04 May 2006

LINK: It's Good to Have Influential Friends

When the wagons start circling, they don't waste any time in firing up the Howitzer, do they? Heidi MacDonald, a highly respected blogger who's known Charles Brownstein since he was 15 years old, has now set her sights on Buzzscope and me:

The buzz on BUZZSCOPE

Folks, I think it's time to cut Buzzscope loose. I really do. They're in the cornfield. If Gonzalez had an insight into actual journalistic ethics, he wouldn't be going around making these jaw dropping statements that are digging him deeper and deeper into the hole he seemingly can't see through his smug-colored glasses of sophisticated higher purpose. And the saddest thing of all? The person most hurt by all of this is the person they were purportedly trying to help.
The best part of her little screed, though, is her unsourced claim that I was starting "a whisper campaign" against Brownstein, a claim she clarified via email with a link to a comment I made on CBR last month, before Brownstein was outed, attempting to quell the rampant speculation over his identity:

I'd caution everyone from speculating about his identity as that road leads to innocent bystanders' names being dragged through the mud. The full truth will come out one day, and in the meantime, trust that he knows his name is already being whispered by those who either knew his reputation or heard of this specific situation when Taki pressed charges. He knows he's being watched, and for now, that's as close to justice as we're able to get. But his time is coming.
It's a little weird that she didn't include this link in her collection of other "jaw dropping" statements I've made.

Ironically, what she interpreted as me starting a whisper campaign -- who the hell do I know that matters to whisper his name to? -- was in fact me referring to people like herself and Jim Valentino, among others, those in the industry who were already aware of the accused's identity.

Good thing I've never really been interested in breaking into the industry because it certainly sounds to me like the beginning of a blackballing, yes?

40 comments:

Jess Manning said...

Actually, no.

Mark Waid said...

No, but it does sound absurdly paranoid and defensive on your part.

Ronee's original piece was, and is, indefensible and repellent and has seriously damaged your site's credibility--not just with me but with a number of other comics professionals who are equally annoyed by the "well, Ronee might not have been right, but she wasn't WRONG" defense and won't deal with you.

Regardless of what might have sparked it, your site ran an inflammatory, immature, accusatory, stupidly worded and ill-thought-out column that ended up serving absolutely no one and started a damaging whisper campaign unlike anything else I've seen in all my years in comics. If you spent half the energy taking your lumps for screwing up as you do backpedalling with your "You'll see! You'll all see!"s, maybe you wouldn't encourage as much dogpiling.

No one's being "blackballed," you knothead. Heidi doesn't have any more abusable power with which to "blackball" someone in the industry than, oh, say, CHARLES does. Sorry to spoil another good rumormongering with all that "fact" nonsense.

K. Gendreau said...

Amen, Mr. Waid.

Jeremy Donelson said...

In this whole sordid, sorry story, there were two parties that made bad decisions and engaged in abhorrent, regrettable behavior: Charles Brownstein and Ronee Garcia-Bourgeois. Commenters who choose to condemn Garcia-Bourgeois and Buzzscope while forgiving Brownstein and the CBLDF are engaging in the same subjective, selective judgement of which they are accusing Guy.

The CBLDF has chosen to stand behind their man, and Buzzscope has chosen to stand behind Ronee. Personally, I find fault with both decisions. But attacking the messenger while forgiving the groper sends the wrong message to victims who are afraid to speak up because their assailants are connected, popular, or powerful.

David Uzumeri said...

I really think it's just impossible to lay blame here because the entire situation is a layer cake of stupidity. Pretty much every party involved in this made the worst judgment possible, repeatedly, including Brownstein, Lillie-Paetz, Soma, Garcia-Borgeois, and Buzzscope in general. It's a round of cyclical poor decision-making that's led to the comic industry to now, where sexual harassment allegations will be taken even LESS seriously because after this massive mess, who the hell knows the truth anymore?

If you wanted to expose the seedy sexist underbelly of the comic book industry, which I am 100% sure still exists, this really wasn't the right way to do it. I'm pretty sure this was the exact *wrong* way.

Sensationalistic "journalism" at its worst.

Louis H. Jordan said...

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/5/5/15728/53644/20#c20

"Patrick Kennedy's in a lot of pain; I feel sympathy.
But if he can't remember even getting into his car, if he was in rehab over Christmas, if there's an allegation he'd been drinking before the accident -- well maybe he needs to resign."

"Here's the problem folks: most Americans who aren't partisans truly believe the democrats and the republicans are 'all the same' and that the power-elite takes care of its own."

"Democrats can talk about Abramoff and Cunningham and the Republicans' toothless ethics bill, but so long as the People see us as just the "other side of the coin", they have little reason to go to the polls to vote for Dems."

"Now we've got Congressman William Jefferson who despite allegations of bribery won't resign, and Patrick Kennedy who announces he's "going to vote" and so dodges a Breathalyzer test, and now will go into rehab rather than resign."

"This gives all the justification in the world to independents who will say that the Dems are 'just as bad' and that 'all of them are corrupt.' "

"The Democratic Party needs to show it's different, that it's not a club of the elite taking care of the elite."

"Much as I feel for Congressman Kennedy, it's time for him for his own good and for the good of the Party, to resign with dignity."

Much as I feel for Brownstein, it's time for him, for his own good, for the good of CBLDF, for the good of the comics industry & community, to resign with dignity...If not, he and the organization, and those who support him, are hypocrites. I am sick and tired of the elite and privileged of all levels of American society getting a pass when they do something wrong.

This is the first time I have heard that an accuser, whose identity was released first, is being made, through deception, innuendo and insinuation, to look like she is at fault, and that what happened isn’t as bad as what people should think.

Now the fourthrail jumps in with a hit piece. and that guy says he’s a "reporter." unfortunately he can’t even spell. But hey, comic books have higher reader levels than newspapers these days, so what the hell...who is 4th rail kidding. Also, although the 4th rail has links to both the comics journal and newsarama pieces, it’s the newsarama piece that is more highlighted with different colored text. what a farce. also newsarma.com was far far from objective. Matt Brady is a friend of the accused and it comes through in his article. I notice that he published two articles; one was the "alleged perp" article, soon after comics journal, and then the "alleged crime" article, which of course will remain on the screen longer than the first one when other current articles cause it scroll it down. for anyone not to see that his friendship colors his supposed "reporting," as well as heidi maconald's, they must be blind. that’s bringing a bias to the proceedings that is disgusting.Its kinda like did OJ Simpson commit a crime or not? whose kidding who here?

The accused ADMITTED that SOMETHING happened, that he felt he needed to APOLOGIZE FOR. Also through the CBLDF, he offered to pay? a donation to her favorite charity. whats up wit dat? What do we call it? restitution? buy out? pay off? for pain and suffering? That all of these comic industry professionals are trying to smother that issue, and think we are talking about the accused and the accuser on equal levels of culpability is ludicrous andout right madness. We are almost at the point of saying, if a woman puts herself in a position to be raped, then she deserves what she gets. that’s insanity. that’s revolting.

Also, that supporters of the accused, as well as those who say they support CBLDF, have pushed the idea on many forum rebuttals, that none of this should ever of been talked about in public, is also ludicrous. If you are a public individual, or business, passionate discourse on your PUBLIC ACTIONS IS LEGAL. THAT IS THER BASIS OF SOCIETY GOING BACK FOR CENTURIES IN OUR SOCIETY, if not the world's. For supporters of a nonprofit organization that promotes the protection of rights of the first amendment, to push this point is frightening and causes great concern for me. I shake my head in disbelief that and open-minded person would support this tactic, when the victim is in a position of not knowing how to take on a person of influence, who is connected with the movers and shakers of the comics industry. If you had been touched and felt threatened, what would you do? Just say nothing happened? even if you had a few drinks but it was still clear something inappropriate happened?

