By a 3-2 vote, City postones JTTF proposal for 3 weeks

... even considering the endless (but mostly great) testimony and stifling accrual of body heat in the chambers. Mayor Potter, Randy Leonard and Sam Adams were amazing. Even after hours of testimony, they were listening, though looked a little less fresh, as did we all. Saltzman even asked some good questions and managed to at least stand up strongly for his media-whore position. Eric Sten should just have a madlib tablet, enabling him to make an impassioned case for voting one way, then voting the other... and always the path of least resistance. Maybe then he could get a second job doing something useful.

Thank you citizens, Tom Potter, Sam Adams (who voted Yes on the original proposed resolution even though it hasn't gone to vote yet ... very proactive :) and Randy Leonard, who provided an excellent answer to a citizen asking the City to define terrorism. Leonard's response is important, and I'll try to summarize it:
'
I can't say that I can, at this moment, define terrorism, but I know what it's not. It's not worshipping at your church, synagogue or mosque of choice. It's not demonstrating against government policies you believe are wrong. It's not getting on a soapbox and voicing the light or darkness of your heart.
'
We left with some frustration, but it was the frustration of honest democracy, where you don't necessarily get everything you want when you want it all the time, but you're listened too, listened to in earnest by <some> people hell-bent on representing you and your neighbor as best and fairly as they can.

Good job.

Yeah, "the definition of terrorism" got thrown around a bunch tonight and I thought Leonard's response was excellent. He didn't try to bullshit his way through it. He just stated he didn't have a definition. This is good because every definition of terrorism that I've heard, when placed under the slighest bit of scrutiny quickly collapses into including people we generally thing of as "good" such as those involved with the abolition movement, the underground railroad, the labor movement, the women's suffrage movement, the civil rights movement, etc as well as often times including acts carried our by the US government which is often not the intention of those who wish to define terrorism. I think Alan Graf may have been the one who brought up that Rosa Parks was a terrorist using the Patriot Act defintion.

And I too commend Adams pro-active vote for the resolution.

here is the government panel at the hearing yesterday. Jordan (local FBI sac, toting his usual gun concealed), Foxworth (police, packing openly) with some deputy of his (packing too), and Immergut, local US attorney not visibly packing anything. Neither of them was very impressive. Jordan came across as somebody still unbelieving he was being forced to talk to some local peon politicians as if they were his equal or something. Was exuding barely restrained arrogance. Which was not very surprising given his reputation from his old Washington DC days - see  http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2003_cr/gr022403.html. Was unable (apparently intellectually) to coherently and honestly answer any of questions presented to him. In fact said little of any substance. Foxworth delivered his piece very well, but the sense was this was written for him and that all this was seriously above his head. (still imho the city is lucky to have this fine, decent gentleman serving as a police chief). Immergut was extremely eager to come across as a reasonable partner willing to see and to accommodate city points, apparently in an attempt to undo the stench that surrounds her involvement in Mayfield case. They apparently bought into it. Will see in three weeks.

