Bailed Out Bank picket/Street Party today 4-5 pm

[Jonathan Leavitt]

Hi friends,

What a perfect day for a bank picket/street party!

I've got signs, sidewalk chalk and a guitar all tuned and ready to go! 

See you today at 4pm on Citizens' steps.  

Also tomorrow there is a bank picket from 11-12 at the same spot with GA to follow.

Soli,

J

[Lea Terhune]

OccupyVT, and fellow Burlington protesters (past and present):

There is a city ordinance being proposed Monday night [Offenses Misc_ Provisions—Health Center Access Buffer Zone, Sec_ 21-111] that will require protesters to maintain a 35ft distance from "reproductive services" sites. According to Council President Shannon via Twitter, the ordinance protects access to health care and free speech by expanding the zone of trespass to include public space, giving police power to make arrests within that zone. BPD supports the ordinance, and I'm told that the workers center supports it also. 

This ordinance specifies health care access to sites that provide reproductive services. Tomorrow it could be banks, city hall, the federal building -- all areas that provide essential services in the city. Activists protested for years at GE when GE was making gatling guns, and at the federal building to resist the draft, and at city hall for countless reasons. I think expanding the zones of trespass around a select sites is a slippery slope.  It shouldn't matter that it is THEM protesting, not US. Present laws prohibit obstructing the free passage of citizens in and out of buildings, and of course protesters can't attack people or destroy property, but protesters can speak and assembly freely in public space including sidewalks and greenways. 

Will there be an OccuptVT GA to discuss this ordinance, and it's impact on future protests of every kind? I want to hear from Occupy VT, hope you will discuss this ordinance, and expect the press will cover your position on this ordinance before the vote on Monday. Rumors that the workers center supports it aren't sufficient.  Council may vote to send it to committee for more work and public hearings, but I'm never sure what process Council will be following on any given issue and I am leary of this ordinance. We've done fine without it all these years, why do we need to expand the trespass zone now? 

Lea

[Stephen Marshall]

On 5/18/2012 4:40 PM, Lea Terhune wrote:
> OccupyVT, and fellow Burlington protesters (past and present):
>
> There is a city ordinance being proposed Monday night [Offenses Misc_

> Provisions�Health Center Access Buffer Zone, Sec_ 21-111
> <http://www.burlingtonvt.gov/WorkArea/LinkIT.aspx?itemID=7042>] that

Greetings Lea,
I look forward to meeting you I hope soon.
I sympathize with both positions. There is the property of clients of
reproductive services that they may be the most vulnerable of possible
clients to public facilities. I would ask "can we think of more focused
way to protect these most vulnerable?" I agree that we must consider the
application of this principle (a safe passage zone) across all other
public facilities.

--
This reply email has been edited to reduce volume and to simplify reading it.

Stephen Marshall
11 Hungerford Terrace (out back)
Burlington Vermont 05401
Dispolemic.Blogspot.Com
802-861-2316 Landline
802-922-1446 Cell

[Lea Terhune]

Stephen, thanks for the thoughtful response. 

Today it's Planned Parenthood. Tomorrow it could be my bank that is a target. I occasionally hear protests are planned at my bank. The financial stability of our city, state, country and world depends on protecting the banks and their vulnerable clients. 

Mostly an intellectual conundrum for me. I don't protest anymore, but I support others who do. My neighbor has a grandson in Canada. He just organized a concert in a cathedral to raise money for the students who are protesting. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/19/quebec-passes-student-protest-law?newsfeed=true 

I'm not hard to meet. Let's have coffee at Chubby Muffin some morning, or at The Bagel on North Ave.

Lea

On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Stephen Marshall <visi...@burlingtontelecom.net> wrote:

On 5/18/2012 4:40 PM, Lea Terhune wrote:

OccupyVT, and fellow Burlington protesters (past and present):

There is a city ordinance being proposed Monday night [Offenses Misc_ Provisions—Health Center Access Buffer Zone, Sec_ 21-111 <http://www.burlingtonvt.gov/WorkArea/LinkIT.aspx?itemID=7042>] that will require protesters to maintain a 35ft distance from "reproductive services" sites. According to Council President Shannon via Twitter, the ordinance protects access to health care and free speech by expanding the zone of trespass to include public space, giving police power to make arrests within that zone. BPD supports the ordinance, and I'm told that the workers center supports it also.

[Stephen Marshall]

On 5/19/2012 12:03 PM, Lea Terhune wrote:
> Stephen, thanks for the thoughtful response.
>
> Today it's Planned Parenthood. Tomorrow it could be my bank that is a
> target. I occasionally hear protests are planned at my bank. The
> financial stability of our city, state, country and world depends on
> protecting the banks and their vulnerable clients.
>
> Mostly an intellectual conundrum for me. I don't protest anymore, but
> I support others who do. My neighbor has a grandson in Canada. He just
> organized a concert in a cathedral to raise money for the students who
> are protesting.
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/19/quebec-passes-student-protest-law?newsfeed=true
>
>
> I'm not hard to meet. Let's have coffee at Chubby Muffin some morning,
> or at The Bagel on North Ave.
>
> Lea

I do hope you plan to move your money to a credit union. I am confused
by "The financial stability of our city, state, country and world
depends on protecting the banks and their vulnerable clients." I am not
interested in financial stability which perpetuates the stranglehold of
the banks over the economy. But if you are opposed to the 35 foot rule
because it could be applied to the bank protests in the future, what
vulnerable bank customers are you worried about? Propose a time next
week, I'm available essentially anytime.

[Lea Terhune]

Stephen, sorry, I was being facitious. I was pointing out how this precedent could be abused, how next it could be banks, or city hall.

I am a charter member of  VDCU, now called Opportunities CU, 100% locally owned. I worked for the org that created it (BEAM), and I nominated the founder, Caryl Stewart, for the Clavelle Sustainability Award this year (she was chosen to receive the award).

So now will you meet me?

Lea

[Alexander Percivul Ruhe]

Ahhh tommorow ..I will try to be there my couragious diligent prayerfully peaceful Dreamer Friends : )

      lol SunSeerly, AleSonder o the ELFvenKind

--
ELFkind Production working for Ecotopia Systems, SunSeerly, AleSonder PS Ruhe

[Stephen Marshall]

On 5/19/2012 7:03 PM, Lea Terhune wrote:
>
> Stephen, sorry, I was being facitious. I was pointing out how this
> precedent could be abused, how next it could be banks, or city hall.
>
> I am a charter member of VDCU, now called Opportunities CU, 100%
> locally owned. I worked for the org that created it (BEAM), and I
> nominated the founder, Caryl Stewart, for the Clavelle Sustainability
> Award this year (she was chosen to receive the award).
>
> So now will you meet me?
>
> Lea
>
>

Your humor is dry but I did laugh out loud at this. When and where?

[Lea Terhune]

Oh, I  missed the offer of getting together next week -- well, the vote is Monday night, so how about Monday morning 9AM at the Bagel Cafe on North Ave? 

Several politicos are pressuring me, but I want to hear from people who protest before I decide. I'll call the Workers Center Monday morning. I've already called peace activists (the ones I talked with are ok with it). People from my Winooski 44 affinity group are uncertain. And in the end, I'll trust my gut. Right now, my gut tells me this is not right.  Lea

[Jonathan Leavitt]

Lea, who are the politicos pressuring you?

[Stephen Marshall]

On 5/19/2012 9:45 PM, Lea Terhune wrote:
> Oh, I missed the offer of getting together next week -- well, the
> vote is Monday night, so how about Monday morning 9AM at the Bagel
> Cafe on North Ave?

sounds OK. Would a later time be ok with you? 10 or 11? other wise, 9
will work.

[William Oetjen]

Hi Folks,

My message is brief and blunt.

I was an escort for Planned Parenthood and the Women's Health Center back around 1990, when they were under attack by people who believed that women are not to be trusted to make decisions about their bodies.   I remember the personal stories from female friends who had to walk a gauntlet of freedom-haters in order to get the care they needed, compounding what was for many, an already emotionally distressing situation.  We activists who defended women's rights then worked alongside elected officials and law enforcement to finally restore a balance of access and freedom of speech.  The current situation no longer reflects that and forces women to once again walk that gauntlet to receive their Constitutionally-protected reproductive health services.  

On Monday evening, I will stand in full support of the ordinance establishing a minimum distance for protestors around reproductive health facilities, to restore that same responsible balance.  

Overwrought warnings that such a narrowly-defined restriction is a slippery slope leading to the diminution of free speech in general, are a straw man, constructed to mislead.  

You can expect that if such an extension of this ordinance ever is suggested, I will be among the many, many opponents aligning to block it.

Yours in Solidarity,

Bill Oetjen

"Posterity, who are to reap the blessings, will scarcely be able to conceive the hardships and sufferings of their ancestors."

Abigail Adams, 1777

[Lea Terhune]

Bagel on North Ave, Monday at 9am?

Sent via Droid.

[Stephen Marshall]

Bill, After being compelled to examine my own excessively forceful
language, I am finally aware enough to notice that yours evokes in me
very powerful emotions that do not relate to the validity of your
arguments. I am conscious of fear that if I do not side with you I may
be at risk of approbation. I would like to make my choices based on
empathy, thoughtfulness and compassion, not in reaction to - for or
against - emotionally threatening language. If you would like to state
your points without so much threat, I would feel safer to approach your
opinions and consider them for their merit, and not in reference to the
fear your language invokes in me.

[Lea Terhune]

I've been at Bagel since 9, keeping busy, no problemo. Looking forward to meeting you! Lea

[Jonathan Leavitt]

Hi folks,

I'm not sure if everyone has read the actual resolution, but some of the concerns aired on this listserve would be immediately put to rest with a cursory examination of the text. 

For instance under the resolution there are only two "Prohibited acts" and both of which are narrowly defined to only include reproductive health facilities: 

(1) No person shall knowingly obstruct, detain, hinder, impede, or block another person's entry

to or exit from a reproductive health care facility.

(2) No person or persons shall knowingly congregate, patrol, picket or demonstrate in a zone

extending thirty-five (35) feet from the premises of a reproductive health care facility. 

Based on the text, the notion that this resolution could be extended to bank pickets is simply factually inaccurate. In this context, I think Lea's comment that "Several politicos are pressuring me" is troubling to say the least. None of this is meant as a judgment of Lea, whom I've had several fruitful discussions with, but rather the politicos. Occupy Burlington via numerous votes at General Assemblies has been abundantly clear that we will not allow ourselves to be co-opted into doing the leg work for the political elites who aren't meeting our communities fundamental human needs. These unnamed politicos fear mongering that bank protests we're engaged in will be impinged upon by such a narrowly defined ordinance which is only germaine to "reproductive health care facilities" deserves to be called out. Further, if I were able to find out the identities of these politicos I would tell them that we are not an astroturf group which they can engage in the final moments before a vote they are poised to lose with misrepresentations of the legal codes discussed in hopes of appealing to our base fears. 

Best,

J   

[Stephen Marshall]

Jonathan,

In deep respect for the intents of this ordinance, and while there is no
reason to oppose this ordinance in day light, I must ask, "What prevents
an aggressive politico from asking "What is the difference between
prohibiting aggressive picketing at a reproductive rights clinic, or a
bank? Shouldn't everyone be protected from picketers?" ?"

The ordinance needs to make clear its intent to protect vulnerable
persons from aggressive, hostile, behavior, and explicitly permit civil,
respectful discourse between protesters and clients. This sort of clause
would protect us from the argument that "all clients at any public
facility should be protected with a 35 foot rule."

Why not write a law permitting the imposition of a restraining order
against persons and groups with a history of hostile and aggressive
picketing? This then turns attention to the just concerns of the clinic
and its clients, who would need to apply for such a restraining order,
and away from the question of whether a 35 foot rule might be extended
to other sorts of facilities. Details such as how long this restraining
order could be upheld can be settled by those concerned.

Either of these approaches would allay my concerns.

In Solidarity, Stephen.

[Kludge]

has anyone considered that arguing over how the law ought to be worded
is a sign of our failure to organize?

occupy has staunchly and rightly opposed involvement in establishment
politics because we shouldn't need a law to tell us what we can or
cannot do, nor should we need a politician to enact the will of the
community.

if we--any we, be it burlington or vermont as a whole or just
occupy--wants to stop right wing loons from harrassing women who want
abortions, why aren't we organizing a defensive campaign? why are we
asking the pols and the pigs to do *anything* for us?

arguing over which details we want the cops enforcing is arguing over
what form our alienation is gonna take. we have bodies and voices that
we can use to directly solve our problems. anyone wanna do that?

-ben

"morals? _the_ _vibe_ does not concern itself with morals. it is
concerned with history. and history is a slaughter."
-- doctor san diego of the americoids

[Stephen Marshall]

On 5/21/2012 2:06 PM, Kludge wrote:
> has anyone considered that arguing over how the law ought to be worded
> is a sign of our failure to organize?
>
> occupy has staunchly and rightly opposed involvement in establishment
> politics because we shouldn't need a law to tell us what we can or
> cannot do, nor should we need a politician to enact the will of the
> community.
>
> if we--any we, be it burlington or vermont as a whole or just
> occupy--wants to stop right wing loons from harrassing women who want
> abortions, why aren't we organizing a defensive campaign? why are we
> asking the pols and the pigs to do *anything* for us?
>
> arguing over which details we want the cops enforcing is arguing over
> what form our alienation is gonna take. we have bodies and voices that
> we can use to directly solve our problems. anyone wanna do that?
>
> -ben
>

Ben, if I accept your argument, I am left to ponder the last GA, for
which there were not enough people to have a meeting. If I reject your
argument, I lose a powerful and beautiful modality. Can we not do all of
these things?