I hate to use this analogy, because I do not believe the accused is this way, BUT THERE ARE THOSE WHO SUPPORT THE ACCUSED WHO ARE INSINUATING SHE IS (especially since there were comments that the accuser is having an affair with the eye witness, AS IF THAT SHOULD CHANGE ANYTHING!!!!!!!!!!!!), but were the murdered victims of Jack the Ripper any less dead or victims, because of their occupation or lifestyle? No they weren’t. They still had crimes committed against them, and even in medieval society, the perpetrator would have been punished, of course if he or she was connected then here we are back at my original frustration!!!

I truly hope the accuser one day gets her satisfaction, and that justice is served. If not, then the next time I intentionally touch a woman, although I am drunk, I will simply say I didn’t mean it and offer to pay her not to press charges, or get her boyfriend/husband not to kick my ass.

LASTLY, the MacDonald piece is also revolting, to say the least. I was going to CENSOR my comments on it, but since this involves some supporters of the CBLDF who have been posting in forums for this whole thing to be hushed up, I am going to babble one last time, and let my anger get the better of me:

to quote the MacDonald piece: “The detectives in the case aren't all that forthcoming, but this is the most likely scenario until Soma herself decides to speak out.”

See what I mean? Soma has spoken out?! and those comments are on the internet. Why state such a misleading comment? Why not give a link like she did for newsarama? Again, here we have ANOTHER friend of the accused posting their opinion on the events, and recommending for everyone to just live and learn. in other words "...since everyone was drunk, o well, shit happens...lets march on and get over it..."

...yes this is getting really sad. Oh I guess I will be called an "idiot" (MacDonald's choice of word for those who speak their mind) for wanting this "resolved." Fuck that noise…

Brownstein and those who support him are getting what they deserve.

case closed...

Erech said...

I'll probably regret this, but...

"Its kinda like did OJ Simpson commit a crime or not? whose kidding who here?"

Um, what? In relation to the rest of that paragraph, this makes zero sense to me. Can you elaborate maybe, or ya know, reign it in some with the absurd analogies?

"We are almost at the point of saying, if a woman puts herself in a position to be raped, then she deserves what she gets. that’s insanity. that’s revolting."

Nope, no we aren't. I haven't seen anyone worth talking about who has made any sort of connection to a line of thinking like this. If I'm wrong, you wanna post a link or two, maybe (since that seemed to be a large point for you vs. Heidi and thefourthrail pieces)?

"Brownstein and those who support him are getting what they deserve. case closed..."

CB, maybe. But his supporters are getting, um, what exactly? A poorly punctuated AND worded verbal thrashing by the ClarKent97 and DeadshotJr's of the message board world? Huzz and ah!

I'm sorry, and I don't know you from Adam, but it seems to me THIS is the kind of behavior that has harmed, and continues to harm any "side" Taki Soma may have had in this event - although that I continue to see people who have no stake with or relationship to the event, talk about there being or even claiming to take sides, blows my wig back.

The good of the comic industry is hardly what is at stake here, and will be just fucking fine whether CB resigns or is strung up by his genitals etc etc, I promise you.

I get that your heart is in the right place - but your mind, and your typey typing fingers are in a scary place sir. And any cause like this you want to champion is just going to be ultimately harmed by that, yeah?

Chill out.

Louis H. Jordan said...

Er-ick,

Its a free country troll. Fuck you and fuck off.

I stand by everyone of my "poorly written" comments. Who are you.. a censor of some kind? I SEE NO MATTER HOW BAD MY COMMENTS WERE WRITTEN YOU GOT MY MESSAGE.

If the truth hurts, thats Brownstein and company's fault NOT MINE. CB IS APOLOGIZING FOR SOMETHING...MAYBE A CRIME??!!!

Seems like the elite and powerful in the comic industry are the only ones aloud to troll as well as "attempt" to fondle, molest, and/or harass someone...

And yes, I see this as the same as OJ...and now as kennedy(the blog comments I posted were from a democrat liberal blogger who is also disgusted at the elite in his party abusing their power and privilige and strongly believes they should resign, as well as those in the republican party. And i wholeheartedly agree. Peopel with rank need to be responsible for their actions. its that simple. If someone hadnt been there to stop Brownstein, how far was he willing to go?)

.....and as far as the comments by those who support the accused, they speak for themselves. you do your own fuckin research. go to newsrama and read the insinuation and innuendo thats been put up over there...as well as some of the pulse comments. and everyone just falls all over themselvs about Heidi's piece of trash op ed. they are sympatheitc to the accused. And the 4th rail hack is a real charmer, but he is slanted too. If the 4th guy is a reporter, I am not impressed. He slanted the presentation of his piece. Even his links are presented in a biased way. He is a friend too of the accused.

And you complain about me!!! I dont claim to even be a reporter like this guy does. spelling, grammer mistakes....Why dont you go tell him how his last sentence reads, and get him to correct it. It really sucks man. really sucks...

Macdonald calls those who have opinions and want it resolved "idiots." Thats lousy jounalism to me. LOUSY AND ROTTEN. ...but she is a friend of the accused so that answers her motivation.

And please, I dont know how many people I saw at newsarama and even the pulse that said, "oh why did this haveto be made public at this time," even some assholes that said this is awful timing to be happening when Civil War is coming out!!!! unfuckinbelievable!! ...and then fkin Joe Q shows up...

I think the internet is great. It allows those without a voice to have one. Tough for those who disagree. they should really control themselves in public especially when they drink. Being under the influence doesnt excuse them from stepping on the law or someone's rights.

I guess Er-ick, you are into patrolling any negative comments by those who support the accuser. again tough...yu will probably get depressed if you follow that course of action.

alot of peopel think the accuser is getting a raw deal. You know when something is wrong, its wrong, even the stones cry out for justice.

OJ eventually got his comeuppance, and CB will eventually get his. too bad for him. He is an adult, not a child, and should face the consequences of his actions, and not try and be HIS OWN JUDGE AND JURY. AND HIS FRIENDS ARENT THE JUDGE OR JURY IN THIS EITHER!

all i know is all those who say they dont like Ronee's piece are friends of the accused. They are biased and their opinions/reporting proves it. THEY TRY TO NEUTRALIZE THIS WHOLE AFFAIR, THEY SAY BOTH PARTIES ARE IN DEEP SHIT, AND THEN GO FOR THE HIT ON RONEE...THATS BIAS AT ITS MOST DEVIOUS.

...go figure.

I guess this industry has alot of creative types that need to have alittle moderation...but you know what, I dont see the accused's side being moderate...AT ALL.

I aint changin what I think on this for nobody. I saw this whole thing comin from a mile away...

cheers mate (wink, wink)

Erech said...

Oh man (sorry Guy)...

"If the truth hurts, thats Brownstein and company's fault NOT MINE. CB IS APOLOGIZING FOR SOMETHING...MAYBE A CRIME??!!!"

What are you... just... but..what?! What truth? I'm sorry, who are you and how are you connected to this, and what do you know for certain that the rest of us don't?

"Seems like the elite and powerful in the comic industry are the only ones aloud to troll as well as "attempt" to fondle, molest, and/or harass someone..."

These are just the babblings of a madman, you have to see that's how this comes across, right?

"And you complain about me!!! I dont claim to even be a reporter like this guy does. spelling, grammer mistakes....Why dont you go tell him how his last sentence reads, and get him to correct it. It really sucks man. really sucks..."

I didn't claim you claimed to be a reporter. I don't claim to be one either. I don't even think claiming to be a reporter defacto means your grammar or spelling has to be top-notch either, actually. But your post was so bad at times, that some of your points were, and still are, lost to me. Plus, it's certainly a bit unfair for you to go after something as trivial as grammar etc, when you yourself can't even get it right, homeslice. Right?

If you are going to attack things about it, at least make them relevant and concise, not this broad speculation and imaginary conclussion business you seem to be doing now. Case in point:

"I guess Er-ick, you are into patrolling any negative comments by those who support the accuser. again tough...yu will probably get depressed if you follow that course of action."

Just giant slippery bags of shit, huh? I can't even fathom what land your brain sits in that let you come to this conclussion.

And as for why I don't call Don on how his last sentence reads, it's really simple - I don't give a shit. You do. You call him on it, you weirdo. I only replied to you in the first place because you posted some stuff on my friends site, and I felt like it needed to be addressed.