What was astonishing about that the State Attorney ( and the Portland better business bureau) asking for more time <as well as a few others that didn't want the resolution to pass> was they were grasping for straws, and it was very obvious to me. Like watching a drowning person in a movie. By asking for more time was like someone loosing at gambling and saying "just a little more" just aaaaaa lllittle morrre... ..... more ? more time for what ???
Hell I researched and came prepared and didn't even speak. The State Attorney and the <boreing> FBI guys were what seemed as almost ""unprepared for this"". They didn't have answers to questions such as were other cities in the US allowing their mayor or police chiefs Top Security? Cities like Wash DC or NY ... .the 3 sat there dumbfounded ... stuttering ... announcing gee I don't know ? It almost was surreal. They were the top dogs the "Big Guys" they looked like a 3 teenagers trying (and not doing well) to get away with some kind of ill thought teenage deception. They were not organized and not even convincing and had no logic (outside of "Cant we put this off and talk in private with ya all?") The Lady state attorney almost seemed desperate or a slightly frantic it seemed not overtly obvious, but she seemed intent on the "mooooooore time" request, which seemed that was her main point of the evening When Mr. Jordon <FBI> was asked by Mr. Leonard about what he meant about his quote in the tribune months ago, when he (Mr. Jordon) was explaining the need for this JTTF and the scenario of 'what if' there was some foreign terrorist who sneak in on ship and jump off in the Willamette we would want to be ready and prepared to use our JTTF to go after these guys" As Mr. Leonard pointed out this very example would be against our city law of having police get involved with immigration and that it was not a even legal for us to help the FBI like that and could Mr. Jordon explain what he meant by that? After a couple wrong answers missing the point he comes around to saying that was just a hypothetical situation whereupon he just shook his head and sort of went duuuuhhh and shrugged it off. <I say to my self> Is that your answer you put on for what was 'This Big Selling Point on the front page of the Tribune on WHY we need this JTTF and in true fact your "scare or ruse" is illegal for our police force to be doing AND... ... That is exactly our reason why to need this oversight resolution! And you are speechless !!! wow !amazing !
Sam Adams brought some good references < by section #> of Patriot Act provisions that he was concerned about on civil rights in relation to this issue. All Salzmann seemed to really mention at least twice but his whole case rested on was the media going to ballistic on the council's decision and did we all really want that. I think he may have been picturing the next day at work and some or a lot of the Lars Larson type of flack he may get and he wasn't ready for that in the morning... he pushed for moroooooore time?
The lady and two boreing F guys sure were not very convincing. Foxworth did give his testimony and although he seemed to of done at least a little homework he wasn't very convincing. Kinda seemed like he was supporting that good old law enforcement of sticking together with the justice enforcers' type of thing . The crowd waved its hands in the air <strictly enforced by the mayor> when we really wanted to clap. <no clapping> .., but lots of people waving in fact I would say 80%.were waving about 30 % of the time.
Very odd that compared with all the public input by citizens that was so Well Researched with in depth knowledge of the FBI tactics, politics, and sensibly researched ideas on our safety AND our freedom was expressed and that within 3 min time limits and compared to the "other side" they were like duhhhhhhh ummmm because "that's the way we do it" A portion of the "way they do it" is to give "TOP secret " clearance to all that go IN to the FBI office building. They tried <heh> to say that is really the only real reason the 2 officers working with them really needed the TOP Secret security clearance. So they could go to offices and use computers in the FBI building. Then they say so that the mayor, since he needs to supervise his staff could still see all that they were doing with just his "secret" security clearance and the TOP really wouldn't be needed <trust us thing> <heh> And they said that there really never is TOP secret stuff that the JTTF would be doing all that much anyway, so don't worry you would have all the clearance you need because this TOP stuff never is really used but to get in the building and besides we would, ya know, keep you informed as the mayor of course <at your lower level>
What is a shame is they lost their case in content and preparedness so to speak. They didn't present a very good reason or knowledge I think they just came with all their clout and represented "THE COMPANY" ... "THE MAN... ... .."THE F B I" !!!!
The council was ready, the citizens were ready, the notes and study time was over and even with them not even being 20 % convincing and having no answers to a few questions it amazes me the council couldn't agree!! The mere fact that they didn't have answers <incompetently or for what ever stupid reason> became their ace in the hole. Which thus allowed them to buy 3 mooooooore weeks time.
I feel confidant in the <majority> of the council that they can't be swayed or coerced or will be relenting their opinion or stance.
It was very close! But with Mr. Stein saying lets give them the chance as Mr. Potter suggested, to answer some of questions and then we will see. Mr. Potter suggested <thank god> to invite the Local ACLU to join in the next talks with the FBI and State Attorney. Latter after the discussions the Council and ACLU could inform the citizens of their discussions, then the revote.
The ACLU was there with a pile of documents that through the FOIA were released showing all kinds of spying and secret info collected about their group. They cited a couple good cases of police spying and informed on the trouble with this type of affiliation by the city and the FBI.
Hmmmm this was juicy with the Democratic process and maybe in 3 weeks these FBI guys will be even more duhhhhhhh like and maybe by then more botched cheating FBI bumbling will be released to the press, such as the Mayfield case which was referred to numerous times to night in light of the latest info jut released
Randy was passionate and very informed and 'CONVINCING' Sam I got to admit was on top of his game with Patriot Act concerns. Tom was quite, held his head straight up and was at a fully attentive and listening and polite. Dan seemed like the pressure might be too unbearable for him to want to shoulder if he didn't have to. Eric was quit attentive and backed up his Superior but I thing he is an inch away from wanting to go ahead with the Resolution passage.. Seemed like he gave some respect to his boss and said lets wait 3 moooooore weeks.
Much great testimony. Books were left for council men by one person, as well as the numerous books recommended to the council to read up on ... heck 3 weeks of reading and they may not want any FBI in this town at all !!
One of the books was "Gag Rule" by L. Lepham < which is excellent and Iv been reading it as of just lately>
And the other was "No place to Hide" by R. O'Harrow < got this book on my list to buy next>
The room was full but not packed. It was a Long night ... ... .
Since we got 3 weeks ....Lets gets some rest and come out swinging!

make sure they know what you think, today

and when they announce a deal
make them announce what the deal says, too

I want Immergut's repeated slipups (which I won't do justice to by paraphrasing) about how Potter should get the access "we think you need to have"... "I mean the access you deserve to have"... She did that 2 or 3 times and a lot of people were snickering over the freudian slip.

let them know you are with them.

Give Immergut a buzz. Ask her what kind of compromise she has in mind and who gets traded for what.

