I apologize for any misinterpretation on my part, however the general tone of most of Glenn's emails is that the public is excluded from use of the park, of which I have seen little evidence (disregarding law enforcement - see below). While I tend to agree with many of Glenn's general opinions regarding rising corporatism and oppression of the middle and lower classes in society, I grow weary of his long rants and little factual evidence regarding the local conspiracy. Most of his evidence presented is the rejection of his participation in FOCP - the exclusion of his voice. And honestly, it seems mostly vindictive to me. Very rarely does he present a cooperative attitude.
Ok, so the A park has been closed for some time for renovations. To me, I see a waste of money. Yes, I bet it will be nice and prettier - but it's still a city park and some efforts are wasteful in my opinion (reseeding grass in the bowl). But at the same time, if that money wasn't spent (wasted?) on Clark Park, it would have been elsewhere. Ok, so the dog park didn't happen (I'm a big supporter of the idea). But I also see the negative sides to it. University City's gentrification (I don't know what else to call it) over the last 15 years has had plenty of positive as well as negative effects. Having a private party in the park is just as much a right for Penn as it is for any group to hold an event. Does Penn have an idea of what they want to see in Clark Park, the neighborhood, and the City? Of course they do - they have a vested interest in all of that. Are they not supposed to voice their opinions? Is UCD not mostly driven by Penn (and Drexel, and other University City power brokers)? Of course it is. I have been critical of FOCP - and have disagreed with plenty of decisions. I have disagreed with some policies of the UCD. That's why I've become more involved. And while the issue of police enforcement (harassment of people sleeping in the park, public drinking, etc) is a complicated one which I don't think is handled properly, I also understand that in fact, that is the law, whether or not I agree with it. My point is, the best evidence that Glenn can come up with is his denial to be on the dog committee. I can fully understand that, since I've rarely seen evidence of Glenn being compromising. While Tony and I have had disagreements regarding policies, he has actually encouraged me to become more involved. So, I'm faced with on one hand Glenn telling me how evil and bad FOCP is, and on the other being asked to participate, despite disagreeing with policies and plans of both UCD and FOCP. Now Glenn will surely say I am being assimilated and will shortly become a puppet of the evil FOCP. Darco PS- I wholeheartedly agree with Glenn regarding the "big picture" of our society and actually appreciate his emails most of the time. But occasionally they just annoy me enough that I need to respond. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Richard Conrad Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 12:43 AM To: Anthony West Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [UC] Clark Park Secrecy, 01-11 You are reading in. You don't play fair. You just can't admit it. Glenn does not say as Darco implied that "people were excluded from the park" (and actually people have been - you and everyone else can probably realize that people are routinely told to leave the park, for sleeping overnight and other reasons). Maybe Glenn refers to private Clark Park banquets with high priced entry fees. Maybe he refers to private gatherings hosted by Penn where the public is excluded. 'Penn Control' is something about which while Glenn has held back from giving it ultimate vilification, he warns people to be concerned. 'Secrecy' is the most difficult to prove (duh, it's a secret), but in any case you ridicule by hyperbole, misrepresent his remarks, and say things that are not true. You now seem to be practically accusing me of being a Trump conspiracy talk supporter. You clearly haven't read much of what I have written (or you are resorting to damaging written public falsification again). I am actually a true "Balder" who believes Donald Trump can't be Pres. because he can't prove his hair was born in the U.S.A. Here is something of mine I posted to FB: "Saying Trump appeals to masochistic dupes with no sense of mathematics, to sadistic voyeurs who wish they had balls, or to racist instincts in those of lesser intelligence, is all the same... they're just the facts Jack!" Bill Mahr did better: Bill Maher says, "Hey Trump, what's the "biggest scam ever" NOW? I'd say its a guy with 3 bankruptcies telling America how to get its financial house in order." "Crackpot." That is what you say Tony, instead of answering others criticisms! Surely you are big enough to deal with others concerns and not to only resort to name calling. Be fair. Rick On Apr 29, 2011, at 12:00 AM, Anthony West wrote: Richard, I quote from Glenn's text, which Darco and I have read quite clearly: "The master plan for 'revitalization' of Clark Park was always a master plan for secrecy, exclusion of the public, and Penn control!" Glenn has, for years, been publishing on this list false allegations that various users were planned to be excluded from the park by this nefarious conspiracy. Since none of them ever were, in fact, excluded from the physical park, and there were, in fact, no plans that any users should be excluded from the park -- he is now attempting to befuddle you -- as well as unsuspecting newcomers -- by pretending some users were excluded from planning for the park. And he's trying to muddle the two together with murky conspiracy-theory language, where what we're talking about shifts every time a claim of fact is contested. Of course, nothing of the sort ever happened. (There wasn't any "secrecy" or any "Penn control" either.) I looked into these allegations very carefully in 2002-03. Typical Trump talk, in my opinion. But if this is what floats your boat, I sure can't stop you. Conspiracy-theory crackpots never run out of gas, do they? --Tony West On 4/28/2011 11:28 PM, Richard Conrad wrote: O.K. let's get real! Darco represents Glenn as saying something he did not. Darco asks: "do you have evidence of people being excluded from the park?" Glenn did not ever say in his communique that people were excluded from the park.
