Feel free to provide a caption for this picture.
For some reason it makes me sort of sad.
Ahmad Zahra acolyte and tender sprig Elijah Mannisero is at it again. In a very strange post on the Kennedy Sister Observer blog he takes offense at my recent post on FFFF detailing many of Zahra’s shortcomings – ethical, financial, and legal.
Specifically, the fragile green shoot takes umbrage at the claim that Zahra filed a false police report back in 2021 against his colleague Fred Jung.
Most of the impressionable fella’s post wastes time explaining what everybody agrees happened: Zahra popped off to Jung with a snide comment, and the latter reacted verbally. It’s funny that Manissero makes it sound like Jung pursued Zahra into the back room, because that is where they all go after meetings – as evidenced by Dunlap, Whitaker, and Quirk-Silva’s presence there, also. He inserts some little snips to look like he has uncovered something. Whatever.
In young Elijah’s recounting Zahra was afraid that Jung would escalate his behavior so he went to the cops – the next day. He shares the fact that the cops did investigate something and closed “the case” for lack of anything that looked like a crime. Oddly, Elijah takes exception to my “timeline” although my post offered none.
It all amounts to FFFF badness and evil, of course. No “false report” was made and we are spreading disinformation.
But hold on a sec, Elijah. You have the whole police report, including the accusation, right? I won’t bother asking who gave it to you because I already know. However, here’s one small problem: you didn’t share any documentation on what the exactly Zahra claimed Jung did to require police involvement. Hmm. I wonder why not.
Young Maniserro tries to claim I mischaracterized something when I wrote that other councilmembers denied Zahra’s account. Not true. Elijah should have tried reading. Here’s what the post said:
The cops interviewed other councilmembers who denied Zahra’s tall tale. End of story. Except that the story has never been reported by Zahra’s Observer friends and of course never discussed by Zahra.”
So the point is not just what people saw and overheard. The issue is whether they saw and heard everything Zahra put in his report to the cops – the whole thing. Obviously, they didn’t. Readers of his post still don’t know what Zahra claimed happened that warranted police intervention, and sweet Elijah didn’t bother sharing the whole report from which he only cites the verbal exchanges, but not the actual accusation Zahra made to the police. Where’s the rest of the report? Let’s see the whole thing
Maybe Zahra honestly thinks “are you a little girl?” is a sufficient affront to call in the police to investigate a crime – in which case there is no false report – just a stupid waste of everybody’s time. Can he possibly have believed that? Or is it much more likely that he saw another opportunity to play victim by dragging the cops into a silly verbal exchange by pretending a crime happened to him, an opportunity that backfired.
The most telling part of the post was Elijah’s attempt to drag Tony Bushala into it, somehow. Bushala wasn’t there at the confrontation, but he must be blamed for something or it wouldn’t be the Fullerton Observer. So the story twists itself to Bushala’s oversized influence, yadda, yadda, and transparency and the like.
What a mess.
Maybe his mom needs to run young Elijah’s sheets out on the line for the neighbors to see.
Some have questioned Dr. Ahmad Zahra’s claim that he quit his life as a man of medicine for a life as a filmmaker. But this claim is no longer in doubt.
A Friend has forwarded this image of the extraordinary Ahmad Zahra that clearly shows the good doctor from Damascus as a big time Hollywood cinematic auteur.
So there you have it. Who are we to argue with our own eyes?
Here’s an interesting bit from the “print edition” of the Fullerton Observer, proving that once again the Fullerton Klown Kar has no rearview mirror.
The subject is the reopening of the abandoned UP Park, and all you have to do is look at the photo op result to guess that a history re-write is in the works.
While we were basking in the Spring-like day, most of the USA was under an unrelenting, repressive assault by ice, snow, and freezing rain. All of the speakers took notice of who was in the audience, mainly the Fullerton residents who did not give up on the idea of a local park, rallying support for an incredible 20-plus years. Assemblywoman Sharon Quirk Silva recalled how she was on the City Council in 2004 when the idea of revitalizing Union Pacific Park was discussed. Persistence from Fullerton residents kept the idea alive, so keep that in mind.
There’s a who’s who of Fullerton libs who can’t seem to have their pictures taken often enough, especially over there on the far left – the tarnished antique Pilferin’ Paulette Chaffee, who did less than nothing to have the park reopened. But then again, neither did Vanessa Estrella, or Sharon Quirk, or Jesus Quirk-Silva.
And on the subject of Quirk and Quirk Silva, the reimagining of history is appalling. Quirk got on the City Council at the end of 2004 all right. But at that point the first Union Pacific Park was just completed – brand effing new. Her statement is obviously meant to ignore the long history of bureaucratic failure that led to toxic soil removal and closure of a third of the park, to finally fencing off the whole damn thing because of the hypes, borrachos and homeless campers.
But just as important as hiding ugly truth is promoting your own accomplishment – finