Thursday, April 9, 1998
On March 13, AMBAG gave a program in Monterey on the so-called "Sustainable Development," which I believe is nothing more than a clever con-game being foisted on the unwary public by the United Nations. The words, "Sustainable Development" have been redefined by these clever demons, away from the Webster's Dictionary meaning, to an entirely different meaning to effect the UN takeover of our national sovereignty, our parks and rivers, and a lot of private property in the phony name of "biodiversity." This definition of the UN meaning is from page 43 of Our Common Future, the 1987 UN report known as the "Bruntland Commission," named for the vice-chair of the World Socialist Party.
Has this gotten your attention yet? Stay tuned--pay attention--there's more to come. Certain of our public officials, who shall remain nameless in this letter, are being seduced by the UN rhetoric. Many of us in attendance at the "AMBAG farce" did not fall for the line of bull being presented, because we have researched their own words as to how they would "con" the American public into blindly following their scam.
We must be very careful of those who think they are the chosen world's ELITE. They are the ones who are running "self-excited."
Blame the Market
I am encouraged by the concern shown in two letters appearing in your March 26 issue, "Chain of Fools" and "Best of MoCo, Worst of MoCo." However, I feel that the true roots of the issues raised are misemphasized.
Corporate growth is unhealthy for communities, individuals and families for a good variety of reasons, most obviously including the fact that the gross gets exported to a different city rather than being re-invested into local businesses. It eliminates small business competition and local profit.
However, the reason that a market exists for these chain-stores and sprawl-malls is because the people of the community make it so. It is us who allowed Macy's and Borders into our communities, who spend tens of thousands of dollars per day at these stores, and who vote pro-corporate in our institutions of media and of politics. The "Best Of" votes accurately affect the interests of the community; the need of the consumer in the county of Monterey is met through these corporations. Their advertisement and bright buildings attract citizens as a deer is attracted to headlights.
To point fingers at our community paper is a futile misdirection of blame. If Coast Weekly were to censor its voters as the letters request, it would paint a false perception of reality. Rather, reality is that citizens in many communities, including ours, are ceasing to think for themselves on community issues. We choose to believe and support companies with the greater advertising dollars, not the local businesses which support the interests of the individual, family, friends, community, country or planet.
Community institutions and individuals should be working together for community health and integrity. Institutions should be gathering information relevant to community issues, while citizens should be engaging such information and coming to their own conclusions about what serves their interests. Asking the media to paint a delusional picture of reality does not promote the health of our community.
Quick and Dirty?
"Biff, bam, thank you ma'am, and not even a kiss" best describes the Seaside City Council's special meeting on April 3.
The long-awaited, on-again-off again event was billed as "Response to the 1997 Grand Jury Report." The audience eagerly awaited its details, but none were given.
If it had been a Broadway play, the critics would have written something like this: "It opened with a thud...was underwhelming...contained denials and an occasional agreement with the grand jury report...and included the not-unexpected claim of Grand Jury bias and racism."
The mayor presented two minor changes to his final draft and the council members each commented on the document. Thomas Mancini and Darryl Choates said they could not accept it, while Helen Rucker and Nancy Amos were loyal in their support.
The spectators were given an opportunity to comment, but several wondered how they could do this without first hearing or seeing the details. Their concerns were ignored. The council then approved the mayor's response on a 3-2 vote and adjourned.
E-mail or Snail-mail Us
We encourage you to express your thoughts and reactions to our stories. We reserve the right to edit for space and/or libel. Please include your name, daytime phone number and the city in which you live. Write us:
By post: Letters, Coast Weekly, 668 Williams Ave., Seaside, CA 93955;
By fax: (408) 394-2909;
By email: firstname.lastname@example.org