Because we require comments under articles to be “on topic”, we found that readers who want to speak to other important issues, events and concerns that our small crew can’t cover don’t have a place for that. Last month we introduced this new feature to make a place for readers who want to bring up other topics, post news flashes, announce community events, or express concerns outside of the selected subjects we write about.
In the spirit of offering Letters to the Editor as a traditional platform for lively, wide-ranging conversations in the public square, we invite you to write about whatever is on your mind. Based on our trial run, we will be posting a new Off Topic! forum monthly. December’s will be a shorter month, but beginning January 2023, a fresh letters forum will be posted on the first of each month.
How this works:
Submit your letter in the white box below Comment Guidelines at the bottom of the page containing the muted prompt “Enter your comment here…”
Either provide your own title to the letter as a top line or we will title it for you.
To respond to someone else’s post, hit the REPLY button under that specific letter or comment you wish to respond to.
Co-editors Ana Wolpin, Stephen Schumacher and Annette Huenke have a combined history of more than 120 years in Port Townsend. See the “About the Free Press” page for more about the editorial team.
On Journalism
I’ve been enjoying Glenn Greenwald‘s launch of his new daily video show this week. On last night’s episode #4 about “The Career-Advancing Lies of Corporate Journalism”, Greenwald corrects his old statement about how corporate journalists can survive and prosper despite being exposed filing proven-false stories about (say) WMD in Iraq.
But now Greenwald realizes, especially with the current breed of corporate “journalists”/stenographers, that their careers advance not DESPITE their false stories but BECAUSE of their ability to shamelessly lie on behalf of their backers. The same could be said about many emerging WEF-connected “leaders”.
Greenwald also expressed in episode #2 (and in its sponsor-only aftershow) about how journalism isn’t really a profession requiring corporate credentials, but an activity which anyone can do when they practice journalism by revealing information in the public interest. The First Amendment doesn’t provide special rights for a privileged class of corporate-employed “journalists”, instead it protects all of us as we exercise our free speech and journalism rights.
I think the ability to distribute ideas and information is what can limit anyone engaging in journalism. I would like to see a pie chart illustrating what percentage or Port Townsend residents are aware of Appointed Mayor Faber’s activities on social media.
Or how Main Street, City Manager and Appointed Mayor limited public input and notice regarding mess tents and street dining in an attempt to railroad through permanent status for special interests with the help of a lockstep council.
How many residents read the several Free Press articles tracking corrupted city government in action regarding that give away of public space for private use?
Most read the Mis Leader that removes stories about favorite sons and their part in the FWPDA malfeasance and also removes comments. Control the past control the future.
I wonder how many residents question the Mis Leader headline that called a press conference regarding women’s rights an “Anti-Trans Rally” with little detail of exactly who and with what authority the police were told to stand down when there was violence against our older neighbors by organized other neighbors.
Was it the figurehead mayor appointed by council who is not supposed to have power over the council? The City Manager who in no way is supposed to make policy? City Attorney? Who? Under what authority?
If you read that Mis Leader article, you had your head spun from the get-go.
I think a pie chart would show more follow the leader than look to the Free Press for information locally.
I spoke with a long time “boat guy” resident last week who is 81 years old. and pretty much represents most of PT for me. I know many others like him.
He knew nothing of Mountain View Pool. Or mess tents. Or much of anything but that this was not the town he always knew.
This week my journal notes a car parked right in front of my business for 4 days and didn’t move. 2-hour limit sign next to it, my customers kept at bay. Not resilient is that? Community? Really? Across the street sits the abandoned mess tent that the city refuses to deal with. My slow to boil manager finally called the police after 4 days to report the abandoned car. She got a call back from an officer that said the owners lived across the street and would move the vehicle.
To where?
The failure to simply be a good neighbor is the contagious overarching trait of Port Townsend leadership. Lid kept on tight by the Mis Leader. Appointed Mayors King, Sandoval (3 times appointed) Stinson and now Faber tweaked what was a nice little town.
Mari at city controlled Main Street and Mauro compromised City Manager spout words like vibrant community. resilient businesses and other nonsense as feet stand on throats here there and everywhere. Including a dangerous sculpture made from a tree stump. Black mold abandoned mess tent is OK.