"Macdonald calls those who have opinions and want it resolved "idiots." Thats lousy jounalism to me. LOUSY AND ROTTEN. ...but she is a friend of the accused so that answers her motivation"

Since you totally ignored the last time I asked you to, but can you link to this, or quote it for me? I may not always agree with Heidi, but I cannont believe in any reality that she called people idiots only because they want "it" "resolved".

You're the Karl Pilkington of this site now, you know this, right? Guy, can I do a column with him - pretty please?!

"all i know is all those who say they dont like Ronee's piece are friends of the accused. They are biased and their opinions/reporting proves it. THEY TRY TO NEUTRALIZE THIS WHOLE AFFAIR, THEY SAY BOTH PARTIES ARE IN DEEP SHIT, AND THEN GO FOR THE HIT ON RONEE...THATS BIAS AT ITS MOST DEVIOUS."

Rabbit, ass, and mind, I believe the term is. As in, you must be out of yours.

"I aint changin what I think on this for nobody. I saw this whole thing comin from a mile away...'

And yet you did nothing to stop it, did you Karnak? So that must mean you are really the one to blame here, right? You selfish bastard. Turn over your Legion ring, yer out of the group!!

I'm done.

Louis H. Jordan said...

Yes, you are done. Another fool who cant take the truth. You and heidi are a hit squad trying to protect the accused for taking repsonsibilty for his actions. He should step down and let the CBLDF retain its integrity.

Taken from http://www.comicon.com/pulse/ go to the Beat link, under "Posted by THE BEAT at 10:53 AM | Permalink"


"May 03, 2006"
"Mid-Ohio-gate: Act III"

"....First, seeming evidence that it was Soma herself who decided not to press charges. The detectives in the case aren't all that forthcoming, but this is the most likely scenario until Soma herself decides to speak out."

"Second, the fact that the CBLDF had in fact conducted an outside investigation, and dealt with the matter internally. "

"So, to every internet idiot who is begging for this case to be resolved, I have some shocking news for you: it already has."

"Soma has declined to press charges. And the CBLDF has investigated the charges and taken appropriate action."

....again, another friend of the accused who refuses to do research into what has really happened and/or been posted on the internet. I will repeat myself AGAIN: CBLDF does not have the last word on this. They did not conduct an outside investigation but are simply gathering evidence for a possible court case against a member of their organization.

Also, Soma has SPOKEN OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!WHY THE FUCKIN LIE??????????!!!!!!!!!WHY MISLEAD?????WHY SLANT THE ARTICLE THAT WAY????????AND WHY ARE PEOPLE WHO WANT THIS "RESOLVED" "IDIOTS"???????????? WHO SAYS ITS "RESOLVED"?????!!!!! HEIDI??????ERECH??????BY WHAT AUTHORITY DO YOU BOTH BASE YOUR FINAL JUDGEMENTS ON????WHO ARE EITHER OF YOU??? your just exercising your freedom of speech, just like the rest of us. why pick on those who have the same legal right but dont agree with either of you or your friend, the accused?

Err-ik, is that a hairy crack on your face, or is that shit hanging from your mouth? you and those who support the accused are assholes, in my eyes, for ignoring some very obvious facts (such as Soma has posted her experience a few weeks ago....that is plainly obvious too anyone),and all of your actions of denial smell like a cover up to me.

that really stinks...that really stinks b-a-d.

case open or case closed? hmmmmm
cheers mate (wink wink)

Erech said...

"You and heidi are a hit squad trying to protect the accused for taking repsonsibilty for his actions."

Marry me!

I admit, I stand corrected on the "idiot" quote, although the context of the actual is a bit different than how your version came across, to me at least. Still, I guess if you really have nothing better to do than be offended by what Heidi writes about YOU on her blog, then shit, maybe you do have a point.

"BY WHAT AUTHORITY DO YOU BOTH BASE YOUR FINAL JUDGEMENTS ON????"

You keep assuming you have any idea what my stance on in this incident is, why is that?

"your just exercising your freedom of speech, just like the rest of us. why pick on those who have the same legal right but dont agree with either of you or your friend, the accused?"

Why? Because of freedom of speech, that's why. Why pick on me for picking on you, because I don't agree with you, huh? Why are you the only one above being called out on your rhetoric? You expect everyone else on the whole comic inturnerd to answer for these opinions/mistakes/lies/whatever whatever, but you get to just babble off on any old tangent you want? That's hardly fair at all, now is it?

"Err-ik, is that a hairy crack on your face, or is that shit hanging from your mouth? you and those who support the accused are assholes, in my eyes, for ignoring some very obvious facts and all of your actions of denial smell like a cover up to me."

You are a total lunatic, this is awesome. I'm not even gonna bother to pick this statement apart, it's just incredible in it's lack of anything related to fact.

Oh crap, you don't have a blog about comics do you?! Maybe I better start being nice to you, ya know, just in case.

(note to self: only PRETEND to be nice, then tell Heidi and Charles at our annual holiday retreat what I really think about him!)

Louis H. Jordan said...

"I admit, I stand corrected on the "idiot" quote, although the context of the actual is a bit different than how your version came across, to me at least. Still, I guess if you really have nothing better to do than be offended by what Heidi writes about YOU on her blog, then shit, maybe you do have a point."

thanks for seeing my point and yes I am offended, and I will stay offended. btw...did I say thanks??.

Also, my comment you quoted....wtf?

there is another sentence after it. DONT PULL A HEIDI.....You have taken my words out of context. The FULL quote should read:

“Yes, you are done. Another fool who cant take the truth. You and heidi are a hit squad trying to protect the accused for taking repsonsibilty for his actions. He should step down and let the CBLDF retain its integrity.”

The accused Brownstein has admitted he did wrong.

He has offered a buy out, so he should go all the way.

But you and Heidi are protecting him from the biggest responsible act to make: TO RESIGN. You both feel you are protecting CB from himself. YOUR NOT.

Brownstein wants to do the right thing, but his buddies wont let him. go fuckin figure...?

Heidi is more than just using her right to freedom of speech. She is lying to cover up for a friend and then promoting the denial of the rights of others. Yes, she can voice her opinion. And i have never denied her that. THATS WHAT I SAID SO EMPHATICALLY IN MY LAST POST....

As I just said, Heidi and others are writing to deny rights to those who disagree with the accused, AS WELL AS DENYING WHAT SOMA HAS ALREADY PUBLISHED, AS WELL AS A TRYING TO CAUSE SOMA NOT TO GO TO COURT. THOSE ARE HIT PIECE TACTICS. THATS LIKE SAYING A PERSON HAS SO MANY RIGHTS GUARANTEED BY THE CONSTITUTION, THAT HE OR SHE (such as a journalist) CAN CANCEL EVERYONE ELSE'S RIGHTS OUT. not in this country. not here.

that is the hypocrisy I stated, in my first rant, against those who support the accused...they are promoting the denial of rights guaranteed to the accuser. they feel if they say it enough times, it will come true. like fun.

Also, if you cant stomach what I write...THEN WHY FUCKIN WRITE/RESPOND???????!!!!!! you must enjoy pain. you sadist you (wink wink) CRACK!!! ooo! there goes the wip again (wink wink)

“....I want a divorce... NO, AN ANNULLMENT. WE WERE NEVER MARRIED..,you lied to me about your intentions...”

cheers mate, and dont take it so personal...you sound stressed (wink wink)

Anonymous said...

