Comments by bilwil
Page 1 of 1
Posted on December 2 at 7:29 p.m.
This is an open invitation for anyone who witnessed brutal treatment of Mr. DeNunzio by Santa Barbara police - and who has been intervewed by the District Attorney's office - to appear on the Channel 17 television program "Just Between Us!"
Mr. DeNunzio's attorney has already received this invitation.
To contact us, do a Google search on "Just Between Us! Santa Barbara"; on the website, click on "Contact Us" and leave your contact information.
We believe this incident deserves further public scrutiny.
William Smithers
Posted on December 1 at 11:33 p.m.
This is an open invitation for anyone who witnessed brutal treatment of mr. Denunzio by santa barbara police - and who has been interviewed by the district attorney's office - to appear on the channel 17 television program "JUST BETWEEN US!"
Mr. DeNunzio's attorney has already received this invitation.
To contact us, do a Google search on "Just Between Us! Santa Barbara"; on the website, click on "Contact Us" and leave your contact information.
We believe this incident deserves further public scrutiny.
William Smithers
On DA Won't File Excessive Force, Resisting Arrest Charges in Denunzio DUI Case
Posted on September 30 at 12:01 p.m.
Dear Barney,
Since you've declared yourself “listening” regarding increased density housing in our city:
How do you regard those in our city government – read Frank Hotchkiss, Dale Francisco, Michael Self and Randy Rouse – who put Santa Barbara in default for one year with regard to California law mandating a five year revision of the city's General Plan, a plan which, after many concessions from all parties, stipulated only the possibility of additional workforce housing in downtown areas of the city? How do you regard these same politicians who hastily changed their minds and permitted passage of the Plan only with elections looming?
On a separate, but perhaps equally important matter, how do you regard those in city government – read Frank Hotchkiss, Dale Francisco, Michael Self and Randy Rouse – who voted that they would like to see eliminated the key provision of the state's Open Meeting Law preventing a majority of a deliberative body operating under California law from meeting in secret? And once again, beating a retreat when a justifiable citizen furor resulted?
Are these people's hearts and minds, do you think, devoted to abiding by a law though they may not favor it and on upholding the procedures of a transparent democracy?
I hope you keep on listening.
William Smithers
Posted on September 1 at 1:27 p.m.
Ah yes - Dale Francisco, the super-fiction-teller who claimed in a candidates' forum to want to broker differences that have prevented the passage of Santa Barbara's General Plan - putting the city in default of the state law requiring the Housing Element of the Plan to be revised every five years - then being exposed as the leading blocker of this Plan in subcommittee.
Ah yes - Dale Francisco, the super-patriot who lead the Flat-Earther council majority to vote for recommending the suspension of a key provision of the state's Open Meetings Law that outlaws a majority of any legislative body being able to meet in secrecy to discuss the peoples' business.
Francisco and partners - including Michael Self, one of the Representatives from Texas who seems to have originated on another planet, and who has described the homeless as "immature ...unmotivated ... terrorists" - need to be replaced on our City Council as soon as possible.
William Smithers
"Who should be afraid to stand up and put their name to their words? And why should anyone listen if they don't?"
Posted on July 22 at 8:28 p.m.
"Independent" readers who'd like to see and hear Santa Barbara Channels Executive Director Keri Stokstad can view an interview with her at:
Posted on May 20 at 12:26 p.m.
Very sorry that the City of Santa Barbara has lost Stephen MacIntosh. His "food scraps" program, which I believe launched its full-scale implementation last November, is a wonderful, innovative, environmentally-sound effort that diverts tons of organic waste from its previous destination - the landfill (where it helped produce methane gas, a more virulent contributor to global warming than carbon dioxide) - but now goes to produce useful compost.
Mr. MacIntosh's interview on Channel 17's televison program "Just Between Us!" explains this innovation with the aid of wonderfully descriptive video footage supplied by Tony Ruggieri.
That interview, and others, is still available for viewing on the web site:
William Smithers
Posted on August 11 at 2:49 p.m.
