jann 10

Boulder radical leftists back Hamas terrorism by Jann Scott Editorial


Boulder Parade of LightsI just can’t stand by while RNPJ and the Daily Camera back Hamas and Palestine. It is  hatred of America. This is treasonous Jann Scott Live 5editorial behavior.

The Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center views the United States as an imperialist nation who are out to suppress Muslims, the homeless in Boulder and the rest of the world. In accordance radical leftists in Boulder often back terrorists like Hamas or Alcaida. Osama bin Ladin loved the American left because they had so much in common. RNPJ rhetoric is the same as radical Islam.

Messages to the world by Osma bin Ladin review by Simon Kovar of the Liberal
“It is true that bin Laden’s statements define his jihad as reactive: that is, as a legitimate response to Western aggression against Muslims, and one that will cease once its causes have been removed. But let us be clear about what he perceives those causes to be. They include the “Crusader-Jewish” presence in all the lands of Islam. By this he is not referring solely to the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Afghanistan, or to Israel’s incursions beyond its 1967 borders. He is referring to the entirety of Israel-Palestine, and (a tricky one for the EU) to Moorish Spain. Bin Laden goes further: “In our religion, it is not permissible for any non-Muslim to stay in our country” (emphasis added). Lawrence et al. might view giving bin Laden what he wants as a “rational” response to the threat of terrorism, but moral honesty requires that we call this solution what it is: ethnic cleansing as a mode of appeasement.

History, of course, teaches us that such fantasies can never be satisfied. And here we come to a second problem with Lawrence’s analysis, one he himself alludes to in his introduction but does not resolve. While “rationality” might tell us that bin Laden’s foe is “American imperialism”, bin Laden himself has an intriguing habit of telling us that his real concern is actually something else: what he calls “global unbelief”. The unbelievers are the Jews, the Christians, and more generally, the liberal, “permissive” societies of the West, epitomized by the US, although bin Laden is explicit in identifying the Jews as the root evil. There can be no permanent peace with the Jews, he states, and scripture demands their annihilation before the Day of Judgement may arrive. American society – its economy, media and politics – is subordinated to the Jews. More generally: “Every Muslim, from the moment they realize the distinction in their hearts, hates Americans, hates Jews, and hates Christians”.

I know there are a lot of you vulnerable new lefties in Boulder, but if you think for your self and not follow the new business startup new atheist crowd down this path, you won’t regret it later. Israel is exactly who they say they are. A modern peace loving country who are trying to live their lives in their little corner of the world. Of course the united states would back them. The Arab nations and Palestine Hamas are unfortunately mostly backward third world countries steeped in hatred, antisemitism and tribal fighting. It is Hamas who are monsters. Before them it was the Palestinian Liberation Army. Remember these are the people who murdered the entire Isreali 1972 Olympic team in Munich.

I covered for International Times in London. I covered the PLO, Yassir Arafat and watched Muslim Jihadists try to Kill Jews and Americans over the past 40 years. Right . I don’t get it. Why are radical Islamist trying to kill all Jews and Christians.

We are not trying to kill them. Hamas tries to penetrate Israels Iron dome. They attack Israel. Then Israel retaliates in a thunderous response. Wouldn’t you?

America ?? Do not mistake Barrack Obama or Hillary Clinton ( when she gets there) Any attacks or attempted attack on American soil by radical Muslims will be met with a terrifying response from the USA. Look what happened after 911. Look what is happening now. Look at our NSA, FBI and CIA. Look at all of our special forces. Look at our financing of intelligence gathering world wide. It is 10 x what it was pre 911.

I would also not rule out our use of nuclear weapons in the Middle East. Really? yes. If one of the radical Arab nations gets their hands on a nuke and uses it against Israel or us you can expect nuclear retaliation from Israel and the United States backed by Russia china, India and Pakistan.

I would not rule out a widening Middle Eastern war and African war where the nuclear powers would invade, conquer and occupy all of the Arab nations for good. if one nuclear weapon goes off there, watch and see. Islam will become a religion of the past; or at least the uncivilized kind will be outlawed.

Jann Scott

Jann Scott is the voice of reason, culture and careful thought in

Boulder Colorado

Jann Scott

Mark Beckner: Outstanding


mark beckner 2

Mark Beckner

Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner retires today. He held the job longer than anyone. He worked for BPD for over a 1/4 century. He is educated, smart , thoughtful and epitomizes a modern day chief of Police. We were lucky to have him.


As a TV talk show host and personality Mark Beckners’ police department always treated me fairly even when the majority of the Boulder city council and mayor wanted my head. Beckner would not budge and protected my right to free speech both on TV and in this column.  On multiple occasions he backed a free press here in Boulder. Boulder has been a place where my brand of talk was able to flourish because of the Boulder Police department and in spite of prevailing “nanny nation politics” of the 2000 -2007 Boulder council.  Boulder police also worked with me and us here at Boulder channel 1 to ensure the safety of our staff from crazed fans of a multitude of colors. Boulder should appreciate just what a great chief Mark Beckner was.  I did not always agreed with him and voiced my disapproval at times  and he was nothing but professional and courteous to me when I did not deserve it.


The Ramsey case had blown up in 1999. Commander John Eller had been removed as the lead investigator .. The DA Alex Hunter  and Eller were fighting. ” Can you imagine having someone like Eller leading this murder investigation”  Hunter once told me.  The DA’s office had blown up too. Hunter had just fired Trip Demuth for publicly going with the intruder theory. “Intruder my ass” Hunter said. ” What’s going to happen when Burke Ramsey comes of age and want to tell the  story?”

Then Police Chief Tom Koby assigned Commander Mark Beckner to head up the investigation. And that he did. Quietly and diligently Beckner and his detectives went through the entire case and came up with one conclusion.

