golden Gate Avenue
11th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94102

or Fax to: (415) 436-7234

Perhaps someone who lives in the area could find out who the proper General Court-Martial convening authority (GCMCA) would be, and post his/her address here so letters could be addressed directly. One could be sent to the GCMCA for the Navy/Marine Corps, one to the Army GCMCA, and one to the Air Force GCMCA. The Army would probably be the appropriate one, but hopefully the others would forward letters they receive.

It's time for the Berkeley City Council to learn what Semper Fi means!

[USMC Brat]

The Berkeley Council meeting Tues night (2/26) did not include anything concerning the Marine OSO or the backlash from thier anit-military actions. They did approve the use of the Veteran’s Building for use by Veteran’s Groups, specifically the American Legion.

Here’s a link where you can access all of the Council meetings and agendas (with PDF links).
Berkeley City Council Video Page
http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/ContentDisplay.aspx?id=11706

My CoC President hasn’t received a reply from the Berkeley CoC either. I’m thoroughly amazed by their silence on the issue.

Of all the letters I’ve written to-date, I’ve not received one single reply... these include letters to my Congressman and Representatives, the FBI, the U.S. Federal Marshall and others.

I think you were right when you said Berkeley is hoping this will just fade away... perhaps that’s what D.C. wants to happen also.

It seems interest in this issue-thread has waned and that folks have moved on to a new issue, while this remains unresolved. In the meantime, I’ll keep checking in and keep doing what I can from here in middle America.

[eyedigress]

Fox News Channel covered this tonite somewhat. Berkeley is still an American city, and will be affected by free-will. Their facists views against America’s prime military arm will hurt business.

[USMC Brat]

Thanks for some new ideas JAG.

“Interfering with military recruitment has been a federal offense since World War I.” - JAG2

Before I write to the U.S. Attorney can you provide the Law or Statute you refer to? I’d like to be accurate in my letter. The only law I’m able to find that may apply is the Smith Act (18 U.S.C.A. § 2384) which speaks to “sedition”, not treason. Clearly Code Pink and some members of the City Council are guilty of Sedition as defined (see http://www.answers.com/topic/sedition ).

[444Flyer]

Thank you. My fingers will be busy and typing tomorrow.

I have friends who are Marines and friends who were Marines and they have rubbed off on me too well to cave on this issue, besides, Ours are overseas taking it for us it’s the least we can do.

Berkeley needs to be made an example of, hopefully legally as well as financially.

[444Flyer]

Thanks for the update. Forward.:)

[USMC Brat]

The Boycott is having an impact! Keep up the pressure!

Berkeley businesses take hit from Marine protests
Hotels, theater, restaurants have seen cancellations, with hostility from opponents of military branch cited
By Kristin Bender and Doug Oakley
STAFF WRITERS
Article Launched: 02/27/2008 03:03:57 AM PST
http://origin.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_8377213

Even Ted Garrett with the Berkeley CoC weighed in with a statement, as he should!

On the Berkeley CoC website it states: "When the Berkeley Chamber of Commerce says it represents business interests, it means it is willing to represent you personally and business in general at City Hall and City Council meetings."

SO... Where the heck is the Chamber during Council meetings?! If my business was in Berkeley I'd be demanding that my Chamber address the Council publicly.

[JAG2]

Thanks for asking for clarification, and wanting to be sure you have your ducks in a row before firing off your mouth. Sure wish more folks did that!

The original prohibition against interference with military recruitment was in the Espionage Act of 1917. Portions of that Act are still in effect today, but the particular part that dealt with military recruitment is not.

You're on the right track though, with your comments about sedition. The section you cited, 18 USC 2384, deals with seditious conspiracy, and makes it an offense for two or more persons to "conspire to . . . oppose by force the authority [of the United States], or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States." The question would be whether they did these things "by force," and how that term is interpreted.

There might also be a possibility of prosecution for violation of 18 USC 2383, which makes it an offense when someone "incites, ... assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto." Again, that would depend on whether the activities of Code Pink and the City Council rise to the level of a "rebellion or insurrection," as those terms are defined. Without doing any research, my guess is probably not.

The current prohibition against interference with military recruitment is contained in 18 USC 2388, which reads, "(a) Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully . . . causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or willfully obstructs the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, to the injury of the service or the United States, or attempts to do so -- Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both." It also provides the same penalty for two or more persons conspiring to violate subsection (a).

The question would be whether the United States is "at war." Does that require an official declaration of war by Congress? Or is it sufficient that this conflict is being called, by the government, the Global War on Terror? Or the Iraq War? Or the War in Afghanistan?

These might be stretches, but could be used to start an investigation if anyone is inclined to do so. I don't know anything about the US Attorney in SFran and whether he would get interested in this case or not. Might depend on how many letters he gets from good citizens demanding that he take any and all action in his authority to prosecute these people to the fullest extent of the law. (Might also depend on his staffing levels and the case load of serious cases in the office at the present time.)

