Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098
mayorsam@mayorsam.org

Saturday, December 22, 2007

Saturday Open Thread Conspiracy Edition

Are we being hacked? Is the FBI watching? I guess we will find out!

Labels: , ,

33 Comments:

Anonymous undercover angel said:

This isn't the type of thing that your local 3rd floor spinners and their usual associates could have pulled off.

They had to call in their "think tank" and "tech department" headquartered in Northeast L.A.

And according to one whistle-blower, these people may have some national affiliations, as well.

Hope they aren't moonlighting behind the big boss' back.

December 22, 2007 3:51 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

DALLAS/primenet 600.91.203.89 IP

December 22, 2007 4:00 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Zuma,

Why don't you ask about the $300 million cost over runs for the new police station and Grand Avenue Project?

Why should we trust the city with money from a new phone tax (Prop S), when they have mis-managed and lied to us about the costs.

How does the new police station double or triple from the initial cost promised to taxpayers?

Did they know the original numbers all along? Did the city lie to us?

And now we are finding projects like Grand Avenue are going to cost much more than expected.

Say no to Prop S!

December 22, 2007 4:05 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Zuma,

It's 4:05 again. Run "cost over runs" into your bat computer. Cross check against developers.

Trust me, once you start asking about "cost over runs" they will start losing their minds.

December 22, 2007 4:07 PM  

Blogger Zuma Dogg said:

4:05 pm,

Gotcha! It's gonna be "All No on Prop S" starting in January! (Might have to dust off the hat and glasses and hop on the bus downtown for this one.)

Meanwhile folks...full discloure: I was just on the phone with 4:05pm discussing this.

Bro, you beat me to the post...and now it'll look like I'm following instead of leading. (Don't blow my cover...LOL!)

December 22, 2007 4:15 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

LOL - What’s the definition?

December 22, 2007 4:45 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

LOL=Laugh Out Laugh

See also:

LMFAO=Laugh My F'ing Ass Off

December 22, 2007 4:59 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Zuma avoid taking Santa Monica buses for the next three weeks. It is advisable.

December 22, 2007 5:04 PM  

Blogger Zuma Dogg said:

Sorry...can't live without the Linclon Express -- but I guess you already know that!

December 22, 2007 5:10 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Did she approve of her campaign being used for purposes relating to this blog? If not, that's not very savvy.

December 22, 2007 5:34 PM  

Blogger joseph mailander said:

I am never surprised when something happens to this blog. That's precisely why I'm involved here---it's that vital.

LA doesn't even have a single tough, muckraking tabloid, like every other cosmopolitan city on the planet does. So what a bunch of babies the people in City Hall are, if they are messing with things here! Even scribes have a higher flak threshold than they.