That Patsy Ramsey had murdered 6 year old  JonBenet Ramsey Christmas night when Patsy  was high and drunk. Patsy grabbed Jonbenet and smashed her head into the bathtub after Jonbenet had wet herself.  The rest of the night was spent covering up the crime with her husband John by concocting an elaborate horrific crime scene. Then Police chief Tom Koby told me: “What appears to have happened is generally what has happened in cases like this and only the facts prove that out”.

Mark Beckner became a hero when he followed the facts,  the case evidence and put a bullet proof murder case together for the Grand Jury.  Alex Hunter refused to indite John and Patsy because he ” wanted Burke Ramseys’ testimony”.

Well, now Mark Beckner is retiring and Alex Hunter is dying from Cancer in Hawaii.  I fully expect that current DA Stan Garnett will drop a bomb shell on the Ramsey case by arresting John Ramsey for the murder  and indict Burke Ramsey for covering up little JonBenets murder. ( lets just hope he does not mysteriously die before then)

Garnett is clearing all of the murder cases his office has and JonBenet Ramsey is next.

We have not seen the last of Mark Beckner, either. He may say he wants to teach or umpire baseball.  But he will be back to finish that case I assure you. Look for him to be a paid consultant during the trial. Look too for the trial of the century to take place here in Boulder and look for a conviction.  I will also predict that after that Stan Garnett will become out next attorney general and Mark Beckner will be heralded as the detective who solved the Ramsey case.



idyllic Boulder Colorado

Jann Scott


Thousands of Boulder Social Security seniors are discriminated by rich


It is Wednesday February 26th and 1000′s of Boulder Senior citizens receive their Social security checks today. The first place they head to is Walmart for their monthly groceries. The parking lot is full this night. Walmart is packed with seniors over 62 shopping for their monthly staples. Why Walmart ? Don’t these seniors know that it is not politically correct to shop there? Why aren’t they shopping at “Whole Social security check” with the rich who protest them at Walmart?

The rich in Boulder secretly despise the poor. They hate the old. They hate the disabled. They don’t want them to survive nor eat. The old and the poor just don’t fit into Boulder. When you see the Walmart protesters they are always white privileged educated and rich.

Walmart serves a need in Boulder. It sells groceries at 1/3 of Whole foods prices. Walmart serves the poor.

one percent

We are under attack, and not just by Jihadists


Capitalism’s Crisis of Value and Imagination
Saturday, 08 February 2014 09:33
By Max Haiven, Zed Books/Truthout | Book Excerpt

You, dear reader, are on the front lines of a war. It is a war between money and the earth, between capital and people, between the blunt stupidity of greed and the resilient creativity of humanity. Perhaps they have destroyed or will destroy the ecosystem in which you live in the name of profit. Perhaps your body or your soul is wrecked or in the process of breaking down because you must work a meaningless, oppressive job to make enough money to survive – or perhaps you like your job but feel the ever-present shadow of the axe in this age of budget cuts and rationalization.


Perhaps you are devalued by the colour of your skin, the country of your origin, or your perceived gender or sexuality and feel that devaluation in the form of prejudice, exploitation, intimidation or xenophobia. Usually you will feel it economically too. Perhaps you are among or will be among those statistics that indicate that the largest single cause of the breakdown of marriages and relationships is financial hardship.

Perhaps you can no longer recognize yourself after years of seeking success or enduring failure. Perhaps you feel guilty for the ways your economic privilege is fed by the exploitation of others, the way your (relatively) cheap iPod or clothing depends on the incarceration of young people in factories on the other side of the earth. In any case, unless you are extremely fortunate, or extremely avaricious, what and who you love and value has been or will be undermined by capitalism at some point and in some way.

Of Value and Values
According to free-market ideologues, capitalism is the ultimate system for assigning value to the world’s wealth. By bringing people’s wants, needs and desires together into an open market, capitalism will accurately and efficiently price things as diverse as the cost of an hour of a shoemaker’s time, a loaf of bread, the value of a river, or the price of a song on iTunes. These utopian dreamers, whose thinking has become associated with the term ‘neoliberalism’, believe that by mobilizing people’s competitiveness and inherently acquisitive human nature, capitalism is, ultimately, value-neutral – markets are simply egalitarian arenas of exchange.

The truth, of course, is quite different. The value of the market itself has become the overarching and unquestionable arbiter of almost every aspect of human existence today. All social, moral, ethical, and personal values are subordinate to the value of money. The result is a system where, in almost every case, the perceived needs of the market trump any other considerations.

Consider, for instance, the dramatic failure of some of the largest assemblies of world leaders in human history to take meaningful action in the face of global warming and the catastrophic climate change it will unleash. In spite of an unprecedented near-consensus of global scientists, and in spite of the evidence that the continuation of present levels of carbon emissions would lead to the destruction of the lives and livelihoods of millions (perhaps billions) of (mostly poor, brown) people, it was ultimately decided that the perceived needs of capitalist markets were more important, and that no action that in any way impeded or jeopardized ‘economic growth’ would be taken.

The rest of us

The rest of us

Such a perversion of any reasonable notion of what is valuable is, sadly, neither new nor shocking. It occurs everywhere, all the time. Individuals and communities around the world are left to languish in poverty, ill health and strife because markets demand lower taxes, access to resources and cheap labour. Whole nations and populations are ruined by speculative investment because markets desire the unfettered ability to gamble on currencies, food prices and government bonds. In the age of austerity, hospitals, pensions, mental health services, schools and universities and even civil infrastructure must be abandoned in the name of plugging the bleeding holes in the crisis-ridden market. And everywhere the value of the earth and the value of individuals and their labour is measured exclusively in their capacity to render profit for increasingly uncontrollable and unanswerable corporations and the god-like market they serve.