But it's worth a shot to let him know that there are a lot of Americans out there who don't approve of this conduct, who believe it violates our laws, and who want it prosecuted. Wouldn't hurt to mention that in your letters to Senators and Congressional representatives, too.

Here's an interesting tidbit I picked up in doing some research on UC Berkeley - Wikipedia says "The military has been and continues to be an integral part of UC Berkeley's history since the University's birth. In fact, military training [ROTC] was compulsory at the university from 1870 to 1962."

It also says, "In a poll conducted in 2005, 51% of Berkeley freshmen considered themselves liberal, 37% considered themselves moderate, and 12% identified as conservative."

Wow!

[USMC Brat]

Thank you for such great detail into what may be our next real option in addressing Berkeley City Council, and Code Pink and World Can't Wait in Federal court. 18 USC Sec. 2388 "Activities affecting armed forces during war" is a good place to start, and other sections of Title 18 USC may apply.

Certainly our Federal Justice Department knows well that the government has the authority to go after Berkeley City Council and the protestors, and I've questioned 'why haven't they?' I've questioned why hasn't the Federal Government stepped in at all? The U.S. Marine Corps cannot defend their little piece of real estate in Berkeley because it's the jurisdiction of the local government and the local law enforcement. However, it is within the jurisdiction of the U.S. Marshall to restore order and enforce the law since the Berkeley Police Department refuses to do so.

"The question would be whether the United States is "at war." Does that require an official declaration of war by Congress?" -- JAG2

I'm sure that's a debate civil and constitutional attorneys would love to argue! For all intents and purposes, the United States is engaged in war... even with the absence of a formal declaration of war. Anyone would have a hard time proving we are not at war. Congress knows all the diplomatic and economic implications of a declared war and we should all be thankful that they've not exercised their authority to declare war in the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq. Declared wars are between nations, we are not at war with the governments of Afghanistan or Iraq. WWII was the last time Congress made a formal Declaration of War against a nation. Since WWII Congress has authorized the United States to be engaged in extended military conflicts through Resolution(s), specifically because no country has committed an act of war against the United States.

This weekend I'll be composing letters to various federal recipients, some of whom I've already written to. This time, thanks to your insights, I'll have new ammo.

Semper Fi

[egginanest]

BOYCOTT BERKELEY....just Berkeley?

[JAG2]

My pleasure.

I think it will be difficult to get any sort of prosecution for this activity, especially during an election year. But if there's enough of an outcry, I would think the US Atty would have to at least take a look.

It's very difficult to get anyone to prosecute treason, but if Medea Benjamin and Code Pink did in fact send money to the families of terrorists in Iraq, I think that would clearly be providing "aid and comfort" to enemies of the US.

The practical solutions are likely to meet with better results. I understand Code Pink does their "protests" on Tuesdays. Are they there the other days, too, or just Tuesdays? Perhaps we could have an "honor guard" assembled shoulder-to-shoulder, in front of the Recruiting Station early in the a.m. before CP shows up, to "keep the sidewalk clear" between the street and the door to the recruiting station and provide "safe passage" to anyone who'd like to enter the station? (Image of Patriot Guard Riders in my head.)

And it would give me a good chuckle to see "reserved parking spaces" all over Berkeley for our pro-troops groups!

As the owner of small businesses myself, I regret the negative economic impact the boycott will have on them as innocent bystanders. On the other hand, they need to be raising hell with the City Council themselves. If that doesn't work, they could vote with their feet and move their businesses out of Berkeley. May be cheaper than the lost business they could have as a result of the boycott.

Have a good weekend!

[USMC Brat]

With this being an election year, I have to agree there's little chance of a prosecution. Maybe after Nov elections are over there'll be more interest in persuing litigation. We can HOPE.

I've read differing accounts about the $600K Medea Benjamin took to Fallujah. I'm inclined to believe older news accounts (2003-04) that Global Exchange donated $500K in medical supplies plus $100K in funds given to refugees. It would be easy enough to verify in their 501c3 reports... provided they documented it.

Code Pink is hosting protests most days each week. The City Council gave them free permits for 4 hours on Wednesdays, so anything outside that frame of time they'd need permits for.

I like the image of an "Honor Guard" posted on the sidewalk to keep the right-of-entry clear. Since it is a law that protesters are not supposed to block right-of-entry the Police should intervene. We've seen how effective Berkeley Law Enforcement is about that very issue, eh.

I've expressed my concern about the small-business owners, too. Being a small-business owner I visited with my CoC President (Marine-Ret) about Berkeley. He wrote a letter to the CoC President (I don't recall his name) and never got a reply. My letter to Berkeley CoC Mr. Garrett went unanswered also.

Today I talked to Councilmember Capitelli’s Administrative Asst. Didn’t get a lot accomplished though. She got a little defensive when I raised the $20K cost to taxpayers for each protest... Freedom of Speech. Yeah, riiight. I wrote some details in this thread.

[60Gunner]

BUMP