By David M. Greenwald
Executive Editor
Davis, CA – On Tuesday, for the sixth time, the entire Davis community has been disrupted by bomb threats. Tuesday marked the third time in the last week that the Vanguard itself received the threat. And while we continue to believe that these are merely threats, they have to be taken seriously lest the perpetrators escalate and turn anxiety into tragedy.
The toll this is taking on the community is being felt by many—this writer included—personally.
The message has been couched in terms of concern for the well-being of the youth: “Our youth are our future, what you teach isn’t just garbage but its (sic) poison and we’re not going to stand idly by as you brainwash the next generation with your sick perverted fantasy and create further division in our country.”
But the bomb threats are disrupting their education. They are causing anxiety and stress and trauma. In short, if your concern is really the well-being of children—by threatening their schools, their teachers and themselves, you are doing the exact opposite.
Not only is this stressing district resources, it is also putting the broader community in danger by stressing police resources.
Chief Pytel told me on Monday, “This morning we had to delay dealing with a missing person at risk because of the school searches. This is impacting our ability to respond to other urgent calls.”
There is a very real danger here that a real emergency will take place when one of these false alarms is called in, 
and the police will not have the resources to deal with it.
There is also a very real danger that this becomes the boy that cries wolf, that eventually the community will become complacent with numerous bomb threats and then one day either these same individuals or another disturbed individual will do the real thing, and it will have catastrophic consequences.
This is in short a very serious matter on many levels with a number of risks that might be unintended and unforeseen.
What can we do about it?
I reached out to Beth Bourne to suggest that she issue a statement calling on the threats to cease. It may not work. I really do not believe that she is DIRECTLY involved, but I do think that her continued social media tirades are inflaming things at this point.
Unfortunately, she was inclined to blame to the issue on “false flags” and deflected responsibility. She suggested that the district hold a public discussion on her issue of choice.
Unfortunately, that looks a lot like bargaining—using the bomb threats as a chip to gain what she wants.
In the meantime, while this may be giving her attention and causing chaos, if anything it is likely to get further from her desired results. Local authorities are angry and frustrated. Local residents who might have listened previously to a rational discussion are unlikely to want to give consideration to her concerns.
Last night, the school board held an emergency meeting in closed session with Chief Darren Pytel to discuss matters further. Bourne and one of her associates spoke at the meeting during public comment, but she still does not seem to grasp the magnitude of what she is dealing with.
In my view, the chief gave her a very clear warning on Monday with his issued statement.
He warned, “The Davis Police Department is working with the FBI and our regional partners on the continuing criminal investigations. As pointed out by many community members, the continuing threats originated shortly after a contentious event, hosted by Moms for Liberty, was held at the Yolo County Library.
“The event quickly made national news, espousing a particular ideology that is related to the language in the threatening emails.”
He explained, “Although there is currently no evidence pointing to any involvement between local members and the threats, the correlation between the two cannot be ignored as part of the overall criminal investigations. While the First Amendment protects certain types of speech, there is certainly speech involving criminal threats and bomb threats that are criminal in nature.”
And then the kicker: “Because of this, criminal cases have been forwarded to the Yolo County District Attorney’s Office to review for criminal charging regarding some of the local social media postings affecting the community that may constitute criminal doxing (threats or harassing communication via communications including social media).”
As such, “We will continue to work with the District Attorney to determine whether there is criminal culpability and take appropriate action if there is.”
While I don’t always agree with Chief Pytel, he has been in his position for a long time and has been in the leadership of the Davis Police Department for even longer. I have learned not to underestimate him and she has clearly gotten under his skin.
There is still a chance to tone things down and hopefully end these daily disruptions to our community, but at some point, the authorities will take more concerted and more formal action.
That may well further inflame things, but the current events cannot continue to occur.
It is a shame we have gotten to this point, but at this point passion and anger have overwhelmed our ability to have reasoned dialogue. The community is not going to have the kind of discussion she wants at gun point. It is time to do the right thing and figure out how to back off. The time to do that is now getting short.
I think the word “felt” should be replaced by the expression ”
carried or transported by the thing specified” That would be more on point.