Few thoughts:
1) I don't think the argument is (or should be that) that Mr. Brownstein should have no punishment for his actions. Rather I think a number of people feel something short of firing him is appropriate based on their feelings as to what probably happened.
2) When people say it is "resolved", I believe they are referring to whether or not the CBLDF is going to fire Mr. Brownstein (which was apparently Ms. Soma's primary goal). I can't say whether that decision was based on the Board's faith in Mr. Brownstein's version, the opinion of the outside counsel they hired, or some other factor. But short of a massive public campaign they seem uninterested in pursuing that option.
3) I think it is important to keep in mind that Mr. Brownstein has apologized and apparently offer compensation to Ms. Soma for his version of what happened, not for her version. If you apologize for shooting me with a water gun, you would be surprised if I told people you tried to drown me. I'm not saying his version is the "truth", but just that we should not assign him more responsibility that he has accepted.
4) I'm going to credit Ms. MacDonald and others with being aware that Ms. Soma wrote a piece for Buzzscope. I think that when the talk about waiting for Ms. Soma to "speak out", they would like to hear her version of events now that Mr. Brownstein's name is public and certain questions have been raised (such as whether she pressed charges and why didn't she have her witness talk to the police).
5) Whatever else happens, no amount of blogging can keep Ms. Soma from her day in court. And as she doesn't have a right to have someone get fired, it seems to me her rights are still intact.

In the end, most of us are groping in the dark, trying to make sense of all of this. Hopefully over time the conversation will turn to the larger questions raised by all of this, such as what is the comic community doing to make sure everyone understands what is and is not appropriate. And what are the responsibilities of writers and their host sites... if someone makes a series of statements without any qualifiers (in my opinion, my sources say), how can we tell if they are presenting facts or opinion?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous makes alot of good points BUT i cant give too much benefit of the doubt to people like Heidi MacDonald. Heidi KNOWS better. She should have posted comments about the accuser alot more fairly...or neutraly for that matter. As it was, she wrote her piece to land on the side of the accused by neutralizing the accuser's side of the story.

All I hear from friends of the accused is "the truth may never be known" and yet anyone sympathetic to her would rather say "she deserves justice." All I hear are apologies for the accused and for everyone to live, learn, forgive, forget. Unfortunately, its not their girlfriend, sister, or friend, that this happened to. They are friends of the accused.

Because the friends of the accused run most of the comics industry websites they are being very unfair and biased against the accuser.

I almost see these friends of the accused not wanting the dark underside of the male comics community to be exposed for public view, even by some women going against Soma in an unfair manner, especially since their careers are intertwined with this mostly male industry.

....hey anyone read about the execution of Atwar Bahjat? Another case of a male dominated community trampling the rights of a woman, and getting away with it. And the women of that society looking the other way too. To quote the Times:

"EVEN by the stupefying standards of Iraq’s unspeakable violence, the murder of Atwar Bahjat, one of the country’s top television journalists, was an act of exceptional cruelty. "

Lets hope the comics community doesnt do a non-violent version of silencing Soma's grievances by writing unfair op ed pieces to neutralize her case in the public mind.

If it was someone or some group they didnt like, they would say he should resign for "attempting to take a girl's shirt off against her will." Im mean, if some politiician did this to a woman, what would people think? what would people want him to do?

check out the horrible silencing of this courageous Iraqi woman at the following link:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2168496,00.html

supposedly her execution is the first full execution being shown on the internet by these iraqi death squads. I guess to keep the other women in line and know whose the boss in iraqi society. horrible.

...all because she made her presence felt in a all-male run society by exposing its dark side. makes one wonder and tremble.

Although we are not condoning bloody violence, are we really any better when we allow, and EVEN ACTIVELY SUPPORT, the unfair silencing in the comics industry press, of a woman's grievance against a man who abused her trust of him? ...and in some instances, the silencing is being done the comics industry press members. how unfair...

where does it all end?

Anonymous said...

Judging from the rhetorical and grammatical tics present in Louis Jordan's comments, I'm going to assume that he's "ClarKent78," or whatever, who posted at Newsarama on a bunch of CBLDF- and free speech-related stories.

Louis H. Jordan said...

...so whats your point troll?

dig deeper, come on...you must have an answer? Its because you must be the troll Erech/Err-ick, another friend of Brownstein. Another friend of CB who wants this whole Soma incident to disappear. Erech used the "ClarK78" phrase earlier, before he/she got their ass kicked.

I like it when a person using the alias "anonymous," accuses someone he cant prove wrong of being another guy named "ClarKent 78". Well we have a real investigative reporter on our hands. Kind of like when Matt Brady and Rick Johnston(BOTH FRIENDS OF BROWNSTEIN
BTW)went after Soma by saying she is having an "affair" with the only eye witness to her attack.

Also, this anonymous "investigative reporter friend of CB" acts like those who try to say that FriendsofLulu has had financial woes in the past and they then try to through dirt on the Empowerment Fund. BUT THIS STILL DOESNT MEAN A CRIME WASNT COMMITTED AGAINST SOMA,SO BETTER LUCK NEXT TIME WITH YOUR SMEAR CAMPAIGNS ERECH, BECAUSE IN A COURT OF LAW THEY DONT MEAN NOTHIN. WATCH THE MOVIE "DIAL M FOR MURDER," OR "A TIME TO KILL," YOU SANCTAMONIOUS SCUM, AND SEE IF SMEAR CAMPAIGNS WORK. THEY END UP GETTING THROWN RIGHT BACK IN YOUR FACE.

I guess mr./ms. anonymous cant stomach when he/she doesnt have the answers can they? I guess they dont like it when they work against A woman's rights and try to hide behind their company's prestige to prevent them from getting caught. I guess they dont like it when they are compared to the the Taliban. WELL TOUGH. THE NAME FITS FOR THEIR TACTICS.

I wonder why Erech/anonymous is ignoring the real issue of this thread?

...another fuckin hypocrite, with no answers. oi, how original.

get fuckin real asshole. come back when you have some friends to help you.

p.s. I repeat, whats your point troll?

Guy LeCharles Gonzalez said...

Breaking radio silence momentarily to ask Mr. Jordan to chill out. Please.

You're coming off like a raving lunatic -- especially in attacking Erech, who's not engaging in the behavior you seem to think he is -- and the couple of good points you've made are being completely drowned out by your hysterical presentation.

I sincerely appreciate your passionate defense of Ms. Soma, but I urge you to stand down. Take a deep breath, count to 10, and step away from the keyboard.

All will be revealed in due time. Until then, be patient, bite your tongue, and let those who wish to declare the issue dead have their premature say.

Erech said...

Louis H. Jordan said:

"there is another sentence after it. DONT PULL A HEIDI.....You have taken my words out of context. The FULL quote should read:"

But by grouping me in with Heidi, or anyone else who wrote on this, or who are friends to CB, completely negates the rest of your point to me. There is no context once you fall off the map into la-la land, as grouping me in with them is insanity. I don't know CB, I don't know Heidi, I'm not even a member of the Fund. You haven't read a single thing from me anywhere defending the accused, because I have nothing to defend. At most I've called bullshit on your analogies and notions that this whole incident is black and white. Piling people together from message boards or whatever, who have no stake in this, simply to pad your conspiricy theories, is just mad.

"The accused Brownstein has admitted he did wrong."

Not the wrong that Taki claims though.

"He has offered a buy out, so he should go all the way."

I thought this "fact" got shot down?

"Brownstein wants to do the right thing, but his buddies wont let him. go fuckin figure...?"

Wow.

"Also, if you cant stomach what I write...THEN WHY FUCKIN WRITE/RESPOND???????!!!!!!"

Fair enough. Karl.

anonymouse said:

"She should have posted comments about the accuser alot more fairly...or neutraly for that matter. As it was, she wrote her piece to land on the side of the accused by neutralizing the accuser's side of the story."

Why, though? She prefaced the whole thing by admitting she has a longtime friendly relationship with the guy. I mean, questioning her fairness and bias, sure, I guess. but what is there to quetion really? But if at the worst, I was ever arrested for eating a bus of children and shooting the Pope, and it was all caught on video, I hope at least a few of my friends would stand up and have some good things to say about me, ya know? Why should she have talked about something neutrally, when the tone of thebeat has always been pretty much her thoughts etc? Geese and ganders, yeah?

And even if you believe the absolute worst version of any part of this story that is floating around, would you completely cut a friend off for doing it? Expect that he should never earn a living again for what at the worst, was an unwanted grope?

Let's not get clouded up in the politics of the entire worlds mistreatment of women in this case, reaching for that isn't fair to the accused OR the accuser.

Erech said...

Holy cow :D

Louis H. Jordan said...

"Judging from the rhetorical and grammatical tics present in Louis Jordan's comments, I'm going to assume that he's "ClarKent78," or whatever, who posted at Newsarama on a bunch of CBLDF- and free speech-related stories."

key words "bunch" and "tics"

...be nice to have some proof on the "bunches" of Newsarama-CBLDF stories.

how come there are none for the Brownstein crisis that Matt Brady wet his pants over?

better luck next time Erech. smoke, mirrors and spin, all courtesy of the friends of Brownstein. A bunch of thought police and censors themselves. HYPOCRITES.

Anonymous said...

...just saw the warning Mr Gonzalez. I shall desist as long as trolls dont keep piling on.

Louis H. Jordan said...

To Mr Gonzalez, I posted rashly. I have scene your warning and will respect it. But have to clear up ANOTHER LIE being attributed to me.

I have NEVER said Brownstein cannot work again in the industry. I HAVE NEVER SAID HE SHOULD BE BLACKLISTED. NEVER! somebody please show that me that quote? PLEASE!!!

I have said he should RESIGN from his present CBLDF position because his actions hurt the integrity of the CBLDF and what they stand for.

why the lies form the friends of CB? again...

why cant those who side with the accused be for the truth instead of posting lies and innuendo.

nuff said.

Scott said...

Wow. Someone didn't eat his Sanity Flakes this morning.

Anonymous said...

You didn't say anything about blacklisting or not working in the industry specifically. But:
1) If "for the good of CBLDF, for the good of the comics industry & community" he should resign his current post, then why would it be ok for someone else in industry to hire him? Wouldn't it besmirch their reputation as well?
2) I'm not sure who else in the industry would hire a lawyer with a specialty in First Amendment law.

At this point, seems like the advice to wait to see what else develops is best. For example, Buzzscope should have a statement out soon on their internal investigation.

Don MacPherson said...

Louis Jordan writes:
>Also, although the 4th rail has links to both the comics journal and newsarama pieces, it’s the newsarama piece that is more highlighted with different colored text. what a farce. also newsarma.com was far far from objective.<

The only reason the Newsarama link text is a different color is because you've probably visited that link as opposed to the others. It in no way reflects a bias for or against anyone.

Sigh.

Louis H. Jordan said...

D. Macpher wrote,

"The only reason the Newsarama link text is a different color is because you've probably visited that link as opposed to the others. It in no way reflects a bias for or against anyone."

"sigh"

Dear "sigh,"

no I visited both links, as well as read them BOTH before going to your site.

"sigh" again.

oh, please dont faint over this serf writing his thoughts.

...bias and insinuation know no boundaries.

from the D. Macpher article itself:

"...but most people would agree that the ends do not justify the means."

(now that reads better. grammer and spell checker always helps. wink wink)

...unfortunatey the classic "end justifies the means" phrase can be used against newsarama, comicbook resources, the beat, etc...and most of those who have not remained "neutral" and sided with the accused, or slanted their articles against the accuser...and at the same time proselytize that they are remaining "neutral."

"siiiiiiiiighhhhhhhh..."

oh please, this is such a f*ckin farce...

Anonymous said...

the poster "anonymous said" stated the following:

"I'm not sure who else in the industry would hire a lawyer with a specialty in First Amendment law."

Oh please...are you f'n kidding???

Please reread your comment. dude you blew that one. A first amendent specialty lawyer cant find work in the USA these days? Then why are law schools offering this area of expertise? The pumping them out like barbie dolls.

Also, just because soemone resigns for the good of the comics industry doesnt mean he cant find work afterwords. give me a f'n break. As if he doesnt have friends/connections in this industry who would hire him, as well as work with other first amendment rights organizations.

heh, this guy admited to AT LEAST attempting to lift up her shirt. He should at least take responsibility for his actions. I would like to see anybody "ATTEMPT" to lift any woman's shirt up, and see what happens. Maybe people could say their sorry, but I dont think that would go very far.

...and Scott says i didnt take my "sanity flakes" today? Scott, if these responses for the accused are any indication of the "sanity" of those who support the accused, well Brownstein better resign asap. His friends are all nuts!

hahahahah

what a farce...

Anonymous said...

Ummm,I'm not sure this is worth the effort I'm going to put in but let's try again.

First, some perspective. I posted because of two things you said. I'll address them each separately.

1) "I have NEVER said Brownstein cannot work again in the industry."
If you read my post, I don't say Mr. Brownstein won't find work (we agree that would be a stupid statement). I said (and you quoted) that he would not find work IN THE INDUSTRY (by which I meant the comic industry... I thought that was self-evident because, after all, what other industry could I be talking about?).

Why do I believe this? Because few comic publishers hire lawyers and none of those that I can think of need First Amendment trial lawyers on staff (the few times it comes up it is probably contracted out to a lawyer who works with many clients). If he is not working for CBLDF or a publisher, he is, by definition, not going to be in the industry.

All I was trying to do was point out that it should not surprise you that people would interpret your words as wanting Mr. Brownstein to be removed from the industry (as this would be the net result of firing him from CBLDF). Heck, it is what Ms. Soma wants or wanted.

2) I HAVE NEVER SAID HE SHOULD BE BLACKLISTED."
Which is a good lead-in to my next point. You have (loosely) equated Mr. Brownstein's actions with that of a rapist and Jack the Ripper. Given the incredibly harsh things you said about him, why aren't you blacklisting him? If tomorrow it is announced he is working in the legal department of DC, will that be ok with you? (And if you are not going to answer this question, please don't bother responding to my post).


In the end, I'm struck by the fact that there seems to be this assumption that if someone in the industry speaks out in favor of Mr. Brownstein they must be doing so solely out of friendship rather than an assessment of the facts at hand. Personally I have a hard time believing that these people would be willing to foresake their judgement of what is right and wrong and potentially risk their reputation in the industry simply on the basis of personally knowing somebody.

Louis H. Jordan said...

Dear anonymous said,

The comments of yours i am answering are posted down below. If you cant understand these answers, then I dont know what else to say to help you out any more.

A first amendment/trial lawyer can find work. period. If everyone seems to think he didnt do anything serious, why wouldnt he get hired? You mean Marvel or DC dont have first amendment lawyers protecting their interests?

Please, Paul Levitz sits on the Board of the CBLDF, and Joe Quesada is a friend of his. please, please, please...you act as if this guy would be on hobo row or somehting, begging for quarters in hell's kitchen.

To answer you questions/accusations, NO!!! i would not care if he worked for Marvel or DC legal departments. Come on buddy boy, look who owns either of these two companies; OTHER BIG ENTERTAINMENT COMPANIES THAT HAVE HUGE LEGAL DEPARTMENTS, IN MOVIES, DV, VIDERO, PRINT, ETC...AS WELL AS COMICS.

It is hypcritical to work for CBLDF because this is specifically an organiztion to protect individuals in the comic book/GN, TPB industry whose free speech rights have been violated. In my opinion, the lawyers involved need to be ABOVE REPROACH, because in many instances they are trying to provide example that their clients have not committed any crimes and are UPSTANDING CITIZENS.

You tell me if the DA against CBLDF's clients wont bring out Brownstein's past actions for harming the personal and bodily safety of Taki Soma? who are you kidding anonymous? At least if CB works in another position, such as reviewing contracts or whatever other legal datamining he knows how to do (NOONE IS GOING TO TELL ME HE DOESNT KNOW OTHER KINDS OF trial or contract LAW! please..). THATS WHAT IT MEANS "FOR THE GOOD OF THE COMICS INDUSTRY." BROWNSTEIN'S ACTIONS ARE GOING TO HURT FUTURE FUND RAISING, AND FUTURE COURT CASES. NAME ONE ACLU LAWYER THAT HAS ATTEMPTED FONDLY SOMEONE??? Those lawyers have to have very law abiding records.

Lastly, ALSO FOR THE GOOD OF THE COMICS INDUSTRY, CB should resign, and the CBLDF should accept his resignation because the actions of CB are representative of what other industry male professionals have done and have not been caught doing. Everyone says, “WE SHALL PREVENT WOMEN FROM BEING TREATED IN A MOLESTING MANNER.” And yet, when someone does these actions, everybody screams “WHAT HE DID WASN’T THAT BAD!! GIVE THE GUY A BREAK!!! HE’LL STARVE IF YOU DON’T!!!”