The process is insidious. We are told that the value of the atmosphere itself is best imagined though ‘carbon credits’, that the value of individuals is best imagined through the price of their time in the form of wages, or that the value of schools, universities and other public institutions is to be measured in the fiscal ‘return on investment’ they afford their ‘customers’. Everywhere, money becomes the measure of the imagination, the means by which we comprehend and act upon the world that we share. And, ultimately, the crises we now face (the ecological crisis; the economic crisis of global markets; the political crisis of austerity; the social crisis of alienation; the cultural crisis of dislocation; the food crisis; the water crisis; the crisis of education; the crisis of incarceration) are all crises of value, where the pathological value of the market is diametrically opposed to the plural values of humanity.

The Crises of Capitalism, Crises of the Imagination
The crises of our age, like the crises of ages past, are the crises of capitalism. In this book, capitalism represents a cancerous disorder in the ‘fabric’ of social reproduction, one that works by perverting our sense of what and who is valuable and conscripting us to reproduce a system that works in the short-term interests of the few and against the interests of the vast majority of humanity. The failure to acknowledge that the many global crises we now face are, inherently, crises of capitalism represents a massive failure of the imagination. And without the radicalization of the imagination, we have no hope of overcoming these crises.

The crisis of the imagination develops on several interconnected levels.
First, it represents a crisis of parochialism. While the 2008 financial crisis came as a shock to many in the global North, it came as no surprise to many in the so-called Third World who have been experiencing the dangerous volatilities of financial markets, predatory lending and extortionary debt for generations. Indeed, ‘austerity’, from one perspective, is merely the application of economic discipline to the First World that once was only reserved for former colonies: the maddeningly bull-headed imposition of a neoliberal economic agenda in spite of its inherent flaws and history of abject failures. The idea that capitalism has ever not been in crisis is a privilege afforded to the privileged. As the capitalist crises deepen and widen, swallowing many who once imagined themselves deservingly immune (notably, the Northern white middle class), the imagination struggles to find purchase.

The crises we now face are also crises of the imagination at the heart of the ruling paradigm. The pompous and enthusiastic announcements of the ‘end of history’ and the eternal and unquestionable value of free markets and global trade which characterized the two decades since the fall of the Berlin Wall have given way to hopeless resignation. While practically no one still believes that unfettered free markets will lead to prosperity, sustainability, peace and human fulfillment, the vast majority of politicians and policymakers remain enthralled to the now undead ideology of necroneoliberalism. Margaret Thatcher’s famous dictum that ‘there is no alternative’ to unregulated capitalism has ceased to be a smug, self-satisfied pronouncement from on high and has instead become a shrill and desperate mantra of a crisis-ridden and potentially suicidal system, rehearsed with slavish devotion by nearly every government in the world, whether avowedly right or ostensibly left.

Finally, the crisis of imagination is a much deeper, broader crisis, which is the subject of this book.

Economic systems, for all their material wealth and very real relations of labour, exploitation, violence, hunger and tangible inequality, are also dependent on the imagination. As I argue more fully in this book, capitalism relies not only on the brutal repression of workers in factories and fields; it also relies on conscripting our imaginations.

On a basic level, it relies on each of us imagining ourselves as essentially isolated, lonely, competitive economic agents. It relies on us imagining that the system is the natural expression of human nature, or that it is too powerful to be changed, or that no other system could ever be desirable. Capitalism, as a system, is driven by a process whereby the plural, living values of humanity, for all their contradictions and vagaries, are translated, transformed and subordinated to the monolithic, singular value of capital. We reproduce our lives, our society and our world through cooperation, and our cooperation is guided by what and who we imagine is valuable. Capitalism is a system that drives and relies on the conscription of that imaginative process of valuing and the subordination of all value to price.

While the system is ultimately held in place by the threat and exercise of very real violence and the concentration of very material wealth and power in the hands of the ruling class, its imaginary and imaginative dimensions cannot be ignored. For instance, sexism, racism, homophobia and nationalism are, for all intents and purposes, forms of power essential to the reproduction of capitalist social and economic relations based, ultimately, on largely imagined attributions of value to individuals. Those who are empowered by these value systems, in turn, typically use their power to reproduce the system. Ranks, hierarchies and other forms of coercive authority are, in spite of the fact that they are often backed by real wealth, privilege and violence, ultimately imaginary distinctions between people. In all these cases, inequality, oppression and exploitation based on imaginary distinctions are central to the reproduction of capitalism, and also reproduced by and within that system.

So the crisis of imagination is also a crisis we all experience every day, a crisis in how and who and what we value, a crisis in the patterns by which we imagine the world around us and, hence, act in the world, a crisis in the way we, as social, cooperative beings, reproduce our world and are reproduced by it. Essentially, a crisis occurs when the reproduction of capitalism comes into conflict with the reproduction of life and happiness.


Climate Protection: The New Insurgency


Faced with the failure of conventional lobbying, the climate protection movement is now turning to mass civil disobedience—but we can take it further still.

By , December 10, 2013.

Protecting our climate requires more than lobbying and more than “civil disobedience.” It requires a new understanding of how we relate to the law–and how can enforce it ourselves when governments fail. (Photo: Ben Schumin / Flickr)

This article is a joint publication of Foreign Policy In Focus and TruthOut. For a longer presentation, see the Foreign Policy In Focus report, “A Nonviolent Insurgency for Climate Protection?

When 30 climate protestors from 18 countries protested drilling at an Arctic oil platform operated by Gazprom, they represented the people of the world taking a symbolic stand against climate destruction, the corporate climate destroyers, and the governments that back them. But the action of the Arctic 30 may be prophetic of something more: The emergence of a global insurgency that challenges the very legitimacy of those who are destroying our planet.

Time to take it to the streets?

Time to take it to the streets?