The radical extremist and dangerous members and supporters of the Moms for Liberty are unquestionably behind these multiple bomb threats. They have used similar tactics throughout the nation to inflict fear on their march towards turning the United States in to a ultraconservative Republican banana republic and strictly authoritarian regime. It’s either their way or the highway. It’s laughable that anyone believes otherwise. People that do nothing now won’t have any right to later complain that their voices aren’t being heard by these out of control lunatics.
Moms for Liberty needs to cease its call for community discussion on its issue. As David points out, the community is no longer receptive to discussing that issue under apparent coercion. If this is a “false flag” operation as Beth Bourne has claimed in public posts, then that actor will be satisfied with the ending of of the discussion. If it’s not a false flag operation, the threats will either continue as terrorist threats often do, or they will see that they have no voice pushing forward their chosen agenda and will stop the threats. In each case, Moms for Liberty have some degree of control over whether the bomb threats continue but it requires that the group stop pushing its agenda, at least for now. If Moms for Liberty continues to push its agenda, then its clear that is pushing its own desires over the safety of the entire community.
One of the problems is that Beth seems to think that getting attention is a good thing. But all she’s done is anger people who might have ordinarily at least been willing to hear her out.
You cannot have any discussion with a group that refuses to engage in good faith. They tell lies that are easily debunked (like the chair of the local M4L screaming that some shadowy “they” are giving girls masectomies) and refuse to have a reasonable, civilized discussion about the issues.
You cannot have a decent and reasonable conversation with a side that is fueled by authoritarian ideas about how the world “should be” and wants to eradicate whole swathes of humans out of public life and view, and will lie, terrorize people and commit violence to achieve that end.
They are at this point a neo-fascsist group and a threat to our community (and all decent communities) that needs to be shut down. And everyone needs to read up on the Paradox of Tolerance as one recent letter to the Enterprise’s editor suggests.
This phenomenon of hoax bomb threats over this and related issues is a pattern that is being repeated throughout the country. A search of news stories within the past month yielded the following stories. There were more, but this is a sampling.
The Daily Beast: How Trans Harvard Lawyer Got Dragged Into Bomb Hoax Terror
Perkiomen Valley, PA: Perkiomen Valley Recovering After Multiple Bomb Threats Over Policy
Chabot Elementary in Oakland: Chabot Elementary evacuated, school canceled due to bomb threat
I don’t think this is likely. It would imply that she has some sort of power or control over the bomb threats. Also, she wouldn’t do it, unless she gets something in return.
I think we’ve reached the point of “that’s enough.” We’ve heard her public statements. We’ve read her social media posts. She is not happy that people disagree with her demands to remove all references and resources related to gender from our schools and our community. The majority has spoken and it is not happening in this town. It was her choice to hook up with Moms for Liberty and its documented relationship with Proud Boys and other anti-government extremist groups to apply pressure on the community to force compliance with her demands. She was warned about the group and its connections early on, but chose to ignore suggestions. Even if it is a “false flag” or “antifa” (something I find absurd) as she has suggested, it matters not. It is her extremist, hateful, crazy campaign that has attracted the attention and prompted threats to the safety of our community, the safety of our children.
It matters a lot.
Occam’s Razor: It is not a false flag or “antifa”.
Until someone is caught, if ever, we will never really know.
Yeah, keep banging that “antiiiiiiiifaaaaaaaaa” drum. There is no organized group calling themselves “antifa.”
But there are organized right wing extremist groups, such as The Proud Boys, 3%ers, Patriot Front, Alliance Defending Freedom, and……Moms for Liberty.
Antifa is a complete boogeyman, as are any other “leftist extremist” groups you might want to dredge up.
There is no equivalent of violence or domestic terrorism on the left or among liberals as there are on the right.
This is from the DHS and FBI themselves. Right wing extremist domestic terror groups are the #1 threat to this country right now. You don’t like that conclusion? Take it up with the DHS and FBI. I’m sure you claim to be a law and order conservative, so why do you buck against this *fact*? Because you identify with these groups on some level, likely. And can’t stand that the receipts are coming in.
Right, all those thugs clad in black with black face masks holding Antifa signs showing up at protests all over the country are just a figment of everyone’s imagination.