Now that this incident has been reported, CB should be a man, and take responsibility for his actions. To act as if his actions, AND WHAT HE REPRESENTS, DONT MATTER, IS HYPOCRITCAL. YOU CANT PROTECT CITIZEN'S RIGHTS, AND THEN ABUSE SOMEONE ELSES. TO HOLD A PUBLIC POSITION OF PRIVILIGE, YOU HAVE TO EARN IT; YOU DONT OWN IT BY DIVINE RIGHT, AND YOU CANT ACT ANYWHAY YOU WANT TO. If CBLDF doesnt understand this, then they and Brownstein, and those people who support him in his illegal behavior, are abusing the trust they are given by the comics community.

By leaving Brownstein in, CBLDF is saying to us "SERFS" in the comics community, that if you have a powerful position, and are connected, you can get away with anything. BROWNSTEIN AND THE CBLDF WILL HAVE SHOWN THEMSELVES TO HAVE BECOME ANOTHER CORRUPT PART OF THE ESTABLISHMENT. “MIGHT MAKES RIGHT.” “THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS.”

To repeat: if another male didnt stop Brownstein, HOW FAR WOULD HE HAVE GONE? Lets face it, Taki tried, but could not have protected herself. Brownstein was taking liberties with another person's civl liberties, and that’s WRONG. THAT’S BAD BEHAVIOR DESERVING OF A RESIGNATION FROM HIS POSITION

If you cant see the basics of this case, I really really feel sorry for you and those who are protecting Brownstein. In fact, its frightening to even have this conversation in a free society, that looks after those less fortunate in our society, who are not connected with the powerful elite. Its so obvious what is wrong with his actions and what his position represents in the CBLDF. To jeopardize everything the CBLDF stands for because people are friends of the accused is astonishing, especially since he admits to at least trying to lift her shirt, and then needing to be restrainted!!!!!!! He even admitted the booze got the better of him!

Between this and the latest Kennedy cover-up, I just cant get over the abusiveness of those in power and privilige in our country. At least others who are getting caught abusing their positions are resigning, which is the right thing to do. NOT RESIGN FROM SOCIETY, BUT FROM PUBLIC POSITIONS OF TRUST.

You ask why those people of prominence and privilige in the comic community are willing to risk their own reputations, weeeeelll …..blood, or friendship, in this case, is thicker than water. It can tend to blind a person's better judgement. Just ask the mafia. All because of family they kill and kill, and commit one crime after another. Because its done in the name of "family honor." does that make it right? Also, political parties do the same thing by covering for someone’s crimes or indiscretions, or giving them an excuse, when they break the public trust, in order not to make the party look bad.

Also, I believe that these people of power feel Brownstein represents their own ideals and causes. Brownstein has proven that they and their own personal behavior can end up going against those same ideals/causes, just like anybody else. Their pride prevents them, and him, from admitting they are no better than anybody else and in fact can commit illegal acts just like everybody else. They are elitists who feel they are above the common person’s faults and weaknesses.

To allow Brownstein to take a fall would admit they are no better than anybody else. Lets face it, creative individuals have a “God complex,” because they produce so much "new worlds and ideas" for the masses to enjoy. Again, their egos are hurt, and because Icharus(sp?) flew to close to the sun of trust he was given, he got burned, and therefore they got burned. The truths hurts, and they are trying to ignore, or prevent the truth from becoming reality. A REALITY THEY DONT LIKE.

To repeat, the truth hurts, go figure.

its good ol human nature that prevents these people from admitting the truth and asking a friend that he resign, for the betterment of the comics community, for the sake of their friendship, and MOST IMPORTANTLY, for the sake of the woman, whose rights he violated.

...hope you feel I answered your questions(s). Just remember, who am I anyway. A nobody, who doesn’t even use his real name. My comments don’t amount to “a hill of beans” in this world. After all, if someone doesn’t agree with me, they can delete my point of view in a split second, or ignore it and go to another website, or even simply log out, and turn the machine off.

nuff said. below are your comments/questions/accusations...

enjoy

"anonymous said"

"Given the incredibly harsh things you said about him, why aren't you blacklisting him? If tomorrow it is announced he is working in the legal department of DC, will that be ok with you? (And if you are not going to answer this question, please don't bother responding to my post)."


"In the end, I'm struck by the fact that there seems to be this assumption that if someone in the industry speaks out in favor of Mr. Brownstein they must be doing so solely out of friendship rather than an assessment of the facts at hand. Personally I have a hard time believing that these people would be willing to foresake their judgement of what is right and wrong and potentially risk their reputation in the industry simply on the basis of personally knowing somebody."

Ed Cunard said...

Louis,

There's a problem with your posts, and the posts of some others here: Brownstein isn't a lawyer for the CBLDF. He's the Executive Director. The CBLDF hires out for lawyers and, according to their web site, the only lawyer they have on staff is Burton Joseph, who acts as legal counsel to the Fund.

Anonymous said...

Ed, thanks for pointing that out. It makes my entire argument about "if he is fired from the CBLDF he will be out of the industry" completely moot. Shows what you get for assuming anything.

Louis, most of our dialog is pointless with this new information (if it wasn't already). Obviously Mr. Brownstein could find a similar job within the industry (although again, no one ever said he would starve or not find a job... in fact, I said that would be a stupid statement).

But I have to say that in reading your posts I'd have to agree with what Guy said earlier. You do have some good points - I'm particularly interested in the notion that those within the structure are inclined to support their own because they can identify with them and so when there is doubt they subconsciously lean towards the known (just enough to put the outsider on the defensive).

But between the excessive use of capital letters, demonizing others (the Mafia?), and arguing against things that were never said, it makes it hard to get to those kernels of important points. Just my opinion.

Louis H. Jordan said...

...you know "Anonymous said," you are a perfect example of why the comics industry has so many problems seeing the common sense truth of this whole matter.

When you first disagreed with me, you said "I dont agree because...."

Then you present questions, that DO get answered BY MOI. You also DO NOT ANSWER MINE, but lets not go there I guess because you dont seem to care anyways....

You then say the ANSWERS TO YOUR QUESTIONS ARE THE CORRECT ANSWERS BUT THAT YOU DIDNT MEAN TO ACTUALLY GET ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS YOU ASKED. OR SOMEHOW YOU DIDNT MEAN WHAT YOU SAID/ASKED...

...wft dude?

I am glad you accepted MOST of what I said, but your criticism of my opinion seems to change from post to post...AS WELL AS WHAT YOUR OPINION IS on this whole affair. And that aint right.

That is the same tactics of those who are siding with the accused. They keep trying to gray everything, and say "everyone is at fault here" or "we will never know the truth..."

Thats wrong and disingenuous.

Hey, for me, using words like "mafia" and using CAPITAL LETTERS, is the only way for me to show stubborn people my point of view, especially when they chnage the discussion playing field with every post. Also mafia tactics are not simply violent tactics, they are a direct result of a particular state of mind(and I dont mean that they are crazy or insane. they know what they are doing.), and of social interaction. Their philosphy of how they solve problems relates to false notions of pride and ego. These notions prevent them from truthfully acknowledging their faults and taking the direct consequences related to them. In the end, they take the law into their own hands.

Like I told others who cant stand my point of view: you dont like it, dont dialogue with me, dont respond, or dont even look at my opinion. How I respond is a direct result of the person I am dialoguing with. It takes two to tango, so they say...

nice dancing with ya bud...

p.s. well now that Brownstein isnt even a lawyer, I take back soem of what I said related to that issue, BUTCB STILL WILL BE ABLE TO BE HIRED IN THE COMICS INDUSTRY BY HIS WELL CONNECTED FRIENDS IF HE SO CHOOSES, OR FIND OTHER WORK.

For me, I have concerns about the victim more than anyone else. But no one who is well-connected in the industry seems to be worrying about her sooo...I rest my case.