Anyway, that’s what my journal notes
Method of gravity distortion and time displacement
Marlin Pohlman; convicted of rape and sentenced to jail just when his Patent Payments were due, after the DOD and Standard Oil approached him with interest to purchase his inventions. He still proclaims his innocence.
I suspect that Marlin is not really the “Inventor” for those patents he filed.
We could sure use a time machine right now,,, to go into the past and change a few things, to change current events… Maybe its already done?
TESLA tech, time machine is also Tesla tech.
Editors Note: This is an edited version of a longer letter submitted by Don Beeman on the PTFP Facebook page (first comment under Off Topic! post):
Most all recent behavioral and physical and mental problems are intentional.
CHANGE MY MIND
Has the CDC dealt honestly, transparently, and effectively with any health issue we have faced over the past forty years?
In the 1980s, as I recall, researchers at Washington University, St. Louis, connected the sudden drastic increase of “crib deaths” or Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, SIDS, to carbon dioxide, CO2. I don’t know what the research actually said, but we were told loving parents were responsible because soft bedding and stuffed animals trapped CO2 around babies’ faces. Was the CDC responsible for this propaganda, this disinformation? If not, could and should they have come out with the truth? What is the truth? Do you know? The truth didn’t matter and still doesn’t to health or medical authorities. Heap guilt on the grieving parents. Were soft bedding and stuffed animals something loving parents suddenly discovered?
Also evident in the 1980s, was an increase in a bunch of health problems — anxiety, panic attack, asthma, allergies, and fibromyalgia., for example, come to mind. There were more. These are the initial ones that were revealed as I recall. Things like dust mites, pet dander, formaldehyde, carbon monoxide, and radon were blamed. We heard about “sick building” and, later, as more problems arose, a more accurate and revealing “tight building syndrome” was offered. Was the real culprit blamed? No, but carbon dioxide, CO2, was finally allowed into the discussion. Of course not as the problem agent but solely as an indicator of the need for more fresh air. Was the CDC responsible for this sophistry? Did they expose it as such? No! Should they have?…
Has the CDC or your state or local health department ever told the truth, which was that homes were (and still are) being built that are way too tight? …the national average is 15 cfm (ASHRAE 62-2004), still less than half needed for good mental and physical health and upright behavior…
We are constantly reminded some 20% of children, mostly boys, have learning disabilities or ADHD. Berkley Labs has called attention to the fact that higher CO2 in tighter schools impairs learning. This is at the 1,000 ppm minimum tighter construction has forced on school children for over 40 years. The CO2 is even higher in many schools. Ditto for the students’ and others’ homes… High CO2 causes anxiety, paranoia, and violence in addition to stupidity, and mental and physical ailments… Higher CO2 means less metabolism can take place. There is also incomplete metabolism, leading to allergic reactions.
Bad things can be induced in low populations with high CO2. So, why do we continue on this course when evidence of a huge mistake has been there for all to see for some forty years? Well, ostensibly, we need “efficient” buildings to save the planet from global warming. That’s a fraud as I have demonstrated elsewhere in many ways. Besides, recirculated high CO2 air causes us to actually use more energy as any real health expert or scientist could tell you… Start with “cabin fever” driving – got to go somewhere, anywhere, just out of here, violence, divorce (another home to be built and heated, perhaps another car and job, another commute, child-care trips), doctor visits, and so on.
The real reason is the total destruction and take over of America.
CONSPAIRACY.COM
Oregon School CO2 Study
Misuse of the word “Lie.”
LIE (verb): 1) to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive. 2) to create a false or misleading impression.
INTENT (noun): a usually clearly formulated or planned intention.
I believe journalist and others are misusing the word “Lie.” Unless writers can clearly demonstrate that the the person making an incorrect statement had the intent to deceive, they shouldn’t use the word “lie.”
Accusing someone of uttering a lie requires demonstration of intent.
Intent is very difficult to prove because one has to have a complete understanding of the mind of the person making the statement.
In most cases I would rather see something like “misstatement” or “misunderstanding” or “exaggeration” or “incorrect” or (in the extreme) “false statement” attributed to an utterance that is clearly incorrect.
There. I’ve got that off my chest.
