"In capital murder cases, snitches are the No. 1 factor, being present in 45 percent of wrongful convictions identified since 1976. When I define snitch, by the way, I don't mean just anybody who's in jail, but anybody who has an incentive to testify a certain way."
website is full of propoganda, i asked spencer about the PAC fund he said he would post the monies donated to politicians because i voiced my concerns as to make sure that certain politicians werent given funds from of if they supported non union labor, or if they were against bailing out union pensions and benefit funds, so i ask WHERE IS THE POST ON THE WEBSITE?????????
You also are trying to expose a person who has chosen to remain anonymous. Thus you seek to deprive him of his life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. Just because you attest to being a law abiding a citizen of the United States of America doesn't mean you necessarily are always acting consistently with its founding principles. And not all laws are just. A quick look at history and political philosophy will prove that beyond a doubt. Saluting the Stars and Stripes, or being a member of the UBC for any number of years doesn't guarantee a person is ethical or wise. I'm convinced you're a decent person, Brother, by hearing some of what you have to say. But I don't believe everything that's written. I can't even be completely sure I'm replying to the real William Davenport, because of the limitations of this mode of communication. That's why I look to ideas for leadership.
So you would prefer to be fed shit by Spencer, Ballantyne and Draper than deal with issues?
Draper on why we should have delegates who are employed by the council:
THE CHAIRMAN: So you have a membership meeting, a special call meeting, every member is notified, they are going to have election of delegates. So a business agent runs, the president of the Local runs as a delegate, and what you're sitting here telling me today is that you want to disenfranchise them and the members from voting for them for delegate to represent them at the District Council. This does not make any sense.
THE WITNESS: Absolutely, it makes a lot of sense because --
THE CHAIRMAN: That it's your opinion
Or do you prefer Spencers double talk and lies? You realize that he will not put himself on the line enough to actually answer a question? If you were at the local 157 meeting you will know that every person condemning Spencer was due to the fact that he will not answer a question unless he can later deny ever answering the question?
Or Ballantyne? Mister I am not a New Jersey Carpenter, I am not a NYC Carpenter, I am a UBC carpenter, what utter shit.
I am a NYC carpenter and I want an NYC carpenter negotiating my contract.
Here is an example of UBC lies.
Local 157 was placed under supervision because Forde wanted to remove a political adversary. So he writes a letter to President McCarron and tells him that the Business Reps from local 157 are not doing their jobs.
Now here are the questions that popped into my head at the time:
These Business Reps were all answerable directly to Forde, Why was the international holding 157 responsible for Fordes poor management?
Why was the guy whose failure to hold his high cost staff were actually doing their jobs placed in control of the local?
Why did no from the UBC find it odd that no one at the NYCDCC noticed that 157 had not submitted a weekly report in three years? that local 157 had not filed 156 successive weekly reports?
Why did no one from the UBC find it suspicious that no one noticed anything strange until Callahan supposedly "informed" them on the wrongdoing at local 157?
What evidence was presented which would even remotely suggest that local 157 reps were the exception rather than the norm? How could any rational thinking person not examine every local? When Draper was asked this question, I believe his reply was to the effect that he had been sent to investigate Local 157, not the other locals.
Why was no credence given to members who testified at the hearings that Forde had engineered the trusteeship to remove a political rival?
With all that has come out on Fordes drug habit, how did Spencer miss it?
Why did no one from the UBC find it strange that Callahan's case was so neatly wrapped in one local? That at no time did Callahan consider putting another local to the same test as local 157 to see if the problem existed in more than one local?
Even assuming that the UBC felt the supervision was actually valid, can you name one change made by the UBC to address what was claimed to be the issue? Even though all the wrong doing had been found at a council level, all the subsequent attention was given to the local, not in any way suspicious, right?
What was found at a local level? that the local needed a paint job and that the secretary was not up to date on quick books, or was there something else?
After instituting a Trusteeship, can you show me a single thing done by the UBC to prevent a future case where Business Reps would not even come to work? What did the UBC propose to deal with this?
Why suspend the delegates when there was no involvement by them shown in this matter?
For that matter, why suspend delegate meetings?
You do realize that the only time your three heroes mention the members, is when they are holding the members accountable for the system imposed on them by the UBC? You do realize that the UBC does its damnedest to avoid taking action against cooperating officers?
Forde is placed as supervisor over Local 157.
Thomassen and Sheils are placed as supervisors over the NYCDCC.
John Thomassen is appointed as an organizer after his father leaves the union.
Lawrence Derrico is like a teflon don, nothing sticks to him, the guy supposedly is the only Business Agent at local 157 who was not doing anything wrong, yet at the same time that Callahan supposedly starts his investigation, the other Business Reps are wondering why Lawrence suddenly stopped goofing off. Now this wonder kid has climbed to the top, based on the fact that he has shown that he will turn a blind eye? or because he will cut a deal with anyone to save his own ass?
These are the people you are claiming to be an asset somehow?