This is very unfair Baldy.  Who is trying to be misleading here?  You can 
change the meaning of someone's statement by doing what you've just done.  This 
is the full statement:

"This was not a Knox rally. This was a community rally. I asked nobody to do 
anything for a Knox rally. I asked them to do it for a community fair in the 
park where we had a church rally," said Blackwell. "

Blackwell's statement indicates that she did not ask for or know about planned 
actions that would violate laws.  Her FULL statement indicates that she states 
that she was not aware in advance that wrong doing was planned.  You simply 
can't infer that this disputes the reported experiences of the students.  But 
it is extremely unfair to underquote the Councilwoman, Baldy.

Now, this is curious.  A public news report suggests that Wendell, the ceo of 
UCD, didn't know anything about the policy implementation for which he is 
ultimately responsible for..  Some of you don't want to see a problem if this 
is true, yet you are willing to play with the Blackwell statement to make 
unsupportable assumptions.  

Politicians go to lots of events and it is much more believable that 
Councilwoman Blackwell didn't know the details that led to the student accounts 
and news reports, than Wendell knowing nothing.

This raises an important matter.  I believe we, as a community, should put 
together a petition to Councilwoman Blackwell and you are good at that.  Will 
you help me?

The Councilwoman too is probably quite ready to have the truth of this UCD 
affair come out.  

We need to draft a request for a full and complete investigation by the city of 
all inappropriate or illegal policies conducted by the UCD over the years.  We 
need to look into ways for the city of Philadelphia to file a formal complaint 
with the IRS over the alleged violations of the law.  And we need to see that 
UCD never again receives community court probationers and also that the 
Municipal Court review its contracts with all of these "service agencies" 
before continuing this program.  The civil rights abuses may be widespread and 
we won't know pending a full an independent investigation.

We have another serious matter.  News reports suggest that the University's 
Office of Public Safety is operating some type of separate court all within the 
jurisdiction of the Penn Police.  I believe, we need to ask the University for 
a clarification of their procedures when arresting students and non students 
for the same violations.  Are they sent through two different systems for 
disposition? 

Can we work on this together?  Baldy, I would apologize for underquotting the 
Councilwoman's statement because it was terribly misleading until I came to 
your rescue.

Your friend and neighbor,

Glenn





  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Doc Baldy 
  To: Glenn 
  Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [email protected] 
  Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 11:27 PM
  Subject: Re: [UC] The UCD answer


  >  Not a single denial of the student accounts has been made

  I guess we just see it differently.  Seems to me there are lots of ways to 
interpret the sparse details.  What I particularly find interesting is that the 
student said "they" were passing out fliers.  He didn't say "he" was passing 
out fliers.  It also does sound to me like the Councilwoman did directly 
contradict the student's statement.  

  From 6abc.com:
    http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?section=politics&id=5328900

  Student:
    "It was a Tom Knox rally. They had on every corner, the four corners of 
Malcom X Park, Tom Knox signs. They were passing out flyers,"

  Councilwoman Blackwell:
    "This was not a Knox rally. This was a community rally."

  Then again it seems pointless to argue over second (or third) hand 
statements. 

  Good night,
  Doc



  On 5/30/07, Glenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
    "Actually didn't Councilwoman Blackwell contradict the student's 
statement?"  


    No, that is Cassidy attempting to fool everyone..   Since he does this sort 
of thing a lot, I would guess he is trying to mislead everyone instead of it 
being simple stupidity.  I'm not completely sure.

    What I saw was her denial of inappropriate involvement.

    Her statement was that she did not seek labor to set up a Knox campaign 
effort.  She asked UCD for help with a community church rally.   It implies to 
me that she claims no advance knowledge of illegal UCD political involvement 
making what she thought was a different event into a situation where community 
service probationers and UCD employees did actual Knox campaign work under UCD 
direction.   You see here is an area of this scandal where we have no answers 
only questions.  

    Consider what if she planned to attend the event, but someone else gave the 
order to break out the Knox stuff and she knew nothing about that plan in 
advance.  Blackwell and the students could all be completely truthful. 

     To imply that this brief statement attributed to her means that she is 
claiming that the students story is a lie is not supported.  I certainly have 
made no comment on her denial of inappropriate involvement or advance 
knowledge.  See how Cassidy wants to lead the gullible into believing his 
fallacious arguments.

    Maybe I missed something but can you show me any statement other than 
Cassidy's nonsense from her that claims these students are lying?

    Cassidy and Pumyhera are on a bizzare campaign to assert that all 
discussion must cease because the list is not a court of law.  Now, Cassidy is 
trying this nonsense twisting Blackwell's denial of involvement into meaning 
that she claims the students were lying.

    You need to pay attention Baldy.

    Your friend and neighbor,
    Glenn
      ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Doc Baldy 
      To: Glenn 
      Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [email protected] 
      Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 6:11 PM
      Subject: Re: [UC] The UCD answer 


      > Not a single denial of the student accounts has been made and an 
"official" 

      Actually didn't Councilwoman Blackwell contradict the student's 
statement?  

      Cheers,
      Doc


      On 5/30/07, Glenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
        There have been several different reports about the incident at Malcolm 
X Park.  Not a single denial of the student accounts has been made and an 
"official" but extremely useless statement has come from UCD that suggests that 
the student accounts are not what is disputed.  

        UCD and Penn could prove the students to be liars and stop the 
speculation too.  I believe the students and the reporters until UCD proves 
that they are liars and all the reporters are stupid.  But I believe that you 
just want this to be covered over and forgotten.  Isn't that the reason for 
your posts about the word "prisoner" and "hearsay?"

        Isn't the current problem the reason that entities like UCD must not be 
permitted to operate behind a wall of secrecy, in the first place, with no need 
to ever provide any truthful acountability?  Why do you continue to sugget that 
people in this community should stop discussing this matter?  Cassidy is 
demanding a criminal conviction or I should shut-up.  Why don't you focus on 
giving him a lecture on non-criminal violations of the 501 c3 laws?

        None of us have the resources to independently ascertain the truth.  
Can we agree that UCD is refusing to clear-up everyone's silly speculations?

        Wouldn't it be great if Wendell Lewis made a fool out of my criticisms 
of UCD?  I'd certainly look like a complete idiot.  Come on Wendell, we're all 
pulling for ya.
          ----- Original Message ----- 
          From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
          To: [email protected] 
          Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2007 8:56 AM
          Subject: Fwd: [UC] The UCD answer 


              I know some people on the list may get into legal debates, but 
I'm not one, really.  But I must tell you that quotation marks don't negate 
hearsay but rather prove it.  And you're correct that newspapers are full of 
it.  That's why you don't usually see newspapers introduced into evidence in 
court!  
              And while you're correct that the truth sometimes does align with 
the hearsay, you're also agreeing that it doesn't always.  
             I'm not unable to believe anything about the incident but rather 
am objecting to those who are sure they know the truth based upon a newspaper 
article.  And I know people don't believe everything they read in the paper any 
more than they believe everything a cop tells them.  You may well be right in 
your reliance but it's possible you're not.





          -----Original Message-----
          From: Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
          To: [email protected]
          Sent: Wed, 30 May 2007 1:24 am
          Subject: Re: [UC] The UCD answer


          On May 29, 2007, at 11:45 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


            As I stated  before, you're determining facts based on double 
hearsay - you read what the reporter wrote about what someone may have told 
her.  If there were a good investigation, one thing it would do is have people 
interviewed and actually asked the questions directly about what happened.  


          The student appears to have told the reporter directly, by the way, 
if that's what the quotation marks around his statements mean, so it's no more 
hearsay than any other newspaper report and certainly not "double hearsay" 
since the student did not speak for or about anyone but himself.


            People with lots of experience actually asking questions of 
witnesses will tell you that what people really know often doesn't align with 
what other people think the witnesses know, or what the reporter said.  It 
happens all the time. 


          People with lots of experience actually asking questions of witnesses 
will also tell me that what people know often *exactly* aligns with what other 
people think the witnesses know, or what the reporter said. So what?


          Why are some people on this list so unable to believe that the 
saintly John Fenton might have made a mistake? I honestly don't believe UCD 
would have suspended John Fenton if nothing at all had occurred. I think 
they're investigating *how* it happened, not if.


          Frank
          = 

----------------------------------------------------------------------
          AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's 
free from AOL at AOL.com.



----------------------------------------------------------------------


          No virus found in this incoming message.
          Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
          Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.1/822 - Release Date: 
5/28/2007 11:40 AM





      -- 

      ----------------------------------
      University City Yoga
      http://www.ucyoga.com 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------


      No virus found in this incoming message.
      Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
      Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.3/824 - Release Date: 5/29/2007 
1:01 PM





  -- 

  ----------------------------------
  University City Yoga
  http://www.ucyoga.com 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.8.3/824 - Release Date: 5/29/2007 1:01 
PM

Reply via email to