Thanks for lightening your chest here, Dave. (-:
You cite a 2-part definition, then proceed to argue only from the first part. The second is equally important.
2) to create a false or misleading impression…
When Alison Berry makes claims about the safety and efficacy of the mRNA jabs with full knowledge that there are tens of thousands of ‘experts’ with far more credentials than she has presenting research and highly-educated opinions that counter hers, she is lying, according to part 2 of the definition you presented. That she chooses to mislabel all those experts as misinformers, and follow the marching orders she’s been given by the CDC or Johns Hopkins or whoever is whispering in her ear, doesn’t change the fact that she is ‘creating a false or misleading impression.’ She and her peers have been instructed to ‘persuade, not inform.’ I have witnessed those ‘education’ seminars in person.
At a BOCC meeting last month, former JeffCo health officer Tom Locke declared (I’m paraphrasing here as I don’t have time to find my notes) that ‘if all schoolchildren got the flu jab, flu would disappear.’
He knows this is untrue. The flu jab has never been even close to 100% efficacious. He lied. That lie fulfilled both parts 1 and 2 of the definition from the dictionary you chose.
I wish that people would research the efficacy of the flu shot year by year instead of blindly getting it year after year.
Council of the Damned, Mauro the tool, and “finger lickin’ weird Chicken Boy” your mascot
After seeing the same vehicle parked in front of our business for 4 days straight and not even moved my manager called the police. They called back and said it was someone who lived across the street, they would move the car. Its back this week. Amazing. What was the message to them and us?
All of you can just stick your fingers in your ears and chant na na na na na and take no responsibility. This letter is only for the ongoing very long record. 9 years long. 9 years of purposeful damage inflicted to businesses and your own tax base.
That’s what Mauro was hired for?
Your own study said each lost parking space is hundreds of dollars per day lost. Beginning under Timmons/Sandoval/Stinson. Now under Faber/Mauro for 3 years. A condition of his employment. A coincidence that no parking plan or enforcement benefited the real estate interests on council? Sure.
See the attached Holiday card I made for you. Christmas, as Monica said is indeed here. Perhaps before she and you “knew it”, but not so fast or unexpected for some with real skin in the game. Goodwill in all seasons is hard to find for some of us.
This season has seen two rounds of snow cutting off important end of year Christmas business. So far. The rest of the year saw Council encouraged illegal parking as usual cutting off business access, along with mess tents and street seating for the special class eliminating more spaces and causing friction you pretend does not exist. That is discrimination anyone would understand, except those who dish it out. For special interests.
The entire year is important. Not just one season or time. Better times can help a business through unexpected down times. All businesses were negatively impacted by continued “temporary” street seating that was minimally used. Damage caused to all, including some restaurants when many days and many specific important times of days customers simply could not find parking.
I see it in person all year. You choose to not quite understand. Perhaps a new study? To be ignored like the one that pointed out the losses you create and preside over now 9 years and millions of dollars in?
Sitting in on 3 council meetings this year I saw familiar dynamics with the Pike Place PDA I participated in for years on end. A few incompetent agenda pushers and several incompetent status quo automatic votes. The reward will be getting appointed to more and more committees and the like. Seems a hollow and empty existence to those keeping track of the damage done.
And, if some don’t like the “tone” of this, I don’t like the results of your participation.
Once again, wishing you all a deniable new year and resilient conscience regarding so much including the Alchemy wreck that still is up.
Harvey Windle
https://www.porttownsendfreepress.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/SEASONS-GREETINGS-scaled.jpg
https://www.porttownsendfreepress.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/Image2.jpgVV_.jpg
“……if all schoolchildren got the flu jab, flu would disappear…….”
In my medical school years, an article came out, New England Journal if I remember correctly, or maybe Journal of the AMA. Either way, it was about eradication of smallpox. The public health efforts worldwide had paid off, the last remote corner of the world had been vaccinated, and the virus had been wiped off the Earth.
Wet-behind-the-ears medical student that I was, I showed the artticle to our microbiology professor. “They say smallpox has been eradicated from the Earth”.
Microbiology professor who knew a thing or two about the subject, replied to me:
HAH !!
My excuse was I had a lot to learn at the time. Still do for that matter.
What’s Tom Locke’s excuse?