" ...I do not believe taxpayer subsidized public education should protect professors in espousing their political views, either liberal Or conservative, without offering both sides of the argument. This guy has abused what academic freedom really intends to protect..!!" writes yendopostal.
Do you actually understand what, in this situation, academic freedom is?
Any teacher can provide any opinion to his/her students as long as the students are free to disagree without fear of reprisal. In Professor Robinson's class, students are ENCOURAGED to discuss/disagree/agree with any statement he makes.
The fact that you pay taxes like the rest of us has no bearing on this.
I challenge you to quote anything from the university Faculty Code of Conduct to refute what I've just written.
And where, may I ask, is your outrage at the corrupt behavior of key UCSB personnel in their handling of the students' charges against Professor Robinson?
"The Academic Senate at the University of California at Santa Barbara approved motions to investigate evident mismanagement of student complaints against sociology professor William I. Robinson and recommend changes in Senate procedures to avoid improprieties in the future."
"'The meeting was filled to overflowing with people from many departments across campus, but the motions passed without dissent,' [Professor] Flacks said. 'It indicates a general sentiment among faculty that something wrong happened in the treatment of the Robinson case. I've been here 40 years, but I can't remember such a remarkably unified consensus. People clearly believe this case was wrongly handled.'"
" ...[Professor] Gallagher said, 'The committee also needs to investigate external pressures in this case and conflicts of interest by faculty who processed the complaints against Robinson. '"
If you took the trouble to read my original letter, you will know what were (some) of the violations of the Faculty Code of Conduct by UCSB personnel who had a responsibility to evaluate, properly and impartially, the students' complaints..
And, by the way, "yendopostal," let's see a real name signed to your posts.
William Smithers
On None
Posted on August 10 at 1:24 p.m.
Ms. Withington, it's refreshing to see someone sign his/her name to an opinion delivered here.
"nacl" and "ucsbparent" are typical anonymous posters whose irrational, sometimes racist, comments can't be assigned to the person making them.
As you accurately report, many respected international organizations have revealed the despotic violations of international law and of human rights by Israel with regard to Palestinians, violations that constitute a policy of extermination of Palestinians as a viable social/ political people.
This is why UCSB Professor William Robinson made the comparison to his students - always subject to their disagreement - of Gaza and World War II's Warsaw.
"ucsbparent" tells us Professor Robinson should accomodate his opinions to those of "parent" because "parent" is one of thousands who pay tuition at UCSB. On the other hand, "parent" tells us that Professor Robinson's campus support against the ADL-orchestrated charges only came from "Arabs" and Arab-funded professors.
This nasty bigotry, unfortunately, has become one of the current methods of the Anti-Defamation League and its supporters. The ADL, once a vigorous defender of persecuted persons, is now devoted to scurrilous smear-mongering and attempts to silence influential persons who criticize the policies of Israel.
It's time for more and more people to stand up against the Anti-Defamation League and its current methods.
William Smithers
On None
Page 1 of 1
Previous Month
Posted on March 25 at 4:27 p.m.
Mr. Clausen,
The 1/2 cent increase in Santa Barbara sales tax that Mayor Schneider would like to have local citizens decide in November would not be used for "wars" or "lucrative pensions."
In fact her proposals include a ballot measure requiring - should the sales tax increase be approved - city employees to pay their share of their pension expenses.
I'm not sure whether you mean our public school system is "rife with politics" within itself or among those discussing it.
In any case, should the Mayor's proposals be accepted as part of November's ballot measures, and should the sales tax increase be approved, a part of that measure gives our voters the opportunity to decide whether the city council could devote half of the increase to our Unified School District. Surely any financial help to our local education system will have no effect on differing opinions as to how it should be used.
Finally: I consider myself progressive but not a Democrat or Republican. I admit that in 2008, for the first time in many years, I voted for a major party candidate - Obama. Regretfully, he has proved in many instances, including support of the National Defense Authorization Act, to be the most despicable right-wing Republican ever elected a Democrat..
William Smithers
On Brava, Mayor!