It's corrected, Chris. Thanks.

Pelican Bay is not California's only SHU. He was in other SHUs before Pelican Bay opened, and in January 2014, he was moved to the SHU in New Folsom Prison. He'd been released from the SHU to the mainline for only a day or a few days; we don't yet know the exact date of his release.

The Bay View thanks the haters, especially those employed by CDC, for proving our point.

From Don DeBar:

I have never identified myself as a member of J&U. And I record all of my presentations on videotape. I don't believe that there is much more to say on this. I will make the video available if this becomes necessary.

Now should I hang you with your statement "If you start off with this dissembling, then it's pretty hard to take anything else you say with anything other than a huge grain of salt"? Or should I continue presenting the relevant facts?

The viability of a suspended corporation is not restored upon filing - it is restored upon filing, processing and acceptance. Had anyone on the board, or anyone advising the board, done due dilligence, they would have used a corporate service like XL Corporate Services (one of the firms who do this work that is known around the country to law firms specializing in corporate law) and effected the restoration of the corporation within a few days of submission, thereby protecting the name that was exposed by the negilgence of your board. After all, you have been sitting on that board for almost FOUR YEARS, as you relate above. Was the corporation susended for that entire time? Or did it happen during your tenure? I have yet to get an answer from anyone on the board. Why?

The question is an essential one: either no one took notice of the suspension in the years since you took over the corporation, or the suspension took place during your tenure (and, it should be noted, corporations are only suspended upon notice) - in either case, an act of gross negligence which, until someone 'blabbed,' the board hid from the membership (and, BTW, was this effective and concealed during the election cycle?) AND also hid from donors during the intervening fund drives.

I am not in the least bit culpable for your negligence, nor am I in the least bit responsible for what happened during your tenure or during the tenure of any prior board. Again, I am not a member of J&U. I have on occasion supported their candidates, primarily in opposition to your bloc and the purging of its political opponents across the network.

As for the canard that, but for Hurricane Sandy, you would have raised $1+ Million instead of the $530,000, all one need do is look at the record of fund raising prior and since, which has been in decline a heluva lot longer than that. Not all of this is due to your mismanagement, although much of it is. I don't know about California, but here in New York, people are only so concerned about their colons, and prefer to support organizations that serve their community needs AS PERCEIVED, DEFINED AND ARTICULATED BY THEMSELVES.
Endless fund drives - RECORD LENGTH fund drives - that push quackery and other themes not related to the needs of New York communities do not draw the support of those communities, formerly the backbone of WBAI's fundraising. The links between WBAI and local communities have been seriously damaged by your bloc in its tenure over the past four years, and, if one is to follow the rhetoric that accompanied the election of your bloc to the boards, this was a deliberate choice, done in the belief that programming to poor people was untenable and instead more emphasis had to be given to more affluent audiences, who would, in turn, support the station. Aside from its obviously racist basis (given the facts of income and wealth distribution in NY and, of course, elsewhere in the US), this 'strategy' was clearly delusional. The reprogramming of the station by a series of people with NO ties to New York's communities - amd, thus, ignorant of their wants and needs - was destined to fail. You are now reaping the results, as are we all.

Posted by sfbayview for Don DeBar

From Don DeBar:

First of all, I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of Justice & Unity, although i have supported their effort to restore local control of WBAI to the listeners and activist community in NY.

Secondly, I am not now, nor have I ever been, a devotee of anything. Ad hominem doesn't substitute for substantive argument, but when that's all you have, it's what you use.

More to the point, everything attributed to me in the above article was factually correct at the time (this past Wednesday/Thursday). The only thing that has changed is that Pacifica Foundation Radio (the new name, necessitated not by "a con operation' but gross mismanagement) was finally restored as of Friday, March 22, 2013. The corporation was NOT restored in January - had this been true, Pacifica Foundation Inc. would not have been able to use the name when it was formed on February 26, 2013.

Also true is the fact that, under IRS regs, the suspension or dissolution of a corporation with IRC Section 501 (c) (3) status automatically, by operation of law, results in the suspension of that status, requiring a separate filing with IRS requesting restoration of its tax exempt status. This application must include a.) evidence of the revival of the corporation and b.) a statement of the term of the suspension, both of which must come from the state authorities where the corporation is domiciled.

There is a pending eviction proceeding against Pacifica for the Empire State Building transmitter - this is a matter of record. This happened entirely during the control of Pacifica of the current majority management.

And the idea that someone 'blabbed' - that is, exposed the mismanagement of the Foundation by this group to the extent that Pacifica lost its charter for the first time since 1946 (!!!) and jeopardized the tax exempt status of the Foundation, risking huge liability to donors for taxes, penalties and interest - tells more about the secrecy that this group practices than anything else.

Posted by sfbayview for Don DeBar, who, for some unknown technical reason, has not been able to post this comment all day.

That's bothered me too. I wonder if the whole thing was a CDCR setup.

Mary Ratcliff, editor
SF Bay View

He is a great philosopher and a brilliant writer. He has put the importance of solidarity in terms that no one who reads this will be able to forget.

Mary Ratcliff
SF Bay View

Thanks, Dania. I'll remove it. I didn't even notice the flag.

Mary Ratcliff, editor
SF Bay View

Lily, the lawyers at the Pubic Defender's Office examined and exposed these videos and used them to set a lot of folks free. Is your husband incarcerated in San Francisco? Does he have a public defender? If so, or even if not, show this story to his lawyers and ask them if they can do the same thing. Good luck!

Mary Ratcliff, editor
SF Bay View

State laws vary. This map makes the variations real clear: http://www.aclu.org/map-state-felony-disfranchise.... In California, you can't vote if you're in prison or on parole. But no one tells you when you're eligible again, so many former prisoners never vote after their release. In a number of states, once you're convicted of a felony, your voting rights are gone for life no matter what. You're absolutely right that these laws are not well known. We need to get the word out - and we need to change the laws so everyone can vote, at least after they're released.

Mary Ratcliff, editor
SF Bay View