The 2013 Fifth Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change confirmed that humans are destroying the earth’s climate. But it also revealed something even more alarming: Twenty-five years of human effort to protect the climate have failed even to slow the forces that are destroying it. On the contrary, the rate of increase in carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels tripled between the release of the first IPCC report in 1988 and today.

Scientists and climate protection advocates once expected that rational leaders and institutions would respond appropriately to the common threat of climate change. As Bill McKibben said of Jim Hansen and himself, “I think he thought, as did I, if we get this set of facts out in front of everybody, they’re so powerful — overwhelming — that people will do what needs to be done.”

It didn’t work. Those who are fighting to save the climate need a new strategy. One such strategy to consider is a global nonviolent law-enforcing insurgency.

A nonviolent insurgency

Insurgencies are social movements, but movements of a special type: They reject current rulers’ claims to legitimate authority. Insurgencies often develop from movements that initially make no direct challenge to established authority but eventually conclude that one is necessary to realize their objectives. To effectively protect the earth’s climate and our species’ future, the climate protection movement may have to become such an insurgency.

The term “insurgency” is generally associated with an armed rebellion against an established government. Its aim may be to overthrow the existing government, but it may also aim to change it or simply to protect people against it. Whatever its means and ends, the hallmark of such an insurgency is to deny the legitimacy of established state authority and to assert the legitimacy of its own actions.

A nonviolent insurgency pursues similar objectives by different means. Like an armed insurgency, it does not accept the limits on its action imposed by the powers-that-be. But unlike an armed insurgency, it eschews violence and instead expresses power by mobilizing people for various forms of nonviolent mass action.

After closely following the massive strikes, general strikes, street battles, peasant revolts, and military mutinies of the Russian Revolution of 1905 that forced the czar to grant a constitution, Mohandas (not yet dubbed “Mahatma”) Gandhi concluded, “Even the most powerful cannot rule without the cooperation of the ruled.” Shortly thereafter he launched his first civil disobedience campaign, proclaiming “We too can resort to the Russian remedy against tyranny.”

The powers responsible for climate change could not rule for a day without the acquiescence of those whose lives and future they are destroying. They are only able to continue their destructive course because others enable or acquiesce in it. It is the ordinary activity of people — going to work, paying taxes, buying products, obeying government officials, staying off private property — that continually re-creates the power of the powerful. A nonviolent climate insurgency can be powerful if it withdraws that cooperation from the powers-that-be.

Why a law-enforcing insurgency?

Faced with the failure of conventional lobbying and political “pressure group” activity, much of the climate protection movement is now turning to mass civil disobedience, as witnessed by the campaigns against the Keystone XL pipeline, mountaintop removal coal mining, coal-fired power plants, and Arctic oil drilling. Such civil disobedience, while generally recognizing the legitimacy of the law, refuses to obey it in specific instances.

Civil disobedience represents moral protest, but it does not in itself challenge the legal validity of the government or other institutions against which it is directed. Rather, it claims that the obligation to oppose their immoral actions — whether discriminating against a class of people or conducting an immoral war or destroying the climate — is more binding on individuals than the normal duty to obey the law.

A law-enforcing insurgency goes a step further. It declares a set of laws and policies themselves illegal and sets out to establish law through nonviolent self-help. Such insurgents view those who they are disobeying as merely persons claiming to represent legitimate authority — but who are themselves violating the law under what’s known as “color of law,” or the false pretense of authority. So “civil disobedience” is actually obedience to law and a form of law enforcement.

Social movements that engage in civil disobedience often draw strength from the claim that their actions are not only moral, but that they represent an effort to enforce fundamental legal and constitutional principles flouted by the authorities they are disobeying. And they strengthen a movement’s appeal to the public by presenting its action not as wanton law breaking but as an effort to rectify governments and institutions that are themselves in violation of the law.

For the civil rights movement, the constitution’s guarantee of equal rights meant that sit-inners and freedom riders were not criminals but rather upholders of constitutional law. For the struggle against apartheid, racism was a violation of internationally guaranteed human rights. For war resisters from Vietnam to Iraq, the national and international laws forbidding war crimes defined civil disobedience not as interference with legal, democratic governments but rather as a legal obligation of citizens. For the activists of Solidarity, the nonviolent revolution that overthrew Communism in Poland was not criminal sedition but an effort to implement the international human and labor rights law ratified by their own government.

These examples seem paradoxical. On the one hand, the movement participants appear to be resisting the constituted law and the officials charged with implementing it. On the other, they are claiming to act on the basis of law — in fact to be implementing the law themselves against the opposition of lawless states.

Law professor and historian James Gray Pope has developed a concept of “constitutional insurgency” to understand such cases. A constitutional insurgency, or what might be called a “law-enforcing insurgency,” is a social movement that rejects current constitutional doctrine but that “rather than repudiating the Constitution altogether, draws on it for inspiration and justification.” Pope detailed how the American labor movement long insisted that the right to strike was protected by the 13th amendment to the constitution, which forbade any form of “involuntary servitude.” Injunctions to limit strikes were therefore unconstitutional. Although courts disregarded this claim, the radical Industrial Workers of the World told its members to “disobey and treat with contempt all judicial injunctions,” and the “normally staid” American Federation of Labor maintained that a worker confronted with an unconstitutional injunction had an imperative duty to “refuse obedience and to take whatever consequences may ensue.”

Why climate destruction is illegal

The Justinian Code, issued by the Roman Emperor in 535 A.D., defined the concept of res communes (common things): “By the law of nature these things are common to mankind — the air, running water, the sea and consequently the shores of the sea.” The right of fishing in the sea from the shore “belongs to all men.”

