Waves of protest pound at BART, shutting down stations

|
(45)

Watch exclusive SFBG video of the Civic Center protest here.

The latest battle between BART and its growing group of grassroots foes played out during today’s (Mon/15) afternoon rush hour, shutting down some San Francisco stations.

What started as a fizzled anti-police brutality protest at BART's Civic Center station has spiraled into a San Francisco moment with echoes of the Arab Spring and V For Vendetta. Following an unprecedented decision by BART officials to preemptively cut off cell phone service on August 11, in a bid to disrupt a protest that never developed, public outrage led to further protest today and a hacking attack on MyBart.org by the notorious international hacker group Anonymous over the weekend.

BART stated that it cut cell service to several of its stations during the evening commute on August 11 as a matter of public safety, fearing what officials characterized as a civil disturbance. BART did not return our call for comment, but it was apparently worried about a repeat of the July 11 protest that flooded Civic Center BART station at rush hour, preventing trains from leaving the station platform. At issue in that protest and the one that never materialized on August 11 was the fatal shooting of Charles Hill by BART police on July 3, on the Civic Center BART station train platform.

Today’s protests to disrupt rush hour BART service threatened by Anonymous materialized out of the rush hour crowd. Protestors, some in Guy Faulks masks, some with bloody shirts, spoke into cell phones repeating, “Can you hear me now? Can you hear me now?” over and over and over.

Upset by what they characterized as BART's record of police brutality, and the recent disruption of cell phone service, they poured into the station as the platform swelled to capacity.

One protestor stood silently with a shirt that read, “Dear BART, you can't take away our ability to call 911 while also making it a habit to shoot your riders.”

“It's incredibly ironic to squelch free speech in San Francisco, which has long been a bastion of civil liberties,” said Rainey Reitman of the Electronic Frontier Foundation who was on hand for the protest.

Others sat on the platform floor, making messages on little red hearts decrying the shooting of Hill. A yellow handbill from #ObBART, the Anonymous name for the protest, even decried BART's record and free speech.

Some began to block trains from exiting the platforms, promoting riot police to move in and clear people away. After a half-hour, BART Police Sgt. Coosndz ordered the protestors to clear the platform.

Protesters peaceably complied, spreading out through the Market Street corridor and causing closures at other nearby stations.

“No arrests were made on the platform and the protesters have peaceably dispersed,” Sgt. Macaulay of the BART police told the Guardian later.

BART officials said they did not shut down in-station cell service during the protest, which hardly seemed relevant as the stations were closed. On the street, amidst the stranded rush hour commuters it was difficult to tell who was protesting, with small groups of protesters gathering vocally but briefly and then melding back into the crowd.

Though inconvenient, the protest took the form of perhaps the most civil of civil disturbances the city has seen surrounding the police brutality issue – a stark contrast to some of the recent tense stand-offs between police and protesters.

One BART official struggled to keep up with a stream of people on the corner of Market and Montgomery trying to find another way home. “People have been very understanding,” he said while catching his breath for a minute.

As of press time, well beyond the normal evening commute hours, BART stations throughout the city’s downtown remained closed.

LEGAL QUESTIONS
According to the ACLU of Northern California, “BART is the first known government agency in the United States to block cell service in order to disrupt a political protest.”

As often happens in unprecedented cases, the legality of BART's cell service disruption has been widely debated. BART asserts that it was with its rights to disrupt phone service.

“Organizers planning to disrupt BART service on August 11, 2011 stated they would use mobile devices to coordinate their disruptive activities and communicate about the location and number of BART Police. A civil disturbance during commute times at busy downtown San Francisco stations could lead to platform overcrowding and unsafe conditions,” the agency said in an official statement.

Some have said that view constitutes prior restraint, and a breach of Federal Communications Commission cell service regulations, while others have suggested that BART may have been within its rights.

“Cell phone service has not always been available in BART stations. The advent of reliable service inside of stations is relatively recent,” acknowledged Eva Galperin of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a group that advocates for free speech in the realm of electronic communication. “But once BART made the service available, cutting it off in order to prevent the organization of a protest constitutes prior restrain on the free speech rights of every person in the station, whether they’re a protestor or a commuter.”

Michael Rifher, staff attorney ACLU of Northern California, was less sure BART's actions crossed the line of legality. “BART contracts for phone service likely allow for this,” he said. “But from a policy point of view our government should never shut down the free flow of information. It's dangerous to our democracy to react to protest by silencing them.”

While the legality of BART's phone service shutdown seems unclear, the reaction of free speech advocates has not been.

Galperin characterized the action of BART officials as shameful. “BART officials are showing themselves to be of a mind with the former president of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, who ordered the shutdown of cell phone service in Tahrir Square in response to peaceful, democratic protests earlier this year.”

Rifher echoed the same sentiments when asked about the ethics of BART's decision. “All over the world oppressive regimes shut down basic communications to silence dissent, and we rightly condemn them. Now we are seeing similar acts here. Do we really want a system where police can call up a cell phone provider to cut service to an area over a demonstration? I think no. Demonstrations and communication are upheld by the first amendment.”

Outraged by BART's actions, San Francisco state Senator Leland Yee called on the BART Board of Directors to take immediate action to prevent a repeat incident in the future. Yee also plans to contact the Federal Communications Commission to request an investigation on the constitutionality of the decision.

“I am shocked that BART thinks they can use authoritarian control tactics,” said Yee. “BART’s decision was not only a gross violation of free speech rights; it was irresponsible and compromised public safety.”

THE HACK
In a statement released by BART on August 14, the agency acknowledged its MyBART.org site was attacked in response to the disruption of cell service. The MyBART.org website was hacked using the logo of Anonymous and to add a link to its Twitter account. About 2,200 user identifications, emails and passwords were also stolen from the site and publicized.

"Today myBART.org account information was compromised in connection with an illegal and unauthorized intrusion into the myBART system. In response to this intrusion, we have temporarily shut down the myBART.org website, and have notified law enforcement authorities."

The attack, claimed by Anonymous, had been threatened the day before. “The data was stored and easily obtainable via basic SQLi. Any 8-year-old with an Internet connection could have done what we did to find it. On top of that none of the info, including the passwords, was encrypted,” read a statement included with the released data.

In a separate statement Anonymous claimed the attack saying, “Anonymous will attempt to show those engaging in the censorship what it feels like to be silenced.”

WHO IS ANONYMOUS?
“We are Anonymous. We are legion. We never forgive. We never forget. Expect us.” Thus read an August 12 release by the group announcing in advance the BART.org hack, and Civic Center station protest. But who is Anonymous?

Heroes to some, loathed by others, Anonymous has caused a worldwide stir in recent years as the group has become associated internationally with championing issues involving Internet censorship.

Anonymous has become an increasing presence, some would say nuisance, in cyberspace as the group's notoriety has rocketed after hacking attacks against major credit card companies and Paypal, in the wake of an extra judicial financial embargo of Wikileaks by major credit card companies.

In January, the federal authorities issued more than 40 search warrants and made more than 20 arrests in a nation wide sweep against Anonymous attacks on companies that illegally withheld donations to Wikileaks.

BART Police have come under increasing public scrutiny starting with the New Year's Eve 2009 shooting of a restrained Oscar Grant. The force has been involved in three fatal shooting in the past 18 months, as many incidents as the previous 30 years of operations. The death of Charles Hill in July was the most recent of these incidents.

Comments

It time to fight back!!!!

Posted by Guest on Aug. 15, 2011 @ 9:11 pm

If by fighting back you mean kicking a few protesters in the face, then yes. If not, then go home and punch yourself a few times.

Posted by RSai on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 8:40 am
Posted by Arthur Evans on Aug. 15, 2011 @ 9:35 pm

One should immediately dismiss anything posted on SFGate comment boards. I try to filter them out. Idiotcy in action!

Posted by Guest on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 2:33 am

Idiocy.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 6:27 pm

The trustifarians were mad that they couldn't make phone calls while they were attempting to block trains? While attempting to make transit riders miserable with their idiocy, they were upset that they couldn't use their phones? Amazing.

"One protestor stood silently with a shirt that read, “Dear BART, you can't take away our ability to call 911 while also making it a habit to shoot your riders.”"

"Some began to block trains from exiting the platforms, promoting riot police to move in and clear people away. "

Posted by meatlock on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 12:39 am

It's up to BART whether to offer that or not. It's offered free at the discretion of BART. It's not a "right" nor something that BART's customers specifically pay for (and anyway, these protestors weren't "customers").

Muni doesn't offer cell phone service in the tunnels. When CalTrain goes through a tunnel, there's no coverage either.

This is a big fuss over nothing.

Posted by Harry on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 6:05 am

"I try to filter them out. Idiotcy [sic] in action!"

- Guest

I see you also filtered out high school, too.

The bigger the blinders, the more that gets filtered out. Simplicity at the cost of awareness.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 6:07 am

so you're defending bart's decision to filter out communications by criticizing someone else's decision to filter out communications. ONLY LEGITIMATE CENSORSHIP IS FREEDOM PLEASE.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 8:20 pm

And this from the same troll who whines about censorship when others suggest that the Guardian moderate trolling a bit.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 10:05 pm
Posted by Arthur Evans on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 6:36 am

"I'm in the chocolate shop here in the ferry building...
heard loud chanting... saw 30-40 young looking people walking by..."
It was kind of scary, seeing them all go by..."

"Was there any disruption going on inside the ferry building, by the protesters?"

"No. They just pretty much walked through, and uh left."

Posted by Guest on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 9:04 am

Shawn Gaynor, your feeble and lame attempt to give credit to this "protest" is shameful and useless. These misdirected pack of ignorant fools are only enraging commuters such as myself, who already agree with them. You're an idiot if you think this is related in any way (even in the spirit) to the Arab Spring. You are a joke as much as these protesters. Why do we have to pay the price, while the big wigs at BART HQ get to walk to the parking lot get in their Lexus and drive home. I'm sorry but you're way off the fucking mark here man.

Posted by RSai on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 8:38 am

You agree with the protesters?
What action have YOU taken?

Posted by Guest on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 9:08 am

Just because I agree with them (on the phone service issue only) does not mean I agree with their futile methods of protests. Take it over to BART HQ and the board meetings.

Posted by RSai on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 9:20 am
Posted by Guest on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 9:33 am

BART should be ground to a halt until they take stock of indiscriminate killings of riders and of their adoption of Hosni Mubarak's telecom policy as a first resort against protest.

But protests should happen in a way that puts the issues, rather than the protesters first and which unites the protesters and commuters against BART and the bosses.

Here's how it could work:

Protesters must not identify themselves as protesters, that only gives intelligence to law enforcement and puts the individuals before the issue.

Disruptions to BART service must happen in the mornings when commuters are on their way to work, not during the evening when they're on their way home to their families.

The protesters should look and act as much like normal commuters as possible. One way to do this is for protesters to cycle through a car when the train is stopped at a station, entering through one door, moving through the car to the other door, exiting the car onto the platform and getting back onto the train. This will delay the system without tying any individual easily to a protest. If the cops catch on, then moving between cars and back out onto the platform and back onto a car is an option.

A slight increase in dwell times will throw the system off schedule.

With many employees late to work due to factors beyond their control, their bosses would have to side with BART management to keep them late to make up missed time and would make it much more difficult to alienate riders from protesters.

Given the choice, most protesters would want to be late to work rather than late home from work. Perhaps if the protest organizers had ever had jobs of any sort, they'd realize this, and might be able to wake up at the crack of seven to make an effective protest.

-marc

Posted by marcos on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 8:44 am

Trustifarians don't get up that early. It would be too hard to get here in time for that from Humboldt.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 9:12 am

You're a mindless idiot.

Posted by RSai on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 9:13 am

So, marc salomon, we can all see that you’re still acting according to your view that progressives are above ethics.

You say:

“BART should be ground to a halt…”

Punishing commuters because of the alleged faults of BART managers? Not only unethical, but also stupid.

You say:

“protests should happen in a way that … unites the protesters and commuters against BART and the bosses.”

Your recommendations will only further inflame commuters against the protestors.

You say:

“Disruptions to BART service must happen in the mornings when commuters are on their way to work”

Commuters will be made happy for being made anxious about being late for work?

You haven’t worked at a regular job for some time, have you?

You say:

“A slight increase in dwell times will throw the system off schedule.”

And what will this accomplish?

You say:

“With many employees late to work due to factors beyond their control … would make it much more difficult to alienate riders from protesters.”

Ha!

Posted by Arthur Evans on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 9:19 am

If Arthur Evans had a job, then he'd be able to afford to move out of his rent controlled apartment and away from the filth crisis of the druggies, drunks and junkies of the Upper Haight, not to mention ground zero of the rigid progressive sect.

But he has no job, has not had a job, blow or otherwise, in quite some time.

All revolts inconvenience people, such is the price for challenging oppression.

Posted by marcos on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 9:34 am

"All revolts inconvenience people, such is the price for challenging oppression."

- Marc Salomon

Without intelligence, inconvenience convinces no one. Without ethics, inconvenience helps no one.

Intelligence and ethics have a role to play in every aspect of life, even politics.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 9:57 am

Stalin said one death is a tragedy, one million deaths are a statistic.

It is typical that a child of the boomer age would have been gifted so much by his parents' generation yet frittered it away on a life of self indulgence and lack of sacrifice.

Any gains made are achieved by confronting power with no other option. Intelligence and ethics are critical but the system has developed ways to neutralize them. Either those seeking justice adapt or perish.

Truth be told, under the watch of the boomers, the American dream has turned into the American nightmare for so many.

Gains were achieved by their parents who were not afraid to inconvenience others at Okinawa, whose grandparents were not afraid to inconvenience others during the depression to achieve social security, and who themselves were not afraid to inconvenience others in the 1960s to achieve Medicare and to contribute towards the end of the Viet Nam invasion.

But this dutiful commitment to civility and not rocking the boat has led it to spring leaks except for those with the intelligence combined with lack of ethics that make the psychopath.

BART cops killing passengers inconveniences people.

BART shutting down cell service inconveniences people.

Neither are very ethical, nor are they very intelligent, both are uncivil.

But Arthur Evans' compensation for a wasted life is to sidle up with power and blame those trying to clean up his generations' messes for the filth crisis of the boomers' making.

Posted by marcos on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 10:30 am

How nice...

Dude, here's what's up. You're an intelliget guy. You also fashion yourself as something of a public figure. Cool.

So, with that in mind, where are you in the Gold's SOMA steamroom forhours on end every Sunday afternoon. And I'm talking like 2-3 hours. I don't even think you work out.

I mean, in addition to the creepshow factor, it's social suicide. I'm an absolute nobody, and I don't go in there. You have something of a name and a stature to protect.

What the heII are you doing?

Posted by Guest on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 4:46 pm

And isn't he married? maybe he's waiting for his husband to join him. I guess the mission is too brown for him to cruise in - or too close to home.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 5:34 pm

What the fuck does this have to do with the topic? Hello... anyone home at the Guardian? This shit needs to be deleted. Ad-hominem personal attacks, references to people's private lives -this stuff ads nothing to the discussion and in fact has a chilling effect on free speech.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 10:02 pm

"I'm in the chocolate shop here in the ferry building...
heard loud chanting... saw 30-40 young looking people walking by..."
It was kind of scary, seeing them all go by..."

"Was there any disruption going on inside the ferry building, by the protesters?"

"No. They just pretty much walked through, and uh left."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ed6PN8T-K4E

Posted by Guest on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 9:37 am

It's Guy Fawkes, not Guy Faulkes.

Posted by Guy on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 12:02 pm

Thanks, marc, for your post above. Some responses follow.

You say:

“Stalin said one death is a tragedy, one million deaths are a statistic.”

You’re quoting this line approvingly, right?

You say:

“It is typical that a child of the boomer age…”

This boomer remark - is it a reference to John Avalos perhaps?

I myself am older, having been born during WWII.

You say:

“Either those seeking justice adapt or perish.”

In other words, you’re saying our local progressive sect will perish, right? Because they certainly aren’t adapting.

You say:

“BART cops killing passengers inconveniences people. BART shutting down cell service inconveniences people.”

And demonstrators shooting themselves in the foot both inconveniences others and undermines their own goals.

You say:

“…Arthur Evans' compensation for a wasted life is to sidle up with power and blame those trying to clean up his generations' messes for the filth crisis of the boomers' making.”

As mentioned above, I’m not a boomer.

By the way, this paragraph is incoherent. Your prose is clearer when you use your gibberish generator to write it.

Bottom line:

The BART protestors are doing everything in their power to turn public opinion against themselves and their cause. And they're patting themselves on the back in the process.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 12:26 pm

"In other words, you’re saying our local progressive sect will perish, right? Because they certainly aren’t adapting."

"And demonstrators shooting themselves in the foot both inconveniences others and undermines their own goals."

Are you on drugs or what, Arthur? My writings on both of these matters are clear.

Why do you insist on twisting my language and otherwise violently disagreeing with me? Is it that you've run out of ideas? Is it that this is not at all about ideas?

Posted by marcos on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 8:06 pm

Good article! A member of Anonymous who was working on Operation BART was interviewed on Democracy Now! He sad that by making public the information of BART passengers, they were only exposing a security hole which already existed in BART's system and that even non-hackers could have gotten then passenger's information. They interviewed an ACLU attorney on the show too who talked about the cell phone shutdown incident. Here's the Anonymous interview: http://bit.ly/mWiW

Posted by jsteve on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 12:36 pm

Because you can you should, and it's ethical because you are righteous.

Posted by matlock on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 3:00 pm

Good article! A member of Anonymous who was working on Operation BART was interviewed on Democracy Now! He sad that by making public the information of BART passengers, they were only exposing a security hole which already existed in BART's system and that even non-hackers could have gotten then passenger's information. They interviewed an ACLU attorney on the show too who talked about the cell phone shutdown incident. Here's the Anonymous interview: http://bit.ly/mWiW

Posted by jsteve on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 12:36 pm

@ jsteve

This would make a great excuse for robbing banks and kidnapping children.

Just commit whatever crime you want and then explain that you only kidnapped, raped and murdered those little girls to show society how easy it is and that we should have better protections or something.

Anonymous has a lot in common with lunatics like the Brevikh gunman in Norway. Can't wait to start reading about members of anonymous doing 20-year jail sentences in places where and cellphones are not allowed.

Posted by Matt on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 2:38 pm

Anonymous has a lot in common with lunatics like the Brevikh gunman in Norway.
Posted by Matt on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 2:38 pm

"Can't wait to start reading about members of anonymous doing 20-year jail sentences in places where and cellphones are not allowed."
-Matt

Don't hold your breath. Your dream of a Big Brother who will comfort you by severely punishing those you disagree with is still a long way off.

"This would make a great excuse for robbing banks and kidnapping children."
-Matt

That's funny.
Because you are the one fabricating excuses for severe retaliation against Anonymous, with delusionary comparisons to robbing banks, kidnapping children and mass murder.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 7:08 pm

Marc Salomon, you say:

“My writings on both of these matters are clear.”

You say that politics is an extension of war, and that all’s fair in war, right?

Therefore, progressives are justified in viewing themselves as above ethical constraints, right? And you, in particular, are justified in viewing yourself as above ethical constraints, right?

You say that political groups must adapt or perish, right?

Isn’t intelligent planning part of successful adaptation?

Is it intelligent planning for the BART protestors to alienate the public, while appealing to the public for support for their cause?

* * * *

Bottom line:

You are not above ethical constraints.

The BART protestors shot themselves in the foot, again.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 9:08 pm

A real live gibberish generator is what we've got right here. Ed Lee's campaign is going down in flames and Arthur is going apoplectic as a result.

Sad, truly sad.

Posted by marcos on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 9:43 pm

"With many employees late to work due to factors beyond their control, their bosses would have to side with BART management to keep them late to make up missed time and would make it much more difficult to alienate riders from protesters."

Have you ever had a job?

Posted by meatlock on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 11:04 pm

One only has so much time on this Earth. Therefore, why does ---- anyone ---- continue to use what time they have for a being that deserves no time from anyone? I'm speaking of dogmatic, right-wing sect Arthur Evans.