The key thing I think both Kendra and I are disputing is the notion of “organized” which your comment did not address.
As usual Keith is making a mountain out of a mole hill. The vile Moms for Liberty are currently undertaking a coordinated nationwide right wing campaign of terror and intimidation that Keith fully supports. There have been dozens of articles, posts and video clips that have proven this fact to be positively accurate.
Talk about blowing things out of proportion.
This is a demonstratedly false statement by Keith Olsen. He fell right in to my trap. Let’s review the real evidence. I rest my case.
Still further proof that what I said was definitely true and correct.
Beth doesn’t really believe it. She is just trying to deflect culpability. Just as she claims she’s just using her 1st Amendment right of free speech.
Oh, so you can read Beth’s mind?
I’m not sure what she believes at this point. I don’t think she’s making decisions that are helpful either to the community or to her own cause at this point.
“Right, all those thugs clad in black with black face masks holding Antifa signs showing up at protests all over the country are just a figment of everyone’s imagination.”
And yet they still aren’t “organized” and still pose pretty much zero threat to the US and aren’t even on the feds’ radar.
While the right wing terror groups are.
Funny that.
“Organized” is open for interpretation. Funny how they manage to show up in numbers at protests. Just coincidence I guess? I found web pages for several Antifa factions and even International Antifa. Sounds “organized” to me.
““Organized” is open for interpretation. Funny how they manage to show up in numbers at protests. Just coincidence I guess? I found web pages for several Antifa factions and even International Antifa. Sounds “organized” to me.”
And yet they pose no major threat and aren’t on the feds’ radar and described as the #1 threat to the US right now.
That would be the side you appear to align with.
But keep throwing out red herrings.
I don’t align with any groups unless of course that group consists of average everyday level headed fair minded Americans. Other than that please don’t make false assumptions about me. I haven’t done that to you.
“I don’t align with any groups unless of course that group consists of average everyday level headed fair minded Americans. Other than that please don’t make false assumptions about me. I haven’t done that to you.”
I’ve made no assumptions. I’ve relied on empirical evidence from your own words.
You refuse to acknowledge right wing extremist groups are, per the DHS and FBI, the #1 threat to this country. You keep throwing out red herrings and distractions from that point and re-directing to antifa.
You hold up the Chair of the M4L group as “brave.”
No assumptions need to be made in the face of that. You provide your own empirical evidence for who and what you align with.
Keith’s beliefs definitely align with the vile Moms for Liberty. All of his comments on this site and that now non-existent site point exclusively in that direction. He just fell through another trap door.
So Kendra, everything you say or cite one has to acknowledge or they are part of that group? All I have to say is, WOW!
Failure to condemn a terrorist threat against children, for whatever reason, means you are condoning such terrorist threats against children. It’s sad that this needs to be said.
These hate incidents are the works of the Moms for Liberty. There is no doubt about that. They are in the midst of conducting a coordinated nationwide GOP neo-facist campaign of terror.
Edgar, the Moms4Liberty group initiated the conversation with the community from a Rank 5 position and expected a Rank 1 or 2 engagement from the community. M4L is as authoritarian as one can imagine. They don’t want their own children or others’ children to live authentic lives without taint. That’s all this is about. No wonder they are continuing with their Rank 5 or 6 program campaign.
Peace Ranking is a heuristic guide to evaluate conflict resolution approaches. From the most peaceful to the least peaceful, the ranking is this:
Rank 1: Celebration
Rank 2: Cooperation
Rank 3: Coexistence
——- Peace-making threshold
Rank 4: Competition
Rank 5: Control
Rank 6: Conquest
These ranks are sufficiently distinct such that I can propose a resolution in each rank if you were to ask. It is also possible that you would understand this just from reading the title, so I will skip the definition to address the context of a bomb threat below.
———
The following may not be a direct representation of the current situation because my focus is peace-making methodologies, not how “Davis” works. I don’t particularly know what official is responsible for what, what had been done, or the history.
Rank 2: Cooperation: In a cooperative response paradigm, a peacemaker intentionally (is trained to) look past the way a message is delivered to identify the part of the message that is worth acting upon.