Louis H. Jordan said...

Thanks Mr. Cunard for the info. Somehow I also thought that because others had said he was a lawyer...I dont htink I originally stated that but in any event, I will not mention that anymore.

Thank you again.

Anonymous said...

It is like a car wreak I can't look away from. Everyone else, just drive by.

There is more than one person posting as anonymous. Otherwise on May 8th I would have criticized myself. In fact, I'm pretty sure you posted as anonymous on May 9th.

Just because I happen to find some of your points to be worth considering does not mean I think they are correct. I am similarly interested in some of the pro-Brownstein arguments but don't necessarily accept those either. I happen to like living in a world where you can admire the audacity of some neo-conservative or neo-Marxist theories without having to subscribe to them.

You are trying to nail me down to one side or the other when in fact I do not have the heartfelt convictions as to what happened that night and what the consequences should be that you have. I'm not willing to state Ms. Soma is wrong, Mr. Brownstein is right, the CBLDF is right, etc because I personally don't have enough information to get a good feel for what happened that night. I'm not arguing for grays -- I'm saying that for me the picture is too blurry to make anything out.

That being said, I will separate myself from this nameless band of critics by saying a) whatever happened that evening, Ms. Soma is blameless (people attributing this to her drinking alcohol, her sticking around late, or not protesting about being pushed in the pool are blaming the victim); and b) it is possible that evidence could come forth that would make feel much more confident about what happened. Guy has promised as such.

I also think you do yourself a disservice by assuming you need tricks like capital letters and your "take no prisoners" language to express your point of view. In the end that sort of thing only makes the opposition more stubborn and other people who might be swayed walk away because you come off, in Guy's words, as a "raving lunatic" (and note he said the same thing I did -- that your points are obscured by your presentation. So it isn't just me).

As for not answering your questions, sorry, I thought most of them were rhetorical or moot by the time I read them. But here goes:
-If everyone seems to think he didnt do anything serious, why wouldnt he get hired? You mean Marvel or DC dont have first amendment lawyers protecting their interests?
Not that it matters now (or ever), but I do not believe there are enough first amendment issues faced by your larger publishers to have a lawyer on staff to solely deal with these issues. Warner may have one or two, but that isn't in the comics industry as I defined it. Again, we are both just blowing hot air here.

-You tell me if the DA against CBLDF's clients wont bring out Brownstein's past actions for harming the personal and bodily safety of Taki Soma? who are you kidding anonymous?
I never said a DA won't bring up Mr. Brownstein's past conduct but I will now. Other than conflicts of interest, the character of the attorneys involved is never brought up because they are not the ones on trial.

-NAME ONE ACLU LAWYER THAT HAS ATTEMPTED FONDLY SOMEONE???
I can't name any ACLU lawyers, fondling or otherwise. But my natural skepticism says that just because I haven't heard of such a case does not mean that someone was not accused and then dismissed quietly. Who knows, that might have happened here if the internal investigation had been allowed to proceed without any publicity as the victim apparently wanted it to.

-To repeat: if another male didnt stop Brownstein, HOW FAR WOULD HE HAVE GONE?
We have no idea. He claims in his drunken stupor he was only raising her shirt. The only way of answering that question is to look at the circumstances and, yes, the overall character of the person involved. Unless you have some sort of machine to look into someone's soul.

-Because its done in the name of "family honor." does that make it right?
No. But while I think this is an interesting explanation (the idea of that a culture or subculture can define its own rules of what is acceptable)of certain behaviors, I neither accept or reject it. Sorry, I don't claim to have a monopoly on the truth.

Louis H. Jordan said...

"TRICKS?" you would know about TRICKS wouldn’t you "anonymous?"

Nice buddy, real nice. "anonymous said" hmm….

what did anonymous SAY??? You keep changing every time!!!...

THE ONLY REASON BROWNSTEIN STOPPED WAS BECAUSE SOMEONE WAS THERE TO STOP HIM!!! SO YOU SIMPLY THINK NOTHING HAPPENED, AND THAT EVERYONE WAS TOO DRUNK TO KNOW THE TRUTH.

...as USUAL YOU TAKE THE SIDE OF BROWNSTEIN. BECAUSE YOUR A FRIEND AND YOU FEEL HE MUST BE BEING PERSECUTED. You are such a bold faced liar its pathetic.

...even in a "drunken stuppor" you are still committing a crime. When a person is drunk, no matter what kind of saint they are, they still commit a crime!!!!

Brownstein SHOULD BE REMOVED/DISMISSED. His actions will effect how the CBLDF is perceived as well as those he represents. Lawyers lives, just as much as their clients, ARE IMPORTANT, AND DO GET SCRUTINIZED. AS I ALREADY SAID, THE ACLU DOESNT HAVE MOLESTERS REPRESENTING THEIR CLIENTS. IF THEY HAD SOMEONE ON THEIR STAFF, THEY WOULD BE, AS YOU SAID, "DISMISSED QUIETLY," AS THE CBLDF SHOULD ALSO DO WITH BROWNSTEIN!!!

ACCORDING TO ANOTHER POSTER HE ISNT A CBLDF TRIAL LAWYER, HE'S THE BLOODY CBLDF BOARD CHAIRMAN!!!!

In 1987, Time Magazine, Vol. 129 Issue 21, p62, 1p, in the article "Law Whose Trial Is It Anyway? Defense lawyers raise hackles by attacking victims and prosecutors," Richard Lacayo reported the "tendency that had started for defense lawyers to attack and attempt to discredit witnesses, victims and even prosecutors, often women, on the basis of their personal or sexual behavior." The article reviewed then recent highly-publicized cases. These actions have continued until today.

So is Brownstein above being scrutinized by unscrupulous lawyers/prosecutors about his unscrupulous behavior? Anonymous you are a fool.

Also the article, "Twelve Anonymous Men," by: Gimbel, Barney, Newsweek, 00289604, 4/19/2004, Vol. 143, Issue 16, analyzes the Tyco and Martha Stewart cases showing jurors are often on trial, too.

"Will shielding identities protect them? Keith Rohman can't remember the last time he had to tail an unfaithful husband. These days the Los Angeles-based private investigator spends much of his time checking into another group of unlucky souls: jurors. Even before they step into the jury box, he often knows the value of their home, how much debt they're carrying and if they've ever been charged with a crime. 'Every bit of information about a juror helps,' he says. 'After all, it only takes one to throw a case.' Being called to serve on a jury used to be, at worst, an inconvenience. But the fallout from high-profile cases like Martha Stewart's and Dennis Kozlowski's is just beginning. Last week the lawyers of former star investment banker Frank Quattrone asked a federal judge for an anonymous jury in his retrial, arguing they didn't want a replay of the Tyco mistrial that was prompted by the press's publishing the name of Juror No. 4. The broader impact: experts say that without the promise of anonymity, many potential jurors may do everything they can to be eliminated--all at a time when the courts need them, with the upcoming showcase trials of former executives at Enron, WorldCom and HealthSouth. 'There's going to be a reluctance for people to put themselves under that kind of media scrutiny,' says jury consultant Richard Gabriel, who worked on the O. J. Simpson case. 'What juror wants their face on the front page of the newspaper?' "

"The problem with anonymous juries is that they typically protect privacy only while the trial is underway. At some point, jurors are vulnerable to media scrutiny. Lawyers, of course, have an early start. Consider the Martha Stewart case. Even before the verdict, Stewart's attorneys hired private investigators to look into the jurors' personal lives--checking out anything they might have lied about before the trial and thus might be grounds for appeal. A month after the guilty verdicts, they alleged that juror Chappell Hartridge had lied on his juror questionnaire when he failed to acknowledge a 1997 arrest for assaulting a girlfriend as well as other legal troubles. The failure to answer those questions honestly, the lawyers argued, deprived Stewart of her right to a fair trial. (Prosecutors counter that Stewart would be unable to show that accurate responses would have required his dismissal.) There's no law against checking into juror's lives--as long as no one contacts the jurors directly during or before the trial. 'It's not just what happens in the jury room,' says Rohman, the private investigator. 'Your whole life is fair game.' And with so many public records on the Internet, it's easy to piece together someone's life history in minutes. At this rate, jurors may start to wonder who's really on trial."