There is fairly dependably aggressive coverage of City Hall from Orlov, Cavenaugh, Zahniser and Tony Castro, but that's about it, even if it's always very buttoned down and conciliatory. But if people in City Hall actually are bothering to take time messing with a blog---well, that's only flattery to us.

~~~

The CRA is an immense agency. So is Housing an immense Department, and the largest landlord in the City by far as well. They demand far more scrutiny than they receive. Why don't these immense entities even have a single media relations person between them?

The DWP is an easy target because it is so transparent. But I wish someone in print would start taking a good hard look at the direction Estolano is taking, the screwloose job Goldberg has done laying out the welcome mat for any two-bit developer with a two-bit plan, and the way Housing can't even tell us a single solid stat on rentals in LA, despite its 600 employees. Oh, and the way some "charities" pump dollars straight from signed-in-good-faith CRUTs into developers and contractor's pockets in the name of charity work.

Between planning, the CRA, and Housing, that's about 90% of all civic policy in the City of Los Angeles (admittedly, nothing has come out of Transportation in a long time, unless you call that failed Holly Trolly something).

If mentioning a few incidentals at a blog gets these entities overstimulated enough to mess with a blog, imagine what excitement print could cause.

December 22, 2007 5:41 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Zuma Dogg we will see you there.

December 22, 2007 5:48 PM  

Blogger Zuma Dogg said:

5:48...no you won't or you would have already.

Joeseph...great stuff! HA! It's backfiring on them already.

December 22, 2007 5:55 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Dear Sirs,
We are indeed monitoring your blog; I am a government employee I work for the NSSA (National Security Spies for Assholes). We have recently received many letters regarding some Blogging Burros who have been spreading rumors and innuendo via the Internet. We have become concerned because a few mentally retarded Los Angeles residents actually believe the words of the Blogging Burros. Unfortunately there are too many idiots and psychos in society who will believe anything they read.

December 22, 2007 6:47 PM  

Anonymous while we're at it said:

Here's a good blog post about Bill Clinton Foundation favorites Eli Broad and Bill Gates and their education platform.

December 22, 2007 6:56 PM  

Anonymous zuma's strategy consultant said:

6:47pm,

relax...too late to cover tracks. we'll see what happens. don't dig in deeper. it never ends up good for your bosses on the blogs. you end up making me cranky, and i end up typing up all these notes about:

wyvenwood

Grand Ave/Police Station cost over-runs

non-documented workers building all the "smart growth" in LA (no accountability, safety concerns)

Bill Clinton Foundation and cronies Broad, Buffet, Gates, Walton, Banes Capital Charter School posse

profitable non-profit affordable housing scam (see insiders with connections to all the right lobbiests!)

PROP S...PROP S...PROP S...

December 22, 2007 7:13 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Dirt burnell

December 22, 2007 7:15 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The FBI doesn't care much about anything other than terrorists and preventing nucaler (sic) attacks. You can murder, rob banks, embezzle, or anything else that is so common in L.A.(well, occasionally a rookie suit will bring one in, only to be sentenced and given only 10 days). Nobody cares. And to top it off, Sheriff Baca will "early release" to bring more crooks to the party.

Now fluoridated L.A. water, that's a good conspiracy. DWP Bah. Slowly sedating the population with low doses of "rat poison" will bring 'um under control. Besides, it'll make my gold fillings fall out. LOL. No Thanks. I drink bottled water, stuff not bottled from SoCal "rotgut tap"(eg. Sparkletts).

GoTo www.snopes.com and type in "fluoridation and rat poison"... or

http://www.health.gov/environment/ReviewofFluoride/MAJfind.htm#asserisk (without the rat poison linkages)

December 22, 2007 9:07 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The FBI appears to care about animal extremists in LA, according to the LA Weekly. They seem motivated to get the ALF guy who threatened Blackman. But maybe not about legal levels of rat poison in the tap water.

December 22, 2007 9:50 PM  

Anonymous a woman for clinton? said:

When the campaigning started, I felt Hillary would be impossible to beat.

But as we roll into Iowa and beyond, I think she'll be lucky to hold on to a #2 position.

I just think her phoniness and true agenda will be revealed -- and even the women voters who support her will be way too scared to even think of voting for her.

Especially when Oprah pulled support of her long time friend and in a surprising move, not only decided to back a candidate (she always stayed out of it), but chose Barack! (If that's not an insider "wink-wink" to women from Oprah, I don't know what is?)

For Oprah to so publicly come out against Hillary Clinton...well that's quite a warning if you ask me.

(And yes, if you take a position for the first time, and it isn't Hillary, that's going "against her", because Oprah could have just stayed on the sidelines.)

The more I see, the more I just don't think Hillary Clinton is electable.

She just doesn't have the political savvy her husband had/has. She comes off too canned. Too tense. She seems to get flustered instead of seizing the moment.

As opposed to people like Huckabee, who although religion may get in the way, he really knows how to give an answer under pressure for the most part.

There's a reason all the Republicans are praying Clinton gets the nomination.

That would HAND the election to the Republican party. It's still early, but Edwards would probably do best with Republicans, but what do I know?

CAN ANYONE READING THIS GIVE ME A GOOD REASON WHY I SHOULD STILL CONSIDER CLINTON, ESPECIALLY SINCE SHE IS SURROUNDING HERSELF WITH PEOPLE LIKE ANTONIO VILLARIOSA AND HIS POLITICAL CIRCLE?

December 23, 2007 7:34 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

A Woman for Clinton?,

Don't worry.

A senator has only been elected President twice in U.S. history and for good reason. They have a voting record. And in Senator Clinton's case, that isn't going to help her candidacy by any stretch of the imagination.

The Democratic Political Machine is getting nervous because they like to control the playing field, and they are desperate to slide Clinton into the White House to spend all the money in all the right places.

So with Oprah Winfrey sending a shock wave, and people in Iowa and elsewhere not taking well to the negative campaigning of the Clinton campaign and Clinton herself being so self-destructive in the media, the political machine is getting nervous that the democratic campaign process may be getting in the way.

Should make for a fun and ugly next couple of months. I think Edwards will be the primary beneficiary of any Clinton vs Obama negative campaigning.

December 23, 2007 8:06 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Edwards is financially disastrous, promising outrageously expensive all things to all people: like free college tuition for all kids who spend a year doing public service, free healthcare to all including illegals, free universal preschool...

Hillary is only promising what she thinks she could deliver based on having gone down that liberal route. Her toughness makes me think she could kick anyone's butt.

Oprah is a draw as a star, but when it comes to the voting booth, most people, including women, aren't dumb enough to go by what she says.

Hillary does get rattled sometimes, but so have all the guys. It's rough out there, day after day. But even lots of blacks are picking her over Obama: a white guy or gal saying their foreign experience stems from living abroad as a child would be laughed out of Iowa.

She's got the stamina. Oprah admitted she's worn out after those few appearances. It'll be her and Rudy at the end. Huckabee, too much in the hands of religious right. Romney: like it or not, people aren't going to buy logic from someone who believes the Ten Commandments were dug up recently in the Old West, taken there by Indians who'd been to the Middle East. McCain: too pro-Iraq.

December 23, 2007 9:39 AM  

Blogger Zuma Dogg said:

7:34am & 8:06am...I hear ya!

9:39am: Like Clinton isn't going to be "outrageously expensive". You must have spun yourself into confusion.

But something funny I just noticed: John Edwards, while giving a LIVE speech (on C-Span) says (regarding the next presidential candidate), "I hope HE..."

Is that an intentional slam at Hillary? I mean there IS a woman in the race. Innocent slip, or a strategic slip? (Or maybe he's just seen the numbers and is just being realistic...LOL!)

December 23, 2007 10:26 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Ok enough suspense. Was MS hacked and is the FBI watching?

December 23, 2007 11:55 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hi to the FBI!
From,
Well obviously you already know who

Hi to Mary out there pretending to dig up IP numbers.

All women do what Oprah wants them to do. LOL However, Oprah's never being involved in a political campaign before just means she's going black instead of woman. Nice job, Oprah. Now all the women in the world won't do what you want them to anymore.

December 23, 2007 12:16 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

5:34

Did I miss something? Who is "she" and what campaign?

December 23, 2007 12:18 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Did Oprah back the Governator?

December 23, 2007 12:28 PM  

Anonymous zuma's strategy consultant said:

For all of Clinton's campaign money and all the advertising dollars --

people are still sitting around all day monitoring the comment section of a single blog and wasting time responding to any and every comment.

kinda sad. i think at least one person has fallen off the rail of the crazy train. (To quote mi amigo Ozzy.)

how obsessed can one political operative be?

And I guess you are an Oprah Winfrey Mind Reading Machine since you are here to tell us that Oprah went, "black" not "female".

Maybe Oprah went "non-corrupt", not "shady".

December 23, 2007 12:30 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

12:18
I'm missing everything. From DALLAS/primenet to "Obviously you know who I am"...nice party Mayor! Thanks for the hospitality and most of all the hangover.

December 23, 2007 1:06 PM  

Anonymous ITA said:

ITA is in the house.

December 23, 2007 1:48 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

No ITA here. Just scrubs.

December 23, 2007 3:02 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The City recently purchased the Figuerora Plaza building for a price somewhere around $200 million. I thought the City had a deficit.

February 03, 2008 9:03 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I heard a rumor some time ago that Nick Pacheco's client was filing charges against Mayor Antonio for fondling an underage youth.
I haven't heard anything on this for quite some time - I'm assuming that it was just a rumor or Pacheco's client got paid off.

February 03, 2008 9:08 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

Advertisement

Advertisement