That was perfect! That was great how she slipped up ...if you can hear her comments on tape on that it would be great, she did it a few times in a row saying what "WE decide for you"
- haha ..man that was wild and oh so true

as for a moment or two, it seemed like he was morphing into Chief Kroeker!

bureaucratic-faction that were seated before the council were typical bureaucrats!
Werent't adequately prepared, bungled by their own inept unpreparedness, and out of it at altogether at times with some of the most specious "planing" I've ever heard! Let me
tell you...from out here...it was sure a hoot and a half!
Way to go Mayor and Councilmen...you had 'em on the run--scrambling here 'n' there--and
that's where we want 'em...that way they're earning their salaries and perks, not seated
reading paperbacks or polishing their nails, or whatever...

He straight-up couldn't or wouldn't answer questions about whether it was possible for Portland Police to work with less than top secret clearance (which the FBI doesn't want to give the mayor and city attorney, because they are afraid of REAL elected officials knowing what is really going on in the Federal government), and when he started to answer the question in a round-about "well, this is how we do things", he ended up stuttering and never finished, never addressing the real question. Probably as he was trying to figure out a glossy way to subvert the real question, he forgot what it actually was...

Check out the city of Porland's web page or just go to this link:  http://www.portlandonline.com/index.cfm?c=28259 Click on the link that says "Portland City Council 3-30-05 6:00PM" to view the video. You will need realplayer to view and it's streaming (so you can't download it).

I don't know if it will be working by then though. All I seem to get is a black screen with a timer counting the seconds. The whole thing seems to be at the moment just one big 4 hour 18 minute and 54 second block of black. What's going on?

but this time i did! i must say. the bureaucrat's were funny as they bungled! ha! ha!

I was there last night, I don't even know why. This was such an important issue, but I should have expected the council to let me down, they always do. Not Randy Leonard or Sam Adams, they shined. And I can't really say Tom Potter let me down either, as he is really sticking his neck out in this, and if Sten had just voted against the delay, then this would all have gone well.

But I'm very angry with Saltzman for siding against all of us who spoke or attended, and I'm very angry with Erik Sten for dropping the ball. Why does he keep DOING this?

The thing that's so confusing is, this could still really be cool. Like Adams said, this could be all right. If Potter refuses to compromise, and the proposal passes, then good. But if that proposal is not passed, then this was all a useless exercise. It's VERY, very important that it pass, no matter what the FBI comes up with in the next few days. We need to make this strong statement that, as a city, we will no longer tolerate this kind of secret intimidation and harassment. It was the LEAST they could do last night.

Like I said, I don't even know what to think about this. Only that I think we might not be that far from "business as usual" in Portland after all. We'll know for sure one way or another some time next month.

I was very hopeful that we finally had a chance to speak at a City Council hearing where citizen comments would count for something. The atmosphere was more civil and hopeful than under previous City Councils, but the results were the same. The "important people" got to speak first and leave - that would be the Feds and the Portland police. The rest of us sat for four hours to have our 3 minutes to speak, and then watched Eric lead the council to vote for the Feds position. It's true, Tom Potter led the move to appease the Feds, but he was ready to let it drop when there wasn't a second to the motion to delay it. Eric provided the useful suggestion that Tom could pass the gavel and then second it himself, which he did. As the final one to vote, Eric first gave a lengthy speech (keep in mind it was past 10:00 and the rest of us only got 3 minutes and no vote) giving all of the reasons to vote against the delay, and then he voted with it. But then, I've never seen Eric oppose THE MAYOR on any difficult (make that left-leaning)issue. In retrospect, perhaps we were all fools to begin with. Most of us were so amazed that the council was doing anything to challenge the FBI, that we went overboard to praise their courage and leadership. so much for that wishful thinking. We should keep in mind that all they propose to do is give civilian officials acces to information- they still intend to cooperate fully with the FBI and don't even question the ethics of deputising Portland Police Officers as FBI agents. I left heartbroken. I supported Tom Potter in the election because I really believed that he would listen equally to just plain people. He appeared to listen, and he was respectful, but the voice that mattered in the end was the voice of police and financial power. I really don't know if we should ever bother testifying before the City Council again. Perhaps we should just accept that leftests and poor people are always on the outside and we should stay outside where we belong- with appropriate protests. As Howard Zinn says, at least we should leave a record that we resisted. But that record my best be left in the streets instead of as sitting ducks in the council chamber. (I am, of course, only suggesting lawful protest - but that distinction seems to be lost on the JTTF).

I find it interesting that Randy Leonard, the coolest voice on the council and, with adams, one of only two who did not desert us in the end, is also the one who reads indymedia. Is there a connection? I think so.