Does anyone expect to change his mind on anything? You're not going to.

He's here to be smug, argue and pick apart every word anyone says, twist words around, use double-speak with anyone who aligns themselves with the "progressive sect."

The guy is sick. Therefore, why does anyone give any attention to a sick being? Or is it that some people can't bear to have this dogmatic right-wing sect drivel left unchallenged? Does it matter that it remains unchallenged? Rational and sane people see him for who and what he is. He's here for himself and the sick satisfaction he gets from this site and his methods used here. He lives for taunting people and he finds the biggest group of suckers (also into arguing) on this site. That's why he stays here.

Let's be reasonable. Let's be adult and leave the sick being alone and to himself. He's not worth anyone's time. That is quite apparent to sensible people.

Let's be sensible, let's be reasonable with a broad-based coalition of sophisticated good will and openness.

Let's be intelligent, intellectual, safe, civil, coherent, cogent, mindful and adult.

It's not progressive to respond to Arthur Evans, no matter what amount of rank, bile diarrhea he dumps on these pages.

Posted by Artor Evons on Aug. 16, 2011 @ 9:40 pm

"A real live gibberish generator is what we've got right here. Ed Lee's campaign is going down in flames and Arthur is going apoplectic as a result."

- Marc Salomon

I'm not an Ed Lee backer, although I think he will coast to victory. All he has to do is go to lots of public events and continue looking mayoral, and avoid major gaffes.

Lee's opponents, on the other hand, have the problem that if they carp a lot about him, they will look like petty bickerers and unmayoral. But if they don't carp about him, they won't get any traction over the other opponents.

This is the bind that ranked-choice voting puts challengers in when there is an incumbent in office. The challengers have to run both an initial race and a runoff at the same time. But these races have contradictory needs.

Under the older system of voting, challengers could concentrate on putting down the other challengers in the first round of voting and then go after the incumbent in the runoff. But no more.

That's why no incumbent has ever lost in SF under ranked-choice voting.

In any case, although marc loves to divert threads, let's get back on topic here:

The BART protestors have just suffered another PR debacle. They are incapable of learning from their past mistakes.

This flaw is typical of SF progressives in general. They will continue to get one Darwin Award after another until their learning skills improve.

Also their social skills.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Aug. 17, 2011 @ 4:06 am

A lot of people here whining about the inconvienience of being late, or their schedule disrupted over their BART commute being late. How inconvienienced are the family members of the dead man the BART cops murdered? How much work will they miss due to the funeral and money lost due to his permanent delay of work? Good for anyone who has actually gets off their rear end these days and takes a stand against those who committ acts of injustice against humanity. Those who go with the flow of the status quo ( no rhyme intended,) are accessories to the crime by their silence.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 18, 2011 @ 10:49 am

If these protests are indeed a response to the Hill shooting, where oh where is the update on that event?

If only we could channel all this energy into something positive instead of repeatedly trying to tear systems down.

C'mon. Who would feel safe on BART if there were no police?

Posted by sfsherpa on Aug. 18, 2011 @ 11:40 am

They'd feel safer.

Posted by Greg on Aug. 18, 2011 @ 12:51 pm
heh

Was watching the news yesterday and it showed some dude shoving a couple of you professional rioters off the BART, then dude punched one of you trustrifarians and the trustifarian looked to the cop who had just come up to do something.

Hilarious and typical.

Most of the professional entitled complainers I have ever met are the last people able to live in a post cop world.

Besides, who is going to enforce the myriad laws you pass to perfect the us peasants?

Posted by meatlock on Aug. 19, 2011 @ 11:58 am

Or at least the article.
What station carried the report?

By the way, there is another protest planned for the 22nd.
Are you planning to be there?

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2391341,00.asp

Posted by Guest on Aug. 19, 2011 @ 1:44 pm

Also from this author

  • Compromise measures

    Housing and business tax propositions don't solve the city's problems, but both sides say they're the best we can expect

  • Suspended state

    Californians lose extended unemployment benefits as recession lingers

  • Sonic attack on the poor

    Concert promoter blasts industrial noise at illegal levels to drive away homeless people