MAF pointing to sign at Central (I-75) and Royal Ln
RADICALS DESTROY TEXAS BUSINESS
DON’T MESS WITH TEXAS OIL”
Posted on 05/30/2002 2:21:35 PM PDT by Ms. AntiFeminazi
Climate Justice Summit Crater
Wow! Where do I begin? This has been a memorable couple of days.
First and foremost, I must thank everyone who participated in this counter-protest. Thank you for asking Freepers to participate. The most remarkable thing about this entire counter-protest has been the way several different conservative organizations worked together as a single unified front to fight off this attack on our city and state. The left has already trashed Austin and Houston, and we will not let them take Dallas too.
Thank you to the following people with whom I had the honor of serving both yesterday and today:
Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE) - Carol Jones and Peggy Venable
American Land Rights Association (ALRA) - Mike Hardiman and Chuck Cushman
Congress Of Racial Equality (CORE) - Niger Innis and Cyril Boynes
Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) - David Rothbard and Steve Watson
Paragon Foundation - Jay Zane Walley
Free Republic Network (FRN)- Patricia Meagher
Committee for the Defense of Free Enterprise (CDFE)
The Leadership Institute
and to each and every person who spent even 5 minutes on this project. It was worth it.
Now to the report:
Tuesday a.m. I got up early and picked up some last minute items for the meetings - copies, signs, etc. I made it to the Bradford by 9 a.m. and spent the next couple of hours meeting with the leaders of each of the above listed organizations plus a few others. From 11-1:30, sauropod and I loaded up in the "bus" (my car), and headed all over the high-volume commuter traffic lanes to confirm the three billboards we had purchased for Wednesday morning's ExxonMobil shareholder meeting.
MAF pointing to sign at Central (I-75) and Royal Ln |
“OIL FUELS TEXAS PROGRESS RADICALS DESTROY TEXAS BUSINESS DON’T MESS WITH TEXAS OIL”
|
We also had billboards at I-35 and Beltline in Carrollton, and at the last south exit on the Tollway just before entering downtown. I never made it to the tollway to check, so if anyone saw that billboard, please let me know.
At 2 p.m., we gathered at the Bradford for a 2-hour training session on the evening’s events. We had a room with 40 chairs reserved and were pleasantly surprised when there weren’t enough seats. I counted 48 at the meeting at one point. Some brief introductions were made and Carol Jones (CSE), Mike Hardiman (ALRA), Peggy Venable (CSE), and Chuck Cushman (ALRA) gave guidance on the Mock Trial counter-protest. We handed out maps, talking points, flyers, press releases, cameras, and costumes! – LOTS of costumes! (more on that later with pictures!)
Once we closed the meeting, we loaded up in 5 supersized vans and went to Tina’s for dinner. Tina opened her house to us fixed the meal herself in addition to handling many other details of the project, such as reserving billboards, printing 100+ yard signs, helping Carol with the hotel arrangements, reserving parking for us at the Meyerson, renting the vans etc. THANK YOU TINA!
 Tina our host holding one of the 100 yard signs she had made |
 Carol Jones (the woman who got it all done!) and Bill Peacock |
As you can see from the pictures below, dinner was no little task for Tina.
 |
 |
 |
Once again we loaded up the 5 vans and headed to the Mock Trial at the University of Texas at Dallas in Richardson. When we got there, Niger Innis and Cyril Boynes of CORE and Jay Zane Walley (Paragon Foundation and our very own c-b 1) and friends met us. We had 48 in our group. We can’t get a definite headcount on their side, but Niger and Lloyd Christmas both counted 6 to 8 in the courtroom.
Niger Innis of CORE had sent a request to the trial organizers a few weeks earlier asking to be allowed to testify at the Mock Trial. He was rejected.
It was a pleasure talking with you yesterday. I had been in contact with your colleague, Scott Crow, and he told me I should call you. I've attached an official request, for my organization to give testimony at your upcoming trial on May 28th, to this e-mail.
Niger Innis
National Spokesman
CORE
Their reply was as follows:
dear niger, i am so sorry to take so long to reply to your request. i'm in dallas and things are very crazy, exxonmobil has hired to folks to counter protest our events, we have representatives arriving from different countries, and i lost one of our key staff people early last week. unfortunately the mock trial has already been scripted out and we've had to turn away some folks who are very connected to ExxonMobil, so unfortunately we're not able to accommodate your request.
hope that you will come to dallas any way and meet with some of the impacted community reps and that we can build solidarity with your organization.
again apologies for my tardiness.
regards,
chris doran
202 413 2897.
Cyril Boynes, Special Advisor for International Affairs, the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), had already prepared his testimony on behalf of the Peoples and governments of the People’s Republics of Chad and Cameroon. He gave me his copy and I will post it on another thread later today. Cyril will be seen and heard here. The left will not keep us quiet. The truth will prevail.
Once we arrived on campus, we tried to enter the Mock Trial.
Our signs were a very big hit to passerbys. Thank you Registered!