I am ready to discuss the factors affecting our community and how we
might re-energize our movement. Is there interest in this?

I do believe there is no enduring freedom without enduring cooperation
and solidarity. And I believe we can have none of these if in our
diversity we all expect all of our visions to be given highest priority
and made manifest. Are we so diverse and independent that we cannot even
elect a common vision of a desirable future? That we cannot unite around
agreements on how to move forward? I despair at the number of people who
have said "I am so frustrated with Occupy!". People who are natural
allies. We ignore each other, our diverse needs, and our need to find a
common voice, at the expense of the hope of the movement to have a real
impact. Is this untrue?

Let us not forget that the vast majority of us want laws that are just
and can be enforced by the courts and police in just ways. The 99% is
diverse and, among those with whom we share the hopes of a just and
healthy future, many are not anarchists. They are ready to be educated,
to be mobilized, to be heard and integrated. But they are not ready -
yet - to abandon the rule of law. Just Law is necessary for justice
where the rule of law is required.

I want more than a movement of radicals. I want a movement of the 99%.
We may need to consider our constituency and how best to project its
interests. Does this fail your vision?

[Kludge]

i feel like this is becoming a philosophical discussion that's a
sidetrack from the discussion of the anti-picketing ordinance.

here's the question i would ask: "how can we achieve our immediate goal
while reaching towards our ultimate goal?" in this case, "how can we
stop a bunch of right wing jerks from harassing patients without
sacrificing our community's autonomy and power?"

i don't think this or any ordinance achieves both those goals.

solidarity,
ben

[Lea Terhune]

Whoa! There are no fear-mongering politicos opposing your bank protests. I wish Stephen hadn't stood me up this morning, because we could have talked this through and prevented misunderstanding regarding my concerns.

I have read the ordinance, and recognize that there is carefully restrictive language about protecting clients seeking reproductive services. This ordinance would not allow other targets of protests to create a 35 ft No Trespass zone around their building, the sidewalk and/or the street, or whatever else is within the 35 ft zone. But it certainly sets a precedent for targets of protest to request special protection. 

I was looking for thoughtful dialogue, and reassurance from protesters that they have vetted the ordinance and approve of it, as it is reported that you do. I wanted to hear it from you directly. Now I have, and I thank you. Protest on!

Lea

[Stephen Marshall]

On 5/21/2012 3:17 PM, Kludge wrote:
> here's the question i would ask: "how can we achieve our immediate goal
> while reaching towards our ultimate goal?" in this case, "how can we
> stop a bunch of right wing jerks from harassing patients without
> sacrificing our community's autonomy and power?"

Ben, How do we do that? Your goal is the goal. If you have a plan, let's
hear it.

[Bill Oetjen]

Please stand up if you were intimately involved, on the ground, in the front lines, during the worst days of this conflict (centered around 1990).

I was  -   as a vetted, trained, clinic escort.  

My opinion counts here because it is informed by that crucible.  

Now, I know I've said this a bunch of times, and in as many venues, that we achieved our victory over the "bunch of right wing jerks" by opening ourselves to a huge alliance including police, elected officials, and a massive cadre of well-organized, disciplined volunteers.  Our success depended on all parts of the alliance, and on implicit trust between them.   Remove a single element, and the "bunch of right wing jerks" would have won.   

With the sanction of the elected officials, the police trained the volunteers extensively.  The police monitored activities from a distance, and responded rapidly and aggressively in response to volunteers' reports.  Basically, we volunteers were the front line of clinic defense.  

Besides for the alliance, another key feature of our success was the acceptance of hierarchy.  We did not operate as a direct democracy; the only horizontal component was the directorship of the Women's Health Center, and its members were established by invitation.    

I love Direct Democracy; I love the Occupy Movement.  I believe it's the coolest thing I've ever seen.   But I can't imagine Occupy Burlington successfully defending the Planned Parenthood clinic on its own for more than a couple of days.

So, in my informed opinion, if we want women to have access to abortion and related services, with minimal trauma inflicted by a "bunch of right wing jerks," we have to ask the city council to pass, and the police to enforce, this ordinance.

And, as I told the council on Monday evening, if anyone wants to try to use this ordinance as an excuse to expand it to other venues, let them try.   I promise them a memorable council meeting.

Yours in Solidarity,

Bill

--

[Alexander Percivul Ruhe]

Thank youare all for clarifying this issue : ) lol

 

     I agree with jono that clarification specifying the medical condition of the treatment centers as the qualifying factor for giving space away from adamant picketers ...Meanwhile, corporate businesses remain seperate as they are not considered "people" ...and their profit mongering is the the reason Democracy needs to be vigilantly present.

 

SunSeerly, AleSonder o the ELFven kind