Based on the Justinian Code’s protection of res communes, governments around the world have long served as trustees for rights held in common by the people. In U.S. law this role is defined by the public trust doctrine, under which the government serves as public trustee on behalf of present and future generations. Even if the state holds title, the public is the “beneficial owner.” As trustee, the state has a “fiduciary duty” to the owner — a legal duty to act solely in the owners’ interest with “the highest duty of care.” The principle is recognized today in both common law and civil law systems in countries ranging from South Africa to the Philippines and from the United States to India.

On Mother’s Day, 2011, the youth organization Kids vs. Global Warming organized the “iMatter March” of young people in 160 communities in 45 countries, including the United States, Russia, Brazil, New Zealand, and Great Britain. Concurrently, the Atmospheric Trust Litigation Project brought suits and petitions on behalf of young people in all 50 U.S. states to require the federal and state governments to fulfill their obligation to protect the atmosphere as a common property. Speaking to one of the rallies, 16-year-old Alec Loorz, founder of Kids v. Global Warming and lead plaintiff in the Federal lawsuit, said:

Today, I and other fellow young people are suing the government, for handing over our future to unjust fossil fuel industries, and ignoring the right of our children to inherit the planet that has sustained all of civilization. The government has a legal responsibility to protect the future for our children. So we are demanding that they recognize the atmosphere as a commons that needs to be preserved, and commit to a plan to reduce emissions to a safe level.

Loorz concluded: “The plaintiffs and petitioners on all the cases are young people. We are standing up for our future.”

A trustee has “an active duty of vigilance to ‘prevent decay or waste’ to the asset,” according to University of Oregon law professor Mary Christina Wood, whose new book Nature’s Trust: Environmental Law for a New Age lays out the legal basis for the suits. “Waste” means “permanently damage.” If the asset is wasted in the interest of one generation of beneficiaries over future generations, it is in effect an act of “generational theft.”

Although so far the courts have turned down most of these atmospheric public trust suits, the decisions are being appealed. On October 3, 2013, the Supreme Court of Alaska became the first state supreme court to hear such an appeal.

A global climate insurgency

Compelling as the logic of the atmospheric public trust argument may be, it is easy to imagine that many U.S. courts will refuse to force governments to meet such obligations. In a brief to dismiss the Kansas suit, lawyers called the claim “a child’s wish for a better world,” which is not something a court can do much about.

The sad fact is that virtually all the governments on earth — and their legal systems — are deeply corrupted by the very forces that gain from destroying the global commons. They exercise illegitimate power without regard to their obligations to those they claim to represent, let alone to the common rights beneficiaries of other lands and future generations to whom they also owe “the highest duty of care.”

But protecting the atmosphere is not just a matter for governments. Indeed, it is the failure of governments to protect the public trust that is currently prompting the climate-protection movement to turn to mass civil disobedience. Looked at from the perspective of the public trust doctrine, these actions are far from lawless. Indeed, they embody the effort of people around the world to assert their right and responsibility to protect the public trust. They represent people stepping in to provide law enforcement where corrupt and illegitimate governments have failed to meet their responsibility to do so.

When the climate protection movement uses nonviolent direct action to protect the public trust, it is often confronted by government officials acting under color of law to perpetuate climate destruction. The Arctic 30 were held at gunpoint, for example, and charged with piracy. Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said, “Concern for the environment must not cover up unlawful actions.” A law-enforcing climate insurgency will answer: Concern for oil company profits must not cover up unlawful government complicity in destroying the atmospheric public trust.

Jeremy Brecher is co-founder and core team member of the Labor Network for Sustainability. He is the author of more than a dozen books on labor and social movements and has received five regional Emmy awards for his documentary film work. An updated edition of his labor history Strike! (PM Press 2014) will include a new chapter on the working class mini-revolts of the 21st century.


Boulder’s Homeless are bad for business


Christmas day was a nightmare for one Boulder Police officer who spent most of her day shagging drunks out of Starbucks and Jamba Juice at 30th and Arapaho. Both are popular spots for homeless alcoholics and drug addicts to convene. The officer had spent so much time arresting people for fighting, that by the end of her shift she had not had time for a break or a cup of coffee. When we ran into her at Starbucks it  had closed and she was trying to figure out where she could get a cup a Joe on Christmas night ?

It was cold and pitiful that night. But the hardcore homeless who dominate Starbucks, Jamba Juice and King Soopers in that neighborhood were either in jail or sleeping under their tarps in the campsites that litter the bike paths nearby.  This is a crazy violent out of control neighborhood run by street pirates. Boulder PD is determined to clean it up. After weeks of trouble Police presence  is now a constant. They are a welcome site for most Starbuck patrons.

One Patron named Tom who is a 62 year old part time scientist at NOAA across the street from Starbucks was attacked  by one of the homeless drunks two nights ago. We were sitting in the Boulder Channel 1 SUV covering this story when we witnessed the whole event.  Tom had ridden his bike from NOAA to Starbucks and was on his way in to get a cup of coffee for his bike ride home at around 5:30 pm.  He was followed by a big tall  homeless man named Charles. Within seconds Charles had Tom pinned against the wall of Starbucks and was screaming at him that he was going to kill him. It was quite shocking. Patrons who were on their way into Starbucks turned around and left. When we asked Tom what that was all about he said , “he had no idea.  the man was one of the crazy homeless people who hang around Starbucks.”

The next night we told this story to Doc who is a homeless programmer who works out of Starbucks. Doc knows everyone on the streets and avoids them all because they are either drunk or crazy.  ” Charles is seriously crazy” said Doc. “He’s is big and does not feel pain. He gets off on beating people up especially little ole scientist types from NOAA. ” Doc Said.