We were met by campus security and told to leave the campus. We couldn’t understand why we were being asked to leave when the trial had been advertised on the internet and was “open to the public”. We were then escorted out of the building and proceeded to the front of the building where our kangaroos and signs would be seen. We had 15 disposable cameras and the one I had with some very good pictures of the kangaroos doing their thing ended up with someone else. I should be getting many more and some better pictures later this week.
 Our happy Kangaroos and ReJoyce! |
 Chuck Cushman (ALRA) teaching Barney Fife about free speech |
Another member of our group, Wanda, sat inside during the trial and took notes. She said that the courtroom displayed a very large United Nations flag and NO United States flag. She said when court was called to order, the presiding judge stated that the “International Criminal Court” proceeding was under way. She had many more details that I’m having trouble remembering at the moment, but I will be posting her report once she has finished it.
After the Mock Trial, we headed back to the hotel for a sign-making party with cake and ice cream. We made hundreds of signs. I’m sorry I don’t have more pictures of them, but I’m sure more will turn up later in the week. All signs were 2-sided and we filled up 2 vans with them. They were all very creative!
We all were up and out by 6 a.m. the next morning to head to the Meyerson Center where the shareholder’s meeting was held. When we arrived, there were already a few leftist protestors and a few police. More police arrived within the next hour. By 7:30 a.m., we had 98 counter-protestors with more than 2 signs each ready to go. The eco-radicals had about a handful of people.
 |
 |
 |
 |
Then the infamous van showed up with u-haul in tow…
Earlier in the morning, we had been asked not to plant the yard signs in previously friendly territory. I can’t help but think the local news had something to do with that. For 5 days prior to this event, local news had been showing clips of Seattle when reporting about the upcoming Wednesday meeting. They should know Texans don’t scare so easily. However, once the ExxonMobil shareholders saw us, they sent down a spokesperson to grant us permission to put our signs anywhere we wanted along the front of the building and blockades. We had literally hundreds of handmade and preprinted signs. Another thing to note is that we had free access to the trees, benches and water fountains outside the Meyerson Center. The leftists were in a bare parking lot with no trees or water. By mid-morning, they were looking so dehydrated and tired, we offered some of our sandwiches and water to them. They refused because the sandwiches had meat on them (ham and turkey).
Dare I mention restrooms after the embarrassing porta-potty threads? We were not allowed to use the restrooms inside the Meyerson Center. This is understandable considering the increased security since 9-1-1. However, the proprietors of two nearby buildings sent people down to tell us that we were welcome to use their facilities as much as we needed them. They were appreciative that we were out their defending capitalism. Thank you.
Now a couple of pictures of “them”:
 Hypocrisy at its finest. I wonder if she realizes that the profits the eco-terrorist realized from bottled water are produced in part by the use of petroleum resin for the plastic bottles? |
 Huh? Notice ole money bags with a gas mask on. It must be sad to be afraid to breathe. |
I’m sorry I didn’t get more close-ups of the opposition. I had 3 cameras and had started one early Wednesday morning, but I gave my cameras to those who had access to better pictures than I could get and I don’t have the pictures back yet. I will post them as I get them, but I’m sure it will be a few days.
More pictures of us:
 The Grinch That Stole Capitalism |
 Why Greenpeace? Why? |
 “Visualize Whirled Peas” |
 “OIL – Black Gold, Texas Tea” |
 “I love the smell of CRUDE in the morning” |
 |
 |
 |
DON’T MESS WITH TEXAS!
Regards from a nasty old mine in South America
Cuttnhorse
This was indeed a great event and my thanks to everyone, especially Ms. AntiFeminazi for excellent work!
Correct. You do not understand the motivational architecture.
That is not what I said. The design flaws of the Pinto and the Firestone 500 tire both killed people and when management learned of it they COVERED IT UP AND STONEWALLED THE FEDS. That's obstruction of justice, fraud, and criminal negligence. Nobody went to jail.
You won't get far with me pretending that the current system works while you are throwing hypothetical bombs at mine without understanding it. I said we intend to replace the system where we can PROVE that we can do a better job and the system design assures collection of data that make that case. Nothing is perfectly determined, that is why motivational systems work better than coercion and oversight.
Read the book. It's well worth your time.
You won't get far with me pretending that the current system works while you are throwing hypothetical bombs at mine without understanding it.Not what I was doing. What I was asserting was, that based on what I had read so far, the proposal would remove whatever little deterrence is in the current (admittedly flawed) system.
However, let's take the parallels further. There were design flaws (accidental, almost certainly). Then there was an action which resulted in harm, namely that the flaw was concealed. In my hypothetical, there was an action that resulted in harm (namely, some illegal dumping).
But we can go back to the Firestone and Pinto examples. This may be a good way to drum up interest in your book. How would your system have handled them precisely? How would it have avoided a coverup? How would it have caused an adverse condition to a group of individuals deciding to cover up some damaging facts or actions?