In the case of a bomb threat, among a variety of speculated motivations, suppose you identify that part of the complaint is that a parent or a student does not want a certain curriculum assigned by the school. They want to opt-out but cannot, because the system does not give them the means to do so. Supporting their autonomy to opt-out is a Rank 3 peace concept. If that option is missing in society, the society has taken a wrong step (in the past) and should be corrected. A person speaking from a cooperative mindset would respond like this:
“I recognize that parents (and well-meaning children) have a right to autonomy of their own education. Our society was developed based on authoritarian values and we are still in the process of deconstructing that system for a better one. In regard to the concept of letting parents or their children opt out of particular lessons about gender, I agree that the school system should have the means for the parents to make such choices. But this topic is new so we don’t have any evidence that we had worked on it or had made any progress. So I agree that we should create a task force to make that happen, and here is the address for the forum for those wanting to make that happen to discuss. With the establishment of this task force and reasonable knowledge that our society has a track record for letting parents define and publicize their own task forces without prejudice, I reassert that the means of using bomb threat to get people’s attention is unwarranted.”
Rank 5: Control: The control paradigm is characterized by using the way a message is expressed to disqualify or dismiss the underlying issue. Paradigms below Rank 3 have the effect of creating conflict and violence. In the case of control, when the message of the speaker is dismissed, the person responding in a controlling manner increases the obstacle for the issue to be addressed and resolved. The controller cannot dictate what the speaker would resort to doing next in order to be heard. ((The message is not about who is at fault, but causality. If there is a fire and you put oil on it, you could expect the fire to spread. That is causality. I am saying that such action drops below the threshold of peacemaking.))
Here are some examples of how a society could build a track record of using the Control Paradigm and (unwittingly) participate in escalating a conflict despite the participants believing that they had been peace-making.
1) A group of parents formed a forum to discuss what to do because they don’t like the curriculum of their public school and want to opt out. Someone from outside the group saw that forum and started calling them names and complained about their opinions on the school board and a quote they used. When they tried to explain what they meant by the quote, their explanation was ignored. The accusers failed to use Hanlon’s razor: The accuser had a choice to choose the innocent explanation but chose the one that would assign guilt.
Track record: Accusers violated the group’s autonomy because they are complaining and harassing a group based on what they say within the group.
Track record: The society/leader failed to set the records straight by standing up and asserting that the group has the right to talk about things anything they want in an opt-in zone. They have the right to not be harrassed.
2) Because the accuser publicly attacked the group, the group reacted by booking a venue to help clear its own name, to tell others what they are trying to do. That event is opt-in. No one needs to attend unless they want to. However, during the event, a group of people entered to object to their message, and the venue disqualified the host group’s right to present.
Track Record: The intruding group and the public venue manager violated the presenting group’s autonomy to book an opt-in zone within a public venue that the presenter party also has a share.
Track Record: The leadership failed to recognize that the presenter group’s autonomy was violated, and failed to address the underlying request.
3) A bomb threat is made (for now, let’s assume that the bomb threat was made by supporters of the group that has been trying to talk but is being harrassed by people entering their opt-in zone, and being denied their share of the public venue).
Track Record: The city declares, “Because they resort to bomb threat, therefore we won’t listen to their plead.”, in this possibly hypothetical chronology for the sake of explanation, such an argument would be misleading because the city had not been listening even when the group was just talking. In fact, the city had been the aggressor violating the right of the group to gather and have their own opt-in forum for discussion. Because the city had a track record of denying the group’s means of a civil grievance, the next step of self-defense was civil disobedience.
An observer could say “There are many forms of civil disobedience, such as pulling the fire alarm, which would be a lesser form than a bomb threat.”
In terms of Cooperative peacemaking, an observer would not make such a comment because the focus is not on the means that the victim had chosen to express grievance, but the fact that their grievance had been ignored. The focus is not on training the victims on what ways of protest are more civil, but on concurring with the victims that the violations that happened to them need to be resolved. The peacemaker has no logical ground to tell the victim to calm down when they are not taking a step to resolve the underlying violation.
David states in his article:
But David you are on record saying:
So which is it?
You imply there is a contradiction between her calling for calm as the right thing to do and believing it will make a difference.