Doc was an alcoholic who sobered up 4 years ago. He used to be a serious programmer and code slinger making over 100 k a year. Now he sleeps under a bridge.  He’s is not crazy from what we could see. He is just disenfranchised.  He won’t get food stamps, or housing or any kind of disability. He picks up work here and there from small start ups.  Last week he cut himself in the night when he fell near his camp. During the flood in September he nearly drowned when the water came through Arapaho Avenue. But he refused help. He refused help from FEMA, the Red Cross or the county. Doc weighs about 88 lbs but should weigh 160lbs. He is starving to death on the streets of Boulder. What’s weird is that he is a perfectly nice guy and seems normal.  He says he just wants a job and a place to live. It is almost like he is too proud to accept public assistance. Doc is one of the few we met on the streets who actually wants a job and is capable of doing high level work.

Most of the street people we have seen around Starbucks are bums; Drunken street alcoholics who are completely lost. One Starbucks manager told us ” we have had it with these people. They have no respect for anything and they drive customers off” Starbucks has started calling the police two and three times a day to have the street people thrown out in an intensive campaign.  Police now come in go table to table see who is homeless. They then 86 them with a warning ” if you come back you will be ticketed arrested and jailed. ” This is all new. Last fall we witnessed the police being all nice , sweet and kind to trouble makers. Better late then never.

Last night when we were in Starbucks at 5:30 the place was empty except for 3 homeless men all of whom were very homeless looking and smelling. One of them had brought in a giant two wheeler with a ton of homeless bags on it. Doc was there too. He had a   computer but 5 layers of clothes, bags and he looked pretty bad. Meaning, he had dirty long hair, a beard, ski pants and homeless gloves. He just didn’t fit the Starbucks mold.

On Christmas there were 30 or 40 homeless men and women in and out all day and night. They were drinking and fighting inside , out side, with patrons and with police. Boulder Homeless are bad for business. They have nearly ruined a popular Starbucks.  The Starbucks in King Soopers across the parking lot is just as bad. It is packed with homeless men and women every day and night. It is just not the kind of Starbucks you would go to.

Lately Doc has been thrown out of all the Starbucks and he has no place to work. But who wants a homeless dirty sucking up the oxygen in a business that likes to turn table every hour.

Bo is a black man. He recently lost his job at NIST and now lives under a camper shell in  a storage lot on Arapaho. He comes to Starbucks about 3 times a week to check his email and go online. Bo is a rubber tramp. He has a jeep, gets  unemployment, but he’s still homeless. He does not look as rough as Doc so Starbucks does not throw him out.

Chief is an Indian from the Rose Bud reservation in Nebraska.  He comes to Boulder to hang out. But he too is homeless. He lives in a mini van that he parks around Boulder at night. But chief is very disturbed. He likes to rape women and often talks about killing people. He is known to Boulder PD but they can’t do anything about him unless someone files a complaint.

Stevie is a black man who got washed out by the flood. He is homeless and crashes where he can. Doc says a lot of these guys are losing their minds and are getting worse. Stevie has been a Boulder bum for years and has a long criminal record to go along with it. It includes robbery, breaking and enter, rape, theft, forgery. He’s a model citizen.


Most of the people on the Boulder streets are white adult males. A few are black, Indian or Mexican. Fewer still are women. All of them are in same kind of Dominate addiction or have severe mental health issues. Only a hand full are homeless for loss of job or the flood.

Ashton was homeless but  got it together to get SSI, a room to rent, medical, mental health , food stamps, but he drinks.. a lot. He still lives the homeless drunken lifestyle. A lot of his friends are low bottom drunks, “trailer court trash” Ashton himself is a convicted felon with a long prison jacket. Though he stays out of trouble , he can’t quite shake the old street alcoholic mentality.

Jeanie is 18 and lives in a camp near Starbucks. She and her boyfriend Dan and Dans father and his old lady all live together at Starbucks on 30th. Danny beat Jeannie up last week at Starbucks so he went to jail. Jeannie is trying to get away from Danny but she is addicted to Heroin and Danny pimps her out for dope.  Jeannie tried to sell herself to us for a bus ticket back to Arkansas and enough Heroin to get her there. According to Doc Jeannie also has aids and is pregnant.  But no one around Starbucks seems to mind or care .

Rick is homeless. He works nights at IBM. During the day he trys to pick up college girls at Starbucks but they are repulsed by Rick. He latches on to them and stalks them and then threatens them. So rick is a scary guy.

Toby is not homeless but he works at King Soopers as a manger. He befriends homeless people especially young homeless girls. He then offers them a place to live for free which happens to be a town house his mother left him 3 blocks away. Toby is a bad alcoholic and often runs the risk of being victimized by the street girls he helps. According to Ashton who lives with Toby says ” they always steal from Toby. Sometimes they will have their boyfriends come  over , beat Toby up and rob him. Toby never files a crime report.  ”

Two weeks ago Sara  got killed in a drunk driving accident on Highway 93 after leaving Starbucks, high on dope. she had just robbed Toby and was on her way out of town. Toby went to her memorial service.

Across Arapaho from Starbucks is a shed where three homeless men got into a fight over this camp. There was a murder and then there was prison. They were all Starbuck homeless regulars.

The patio in front of Starbucks and the outdoor section at Jamba juice is a  homeless pirate  territory. There are dozens of street addicts there each day planning robberies, dealing dope, knifing each other. It is a very unsafe zone and the public is not invited.

This story was written by Boulder channel 1 staff. Some of the names have been changed to protect the innocent




OPED: Koch brothers poisonous tentacles


 OPED: Koch brothers have sunk their poisonous tentacles in our weakened democracy10/07/2013 9:45 pm
From the Huffington Post
by Eric Zuesse
Investigative Historian

Posted by Ron Baird
Boulder Channel 1 News editor


On October 7th, I reported in a two-part story, how the Koch brothers and their friends started in 2002 a plan to get control of the Republican Party so as to become enabled ultimately to shut down the Federal Government and maybe even drive it into default, so as to cause the American public to despise “government,” but actually to despise democracy itself; i.e., to despise this country’s democratic government, specifically.

Today, I report on the crucial role that the tobacco industry played in helping the Kochs to finance this operation, all of which was done with a profound contempt for the public, and with a deep pride for these aristocrats to rule the U.S. instead of the despised public controlling public policy through an honest and transparent Congress and Presidency.


Whereas that previous news report focused upon the Kochs’ expansion of their orbit of control to include the Heritage Foundation, from 2002 onwards, which is an operation that has not previously been covered, today’s report concerns instead the three major foundations that the Kochs themselves started and operated during this period: Americans For Prosperity, FreedomWorks, and Citizens for a Sound Economy.

The scholars, Amanda Fallin, Rachel Grana, and Stanton A. Glantz, published on 8 February 2013 in the online edition of the journal Tobacco Control, their blockbuster study,“‘To quarterback behind the scenes, third-party efforts’: the tobacco industry and the Tea Party,” and they laid out there the history of the key alliance between the tobacco companies and the Koch brothers.

This enormous study, through thousands of pages of archives, was funded by the National Cancer Institute; and it reported that, “Rather than being a purely grassroots movement that spontaneously developed in 2009, the Tea Party has developed over time, in part through decades of work by the tobacco industry and other corporate interests. … Simultaneously, they funded and worked through third-party groups, such as Citizens for a Sound Economy, the predecessor of AFP [Americans For Prosperity] and FreedomWorks,” all of which were/are Koch operations.

These researchers reported that, “In 2002, … CSE started its US Tea Party (http://www.usteaparty.com) project, the website of which stated ‘our US Tea Party is a national event, hosted continuously online and open to all Americans who feel our taxes are too high and the tax code is too complicated.’” (Amazingly, that damning webpage can still be accessed, via the web’s archive authority.)

Already, “Between 1991 and 2002 the tobacco companies, mainly Philip Morris, provided CSE with at least US$5.3 million,” and Philip Morris’s V.P. for Government Affairs justified these expenditures in a memo by saying: “They are adding this level of value. They have provided significant grassroots assistance, in the nature of several thousand calls to the Hill,” and are “very active on our behalf in the field in key states with key Members” of Congress. So: when the “spontaneous” “Tea Party” organization rose up in February 2009, to protest Obamacare, it was actually neither spontaneous, nor at all new.

America’s greatest living investigative journalist is perhaps Pam Martens, who provided a good summary of that study, and she supplemented it with an investigation of her own. In her 20 May 2013 article at her muckraking site “Wall Street on Parade,” she headlined “The Criminal Case Against the Tea Party Cabal,” and she reported also an additional Philip Morris memo (not mentioned by those three researchers), which described the role of CSE as follows: “We are funding a major (400K) grassroots initiative in the districts of House Energy & Commerce members to educate and mobilize consumers, through town hall meetings, radio and print ads, direct mail, patch-through calls to the Capitol switchboard, editorial board visits, polling data, meetings with Members and staff, and the release of studies and other educational pieces.”



They had already done this during 1994, with the Clinton Administration’s proposed healthcare reform, and they claimed there that it was “to show the Clinton plan as a government-run health care system replete with higher taxes and government spending, massive job losses, less choice, rationing of care and extensive bureaucracies. CSE is taking aim at the heart of the plan – employer mandates, new entitlements, price controls, mandatory health alliances, heavy load of new taxes and global budgets – and, with the program well underway, [it] is by all accounts getting rave reviews in the respective districts.”

Another wing of this operation to gut democratic government has been operated by Grover Norquist, who, on 25 May 2001, said on NPR’s “Morning Edition”: “I don’t want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.” He was referring only to taxes, not really to spending (which many naïves interpreted him to mean).

Virtually every Republican congressional candidate thus signed Norquist’s “No New Taxes Pledge,” in order for them to be able to qualify for Norquist’s massive campaign-funding commitments from mega-corporate America. Norquist had been set up by Ronald Reagan to run Americans for Tax Reform, in order to do this, but the idea wasn’t actually new with Reagan. The far-right economist Milton Friedman had first introduced this idea, in 1978; candidate Ronald Reagan then adopted and defended it in 1980. Here’s how Reagan himself put it, during a Presidential debate, on 21 September 1980: “John tells us that, first, we’ve got to reduce spending before we can reduce taxes. Well, if you’ve got a kid that’s extravagant, you can lecture him all you want to about his extravagance. Or you can cut his allowance and achieve the same end much quicker.”

The idea of the plan is basically to strangle democracy. This is done by privatizing everything, so that the aristocracy, who already own most of the private wealth in this country, will be able to farm the public – farm the serfs with debt, as the public used to be known during the feudal era. Now, however, the aristocracy are no longer based upon their passing on to their heirs vast landed estates with serfs, but passing on to them vast international corporations with employees and consumers; so, instead of acres, they pass on shares of stock. So, instead of feudalism, it’s fascism. It is the modernized form of feudalism; it is conservative dictatorship for the world of today.

Their plan is working, brilliantly. They call it “libertarian,” but the liberty is to be only for aristocrats. For everyone else, it’s serfdom, if not outright slavery. Conservatives love hierarchy; it is morality, in their vision of things.

[includeme src="http://c1n.tv/boulder/media/bouldersponsors.html" frameborder="0" width="670" height="300"]



Boulder Startup Week 2013: what we did.


in bike helmet smerking

Jann Scott is Boulder’s critical voice

First of all we are not exactly a start up. We are more an old school OG Boulder entrepreneurial company. That is to say Brad Feld and David Cohen didn’t invent the entrepreneurial movement here in Boulder. They joined it in the 90s and capitalized on it. Yes they are modern day Gurus, but Boulder has 100′s of gurus. Boulder’s entreperurship started in the late 1800s during the Colorado Gold rush and it never stopped.