A Public Response to Craig Durgan’s Claim of PTFP Censorship
Former JeffCo GOP chairman and District 3 resident Craig Durgan is going to great pains to smear the PTFP as leftist censors on social media. I am writing this to set the record straight.
The following exchange occurred in the comments below my Nov. 11 article about the PUD:
Eight days later, Craig dropped this comment:
“It was a mistake. I suppose you don’t make mistakes. Why didn’t you answer the question?”
I elected not to approve that comment because I had already taken time months back to tell him in a private phone call why, in no uncertain terms, I would not be running for PUD Commissioner. I answered it again in the thread above. That he was incapable of understanding the subtlety of “There are two kinds of people that should not hold public office — those who realize they’re not cut out for it, and those who don’t” was not my fault.
Taken in aggregate, and given that he had the answer to his question already, his comments could only be interpreted as intended to insult and harass — just whining, unwilling to walk the talk, complaining, just talking… If I approved the last comment and answered it with “I did already, multiple times” I could only imagine the return volley of “No you didn’t.” I have more important things to do than continue engaging with someone who is clearly not operating in good faith. My own take on my action was that I blocked a toxic troll. I will not be engaging further with Craig Durgan.
Please feel free to share this reality check in response to his crybully rants.
My own thoughts on this are that he is extremely angry and lashing out at everyone and everything due to his anger. When we don’t take or don’t want to take responsibility for our own actions or behavior, it can lead to a slippery slope of denial. This denial of responsibility will undoubtedly lead to lashing out at others. As well, this will only perpetuate the denial of responsibility of actions or behavior.
I personally had to learn the hard way in my early 20’s, I am now 50. My anger issues were due to putting my expectations on others.
I learned in my anger management counseling that I was only setting my self up for disappointment by doing so. It still is an uphill battle at times. However, I am willing to take responsibility for my actions and behavior.
No one is perfect….. But we need to take responsibility for our own actions or behavior!!
People have varying ideas of what free speech actually means and since the internet came along, we’ve all been trying to define and clarify our boundaries. I’ve had to do this myself in blogging and on the internet. The government has come in and made a real mess of things with their corrupt and biased misinformation campaigns.
Today I am almost a freespeech absolutist, as in unless there are many vulgar words, outright abuse, and clear calls for violence, I let all comments stand as they are. We talk about everything from flat earth theories to the proud boys. It’s often messy, unedited, and sometimes impolite. I do like to mute some people who chronically offend my sensibilities just so I personally, don’t have to be exposed to them, but in the larger scheme of things, I want them to be able to speak freely, too.
I am kind of shocked by how repressed and oppressed we are culturally in America right now. I really believe that being able to speak your mind is a human right, no matter how messed up your mind might be. In fact, talking to one another is how we tend to resolve our issues, strengthen relationships, build some unity and connection. We need more of that in the world, not less.
I think you are one of the most wonderful commenters on this page but I have to disagree with you on your last point.
We are past the hand holding unity stage.
I am not holding hands and creating unity with people who hold the values of our mayor. I do not want to live, nor do I want to raise my children to accept, that kind of filth. I’m done. I’m working hard every day to get us out of here.
I would like to hear feedback from other readers on this question of censorship. It is one of the Free Press’s most important considerations, one that we three current co-editors (Annette Huenke, Stephen Schumacher and myself) discuss intensively whenever we are faced with questionable posts. We took on the resurrection of PTFP because of local censorship, so we are especially sensitive to the loss of free speech in our public commons.
All three of us are inclined to be generous in interpreting our comment guidelines, and in fact created this letters forum because it weighed on us that we were rejecting comments from readers that were off-topic. In my view, holding a space for readers to have meaningful dialogue is as important as the articles we post.
The question we faced in rejecting one of Craig Durgan’s comments is — does free speech convey the right to repeatedly insult and make accusations, in what is obviously mean-spirited provocation? Our guidelines clearly state “insults, taunts, bullying… will be removed and offenders will be blocked.”
The removal of one of Craig’s repeated provocations on this site came after a series of snipes on our Facebook page. Attempts at dialogue have only led to more pot-shots, no effort to have a reasonable conversation. It would have ended there, but he then went on the warpath on multiple social media sites, accusing PTFP of censorship. Other readers alerted us to his posts.
One of those attacks we were sent, posted by Craig to a user group called Rural Rebels, says:
“Just so you all know. The Port Townsend Free Press is no longer ‘Free’.’ They have gone into censor mode just like the Misleader.”
Someone asked: “What was censored?” He avoided answering the question with the vague response, “My comment. The leftists that Scarantino brought in doing what they do best.”
Clearly an effort to smear us, not even based in reality — Jim Scarantino did not “bring us in.” After closing down the Free Press because he wanted to focus on other priorities, Jim agreed to let us give PTFP a new life after WE approached HIM about bringing it back online. Jim tells the story in Long Live the Free Press! A New Team Steps Up. And given that most who attack us call us right-wing conservatives, the attempt to malign us by telling a conservative group we are “lefties” is curious indeed (we are neither, and welcome all perspectives here).
One of our wonderful commenters above describes herself as a “freespeech absolutionist,” allowing all to speak their mind on her own blog “no matter how messed up your mind might be.”
Should limits be drawn? Our intent is to create a safe and welcoming place for anyone to express views, have civil debate and thought-provoking conversation. Does creating limits on that help or hinder a healthy exchange of ideas?
I am curious to hear what other readers think.
Does the right to free speech mean that anything goes? Should exchanges that devolve into toxic sniping be allowed? At what point does the freedom to speak one’s mind become a deterrent to meaningful dialogue? Is there a line to be drawn, past which allowing free reign of expression becomes the enabling of abuse?
I have had some of my comments requested to be rewritten or removed after being contacted with a reasonable explanation. I personally haven’t taken issue. I appreciate the learning experience.
Thank you Annette, Ana and Stephen for not letting the Port Townsend Free Press go by the wayside. I am thankful for your thoughtful reporting and opinion pieces. I wouldn’t be as aware as I am without the Port Townsend Free Press!!
The fact that you have gone to great lengths to explain policies speaks volumes. The Mis Leader gave no explanation when the story regarding Dave Robison and his role in the FWPDA malfeasance was removed from the online paper.
Protected person.
No explanation when dozens of comments from years ago forecasting current problems with the FWPDA were removed from the online Leader. It was about the substance of what was removed, not the tone. Removal altered facts, local history, and responsibility. That is Orwell stuff.
3 volunteers finding their way and communicating their process on what is more a blog than an advertiser funded paper is a different set of dynamics. Not to call out any specific person but I have seen that old polarization based in party from at least one person consistently. Usually guttural one liners blaming the “other” party.
Especially locally I lay responsibility on individuals in local government. Seems most do relate to donkeys and are jackasses individually. However gross stupidity and ignorance fueling incompetence and arrogance are nonpartisan.
Partisanship and checking the D on voting ballots automatically do seem problematic locally. Look at track records as well.
Groups tend to lead to groupthink. George Carlin-
“People are wonderful. I love individuals. I hate groups of people. I hate a group of people with a ‘common purpose’. ‘Cause pretty soon they have little hats. And armbands. And fight songs. And a list of people they’re going to visit at 3am. So, I dislike and despise groups of people but I love individuals. Every person you look at; you can see the universe in their eyes, if you’re really looking.”
We all define ourselves. Feedback on comments can educate or entrench. Or enrage leading to telling others thoughts you cannot defend.
Off topic is this. Hope they are really interested in finding out the cause. Seems to be happening worldwide. Interesting that it is being recognized.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/news/australia-concerned-as-people-dying-at-incredibly-high-pace-and-it-can-t-tell-why/ar-AA150kVt?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=fed95273af374fc0925afbe5140af931
For those that can see a must watch…
https://rumble.com/v1wac7i-world-premier-died-suddenly.html
Refreshing to see & hear others standing up against Berry. We experienced her first hand and I would say in 60 years of doctors she has by far been my worst. We were held hostage with our daily medication, mine (thyroid) and would not listen when talking about our bodies and how we responded to different types of treatments. She was more interested in rules & regulations of healthcare and Medicare than helping us with our medical issues. Her mind was made up and if you didn’t do it her way, we were somehow punished. We are 60 years old & didn’t need a doctor who won’t listen. We were happy to see her go to her new assignment, however it has come back around quickly & with much more power unfortunately.