Way to go Randy. Way to go Adams. We're with you. And Tom didn't do too awfully bad either, provided he makes no compromises between now and the vote. Sten? Grow up or we will turn our backs on you for good. One can only stomach so much damn-liberaling before just choking on it. Saltzman? The people of this city put Francesconi in his place, and we can put you in yours. The countdown has begun, buddy.

The poster "Duuuhhh" referred to the Portland business beareau as being there in support of the FBI's unlawful conduct in our community. I wonder if you didn't perhaps mean the Portland Business Alliance? The same organization that spearheaded the terrorist "sit lie ordinance" that criminalized basic dissent, and poverty in our town? If you ask me, the question here comes down to who decides what "criminal" behavior is? According to the PBA sitting on a curb is criminal, sleeping under a bridge because you have no place to live is criminal. According to the "Portland Business Alliance" standing on a corner begging for change because you can't eat or receive treatment for your disability when our leaders care more about funding world conquest and privatizing social security, than community services makes you a "CRIMINAL." I know who the real terrorists are, and it sure as hell ain't the poor and disgruntled. I feel that this business "alliance" should do what's right, and strike "Portland" from their name because they do a disservice to our city and its name. The same goes for the task force: Terrorist Task Force, for real.

The media that Saltzman is scared of is this 1450 fascist radio am. Bro, you need to break your fear down. This "media" plays on real liberal shortcomings, throws in a heaping load of LIES, I said LIES, and goes on to promote a fascist agenda. We can not let them speak louder than the rest of us. This "media" is a vehicle of corporate propaganda, and fascist rule, the extent to which they "care" about issues relevant to us is the extent to which we let them push their crack in our community. When we speak against what the fascist Mussolini described as "corporate government" they will and have done everything in their power to shut us down, this is the EXACT degree to which this "media" cares- and don't you forget it. I know and respect many local responsible businesses, but there's a world world of difference between a moral person committed to providing a service to our community, and the fascist world view that owners should govern all and the rest of us are little better than criminals. This philosophy is a disease from a Dark Age when kids worked 70-hour weeks and people were lynched.
This extremist media is a bully in our community that needs to have its ass kicked. They spearheaded the effort to ban gay marriage, they chastise our efforts to establish real community control of our police, they call our immigrant brothers and sisters terrorist, and try to criminalize our very right to speak out against injustice in our community.
To anyone that fears this 1450facist onslaught- I say do not flee but fight, and fight as only the true can, because as we can rid ourselves of this TERRORIST TASK FORCE and restore our civil liberties weather George Bush and the FBI likes it or not!
Sure, it is rational to have some degree of fear because the threats that our community faces are REAL, as real as the OCA, PBA, and the TERRORISTS TASK FORCE. Last I checked the OCA is gone. As far as I'm concerned, one down two to go. Really though, is it rational to succumb to fear when our community has so much to gain, and hold on to by standing our ground and holding true to what we know is moral? We got a mayor that rides the mass don't we? We got bicycle paths and CO-OPS all over the place don't we? We got vegan restaurants (plural,) and some of the best organic growers anywhere. What we have, is a community and liberties -worth fighting for. We can preserve justice and liberty in our little neck of the woods, if we stand for what we believe in.
We should not allow ourselves to be dragged into the darkest recesses of history where those who have profited from our work were allowed to hurt us, and govern in spite of our democratic will.
What is at stake here is not some small matter of cops pushing protestors but the very right to have democratic control of our community. The FBI is operating in violation of our law. The FBI is doing so without regard to our communities will. This violation of our community is being supported by the same old culprits that work to criminalize the poor, and dissent in our community. If the FBI doesn't have to respect our democratic will, then WHY should anybody else? If LOGGING companies can break the law and steal huge profits from our states forests- why can't anti-logging protestors break the law and inflict economic damage or consequences on these companies? If the CIA can sell crack in black communities and murder "black messiahs"/civil rights activists then why is it wrong for these activists to arm themselves in defense of their community? It isn't and any moral, decent person knows it.
If you examine the FBI's definition of terrorists you find that everyone that ever did a damn thing for justice in this country is a terrorist, you'll find that under this light the FBI, the CIA and the most of the government is a terrorist organization. Not here, and not in this day.

In conclusion, I want to praise everyone that is working to run this TTF of our town from INDYMEDIA to KBOO, from Randy Leonard and www.blueoregon.com, From the Unionists to the Muslim community, from the ACLU and Dan Handleman, to the anti-imperialists and the subvertistas. Every voice big and small thank you. WE CAN WIN!

Michael B ~ you are correct about me meaning to say 'Portland Business Alliance'
yep they asked for more time and that was pretty much all they could say
None of these groups against the Resolution have solid logic or good reasoning for their agenda.
Thanks for the correction and attention to detail and your post reaffirming all of us to the right to have oversight to what our police force is involved in or what they are doing. And a reminder of the FBI intent to label anyone with an opinion as Terrorists