So old timer tech entrepreneurs look at Feld , Cohen and Polis with some bemusement. They’ve seen it all before. This new hippy feel good neo communist business start up scene was really started by Moe Segal and the natural foods biz heads of the 1960s and 70′s. One CU business professor scoffed at the notion of Start Ups. ” Most of it is junk” he said. ” One or 2 out of 100 will be swallowed up by the VCs and make it to market but the other 98 will fail. So this is nothing new and Brad Feld is not that special.” he said.

And this is where I’d like to pick up. So what did we at Boulder Channel 1 do during this years Boulder Start Up Week. ?
We kept working that’s what we did. Part of our work was to send out sales reps to various event s to see where there was an opportunity to make some money by selling our services. What?? yep. We were looking for advertising clients, We were not looking for funding an angel or a VC. But we were looking to deal. We were selling. Overtly and not so overtly. We were looking for one $20,000 client for a year. One advertiser who needed banner ads, video, sm, pr, design, a show series, a web site and who wanted consumers from Boulder to buy their goods. We were on the hunt. We set a goal and went after it. That’s what start Up Week Boulder meant to us. No bullshit. No drinking. No fucking around. No chasing millionaires. Just hard work. Sales.

Did we land anyone. Yep we did. Two. we made $40,000 bucks this week off of Boulder Start Up week from two companies who wanted our services….. who needed our service… and who did not want to be dicked around by a bunch of drunks  who are playing at business.

There is a lesson here for those of you who want to be serious business people.  ( We have been successfully in business since 1975 here in Boulder. Like everyone else who digs this city, it only keeps getting better) We live in Utopia and we don’t take it for granted. We are truly blessed

What do we do to give back to Boulder?? We have been here for a long long time. We are established and have roots. we give cash to 30 different Boulder charities who help feed and clothe people. We produce videos for free for any non profit. We don’t charge non profits. We mentor homeless techies who need a hand up. We mentor kids of impoverished families.

Jann Scott is the CEO of Channel 1 Networks


Boulder County’s moratorium on oil and gas drilling permits is scheduled to expire on June 10


If we do nothing, Boulder County residents and our land, water and air will be threatened with exposure to the hundreds of toxic chemicals that are used in the hydraulic fracturing or “fracking” fluid to break apart rock and release “natural gas” (methane). The chemicals include known carcinogens and endocrine disruptors that, even in small amounts, when released in emissions or spills, can damage the human immune, respiratory, neurological and reproductive systems—with children, pregnant women and elders being the most vulnerable. In addition, methane is a potent greenhouse gas, and with 3-9% of methane reported to leak from fracking wellheads, it is contributing significantly to climate change.

TAKE ACTION:  Contact the County Commissioners @ commissioners@bouldercounty.org to ask for a multi-year moratorium on fracking until we have results of neutral health impact research such as the National Science Foundation study due in 2018.  Before issuing any oil and gas drilling permits, we need to first know the public safety impacts of hydraulic fracturing.

A multi-year moratorium based on the need for health impact studies on fracking would allow time for the results of medical and scientific studies now in the works to be finalized, including a 5-year $12 million study funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) being coordinated by the University of Colorado at Boulder, an EPA study on “Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources,” and a multi-year study by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment with Colorado State University.

Your personal email will make a difference.

Thank you for your help!

boulder camps steve

Newtown could happen in Boulder: Editorial


Boulder is not immune to crazy acts of  violence. It only thinks it is the way Sandy Hook did.  Boulder has had a history of extreme acts of violence by very insane people.

In the 1970s A Boulder high girl was raped , shot and murdered as she washed new car at Buckingham park.  A 10 year old girl was brutally murdered in her home . She lived a block from JonBenet Ramsey. The crime occurred 25 years before.

In the 1960′s a janitor ravaged and brutally murdered a female CU music student.  The crime scene was so bloody and cruel it cannot be discussed here.

In the 1980′s Michael Bell shot 5 people at a gun range in Boulder He killed two.  Sid Wells was brutally murdered with a shot gun blast to the head in a dope dealing operation gone bad. Involved was Robert Redford and his daughter. It was a celebrated case.

in the 1990s A Boulder county student held his girl friend Hostage with an AR 15 assault rifle at CSU . He fired rounds all day. A police sniper finally shot and killed him at 200 yards away.

In the 1990s 6 year old JonBenet Ramsey was brutally murdered in Americas most sensational child murder. In the same decade a 19 year old CU female student was abducted off Canyon Blvd and raped by an Asian gang. she was then thrown to the side of the road and left for dead.  CU student Susanah chase was brutally raped and murdered  at 19th and Spruce as she walked home from a night of Pizza and beer in downtown Boulder.

Also in the 1990′s Amanda McDonald was crushed by her boyfriends SUV as she drunkenly car surfed up flagstaff Mt. Boulder also experienced 3 days of alcohol riots in the 90s where scores of police officers were injured. For two years Boulder endured couch fires, firemen being targeted by Motoff cocktails

In 2011 a gunman shot and killed a star football player on the hill.

In 2012 a drunk young petite college girl wondered into the wrong house on the hill and was shot by a panicked psychiatrist aided by his hysterical wife.

1n 2012 Two students attacked their entire CU class by purposely loading brownies with a  potent Marijuana strain sending 5 of them to the hospital and making the entire class sick.  Some brush this of as a prank. but it was still an attack on a classroom.

Oh it goes on in Boulder

The level of violence has steadily increased in this city as it has all across the world.

Gun sales are up at the thriving gun store.

Driven by movies, video games, young men are driven to incredible acts of violence and mass shootings all over the world.



Go to Top