By preventing the coverup and additional losses because the manufacturer would have MOTIVE not to do so. Good systems prevent problems.
How would it have avoided a coverup?
Remember that the certifier has access to audit. If the cases continue to mount, it costs them.
How would it have caused an adverse condition to a group of individuals deciding to cover up some damaging facts or actions?
Their premiums go up because they are a high risk. The criminal penalties remain in force. This is about getting rid of the DOT, not the DOJ.
By preventing the coverup and additional losses because the manufacturer would have MOTIVE not to do so.How would it have prevented the coverup? I am having a hard time seeing that.
Company X has a car that is selling well. Re-engineering it would be prohibitively expensive for the next generation, and revealing the problem would cause people to want their current model to be fixed. It would harm the marketing of other models, since people would rightfully be concerned about the quality control at Company X.
To me, I still see a motive to coverup. What two differences I see are conflicting in their effect: 1)the governmental penalties may be less (which works towards diminishing the motive to cover up) and 2) the liklihood of any coverup being discovered and successfully brought to full public knowledge without the resources of government to force it decreases (which works towards increasing the liklihood of coverup).
Good systems prevent problems.Possibly true. I think a more accurate statement is "good systems are characterized by a minimum of problems as measured by number and scale".
Remember that the certifier has access to audit. If the cases continue to mount, it costs them.You don't think it would become likely that the same sort of destructive, conflict-of-interest laden, relationships would develop between the certifier and the producers as happened between Enron and Andersen?
Not if they successfully do cover it up. Avoidance of costs is a motive to cover up, and premiums are a cost.How would it have caused an adverse condition to a group of individuals deciding to cover up some damaging facts or actions?Their premiums go up because they are a high risk.
The criminal penalties remain in force. This is about getting rid of the DOT, not the DOJ.It may be on this that I am misunderstanding the proposal. What would the role of the DOJ be (summary, I am not asking you to give away the book)?
I just know I'm forgetting something. Will that feeling ever go away? lolololol.
Angelwood, I didn't get any pictures of basil. She doesn't stand still long enough to snap a shot. Well, I did get one and I think it's posted above, but I'm not going to point it out because she's fleeing the scene and came out a little blurry and a lot wide. lololololol.
basil, we'll talk either this weekend or next week sometime? I was just too tired last night. I enjoyed spending time with you this week, as I always do.
Again, both Andersen and and Enron got preferential allowances out of the SEC that violated the rational principles of control system design. The reason those conflicts of interest existed is because they could buy preferential treatment from Bubba for cheaper than the insurance premiums for a settlement. If for example, the SEC had to cough up the dough if either Enron or Andersen failed, you can bloody well bet that they would have done more to prevent the problem. Becuase they are a monopoly and can pass that liability onto voters, they do not behave rationally. There is no accountability in civic regulation and I defy you to cite a Congressman or Senator who lost his job over this case. Indeed, Bush is being blamed instead, which cuts precisely to the evil of democratic control of property.
In the case of Ford or Firestone, both products were tested to DOT standards. That protected the manufacturers from the economic need to to develop better preventative testing and limited the degree of culpable neglegence. Compliance was all that was necessary and limited the liability of both companies. I contend that the trial lawyers are enough to put the fear of God into any company.
The biggest flaw (if you could call it that) in my proposal is the existing system of torts and insurance regulation. They both distort the motive to manage and reduce risk objectively. What you observe in the marketplace is manifestation of those distortions in part caused by civic intervention. I made the early decision that it is impossible to design a just system around an injustice. It is better to make the consequences of injustice more visible so that the problem gets fixed. That is a political problem and, yes, we do need legislation there.
I propose NO changes in congressional legislation, indeed, my intent is to use environmental law agains the government and its colluding environmental NGOs. It is the unconstitutional rulemaking process I am attacking where the power to draft, adminster, enforce, and judge are combined into a single agency. That violation of the separation of powers principle is the essence of a police state, the continuation of which is what you have said you prefer.
No thank you. As I said, I am not an anarchist. The democratic tyranny of civic control of property in response to the whims of media is doing more to lead us into anarchy than anything I propose. You do not understand enough of the antithesis in the book to see it.
I am not going to answer any more of these hypotheticals (I don't have the time). If you want to know more, buy a book and read it.
YAAAAAAHHOOOOOOOOO it sounds like another successful and organized freep. Thanks for all you do. This mock trial sounds downright scary. This is socialism right in our faces. Basil the report of the woman with the 2yr old was most depressing. These people need to move to another country just for a month and they would see how beautiful and free the United States of America truly is.
Unfortunately this is the first I had heard about it. This last week of school for my kids keeps me busier than my kids, and off the puter for any lenghth of time.
Again I salute and thank you for all your successful efforts.
. If for example, the SEC had to cough up the dough if either Enron or Andersen failed, you can bloody well bet that they would have done more to prevent the problemAndersen's very existence may have hinged on them preventing the problem. It didn't make them.
And a corporation can only cough up the dough they have.
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.