...KEY PHRASE MORON, "'Your whole life is fair game.' And with so many public records on the Internet, it's easy to piece together someone's life history in minutes. At this rate, jurors may start to wonder who's really on trial."

So do you really think a lawyer’s life should not be ABOVE REPROACH? OR THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF THE CBLDF?

…to even attempt to molest someone when you are drunk will still get your reputation and integrity in TROUBLE. BUT WHOSE FAULT IS THAT? THE ACCUSERS???????

Anyway, Brownstein could still get hired by his well connected friends in the entertainment industry SO WHY THE WORRY?

Buddy, your the only who thinks your answers are the right/TRUE ones. you do not care what the truth is.

BUT YOU KNOW WHAT, LETS DO IT YOUR WAY: LETS LEAVE BROWNSTEIN IN FOR ABUSING HIS RANK AND PRIVILIGE. LETS DO JUST THAT. Keep citing what you want the truth to be, and GO FOR IT. YOU JUST WANT A COVER UP ANYWAY. YOU DONT FOOL ME.

Your an absolute pathetic liar and hypocrite. WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO POST SOME FUCKIN BACKUP TO ANY OF YOUR OPIONS? TO ANY OF YOUR STATEMENTS. NOT ONE IOTA OF TRUTH. NOT ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

enjoy your life and enjoy your blind baseless & spineless opinions.

Anonymous said...

Look, let's be honest. I'm not in the industry, I'm not a friend of Mr. Brownstein. You are smart enough to realize that because I didn't even know he was a lawyer.

What I am is a guy who, having heard snippets from the people involved and some "news" reports, thinks that something wrong happened that evening but maybe not wrong enough to get someone fired. Maybe. I'm completely open to the idea that Guy's silver bullet is out there and when it appears I'll be pulling out my trusty torch.

But until that happens, I will be exploring different sides of it all. I'm going to point out that your theory of a "hive mentality" might explain why all these industry pros are supporting him. I'm also going to suggest that they might be speaking out because they know him and the description of the man in that first buzzscope article doesn't sound like the person they know. In short, I'm going to encourage people to think about it because, despite what you wrote, I don't know what the truth is.

I recognize you think this position is spineless. That because I'm unwilling to say "This person is wrong", it seems like I'm changing sides. So be it. I like to think I'm cautious and thoughtful, but I can see how someone with your convictions would be frustrated.

You know what I regret? That we never got to a point where we honestly asked the other person real questions. I'm not blaming you -- looking at my first post, I was made statements based on who I thought you were, rather than finding out if my assumptions were correct. And I think you did the same... if you had asked "I put a gun to your head and tell you you have to make a choice, you spineless worm", you would have found that, while I have strong doubts, I'm leaning more your way than the other.

But that kind of dialog isn't going to happen. And in the end, you are calling me pathetic, I'm accusing you of being a raving idiot (sorry about that, by the way), and both of us spent a lot of time without getting any closer to understanding not only the WHAT but more importantly the WHY of what we think.

Last post. Agree with me, laugh at me, tear me a new one. Stick a fork in it... I'm done.

Louis H. Jordan said...

dear "anonymous said,"

You are a devious and cynical indiividual that doesnt care about the truth.

I have backed up every one of my reasons why brownstein should resign. They are all clearly posted in my previous messages.

You know damn well if you had any leg to stand on to back up your point of view you wouldve. YOU NEVER NEEDED ME TO INVITE YOU TO PROVIDE FACTS TO YOUR POINT OF VIEW! YOU ARE A SPINELESS LIAR.

You have danced around, changing you reasoning more times than a pretzel-maker. NOW WHEN ITS TIME TO PUT UP OR SHUT UP, YOU FEIGN "WELL NOW THAT YOU NEVER ASKED ME ANYTHING, I THINK WE SHOULD STOP" boo hoo, boo hoo, sniff sniff.

your an idiot, a liar, and a hypocrite. Since you were reading every post on this thread, YOU DID SEE THE POSTER WHO MENTIONED BROWNSTEIN WASNT A LAWYER. I know you read everyone of mine, and I acknowledged to the poster of the fact that CB wasnt a lawyer, that he was correct.

You TROLLED me for a week. NOW THAT I PROVIDED PROOF THAT LAWYERS ARE FAIR GAME IN A TRIAL TO HAVE THEIR CREDIBILITY QUESTIONED, INCLUDING THEIR PERSONAL BEHAVIOR, YOU MAKE THE LAME-ASS EXCUSE THAT "YOU DIDNT KNOW HE WASNT A CBLDF TRIAL LAWYER." again, your a liar and a hypocrite.

EVEN IF BROWNSTEIN IS "ONLY" THE CBLDF BOARD CHAIRMAN, THAT POSITION IS EVEN MORE PROBLEMATIC TO THE INTEGRITY & REPUTATION OF THE CBLDF & ITS CLIENTS.

"rip you a new one???" dude!!!! wtf!

YOU RIPPED YOURSELF A NEW ONE BY WHAT YOU WROTE. ALL YOU DID WAS TRY TO NEUTRALIZE MY POINT OF VIEW. ALL YOU TRIED TO DO WAS MAKE ME AGREE THAT "WE REALLY SHOULDNT PICK SIDES." OR "THAT EVERYONE WAS DRUNK SOoo...how can anyone know what really happened."

THAT KIND OF SYMPATHY LETS BROWNSTEIN OFF THE HOOK. THAT SAYS TO PEOPLE THAT IF YOU CAN PUT OUT ENOUGH PROPAGANDA FOR A WELL- CONNECTED INDIVIDUAL,......AAAAAND IF THEY SHOULD BE SUSPECTED OF BREAKING THE LAW, OR ATTEMPTING TO BREAK THE LAW, PLEASE GIVE THEM THE "BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT."

SO MUCH OF OUR WORLD HAS ADOPTED YOUR REASONING THAT GANGS, THUGS, AND THOSE WITH PRIVILIGE AND POWER GET AWAY WITH BENDING AND BREAKING THE LAW ANYWAY THEY FEEL LIKE IT. YOUR WORLD IS ONE WHERE MIGHT MAKES RIGHT, AND COVER UPS REIGN AS THE NORM.

EVEN WHEN THE PROOF IS GIVEN TO SOMEONE LIKE YOU, YOU STILL WISH TO DENY THE TRUTH, IN ONE FORM OR ANOTHER.

And for any other asshole who wants to jump in, PLEASE read my weeks worth of proof that backs up everyone of my points.

WELCOME TO THE MACHINE ANONYMOUSE! IN THE END, BROWNSTEIN MAY JUST GET AWAY WITH IT. WITH MOUTHPIECES LIKE YOU AND HIS WELL-CONNECTED FRIENDS PROVIDING SUPPORT, HOW COULD HE LOSE?

how revolting to say the least ...the comics industry is in sad shape if these types of individuals like CB are looking out for our civil rights and "freedom of speech." WHOSE WATCHING THEM IF THEY SHOULD DENY US THOSE SAME RIGHTS???

...and it makes me wonder??

Anonymous said...

Good name in man and woman, dear my lord,
Is the immediate jewel of their souls:
Who steals my purse steals trash; 'tis something, nothing;
'Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands:
But he that filches from me my good name
Robs me of that which not enriches him
And makes me poor indeed.

Louis H. Jordan said...

"Fool me once, Shame on you, Fool me twice, Shame on me." Chinese Proverb.

"No strength within, no respect without" Kashmiri Proverb

"Because we focused on the snake, we missed the scorpion." Egyptian Proverb

"If there were no fault, there would be no pardon." Egyptian Proverb

"The tyrant is only the slave turned inside out." Egyptian Proverb

"Dont be so sweet that people will swallow you, Dont be so bitter that people will spit you out." Urdu Proverb

"Pride and dignity would belong to women if only men would leave them alone." Egyptian Proverb

"Put a rope around your neck and many will be happy to drag you along." Egyptian Proverb

Lea said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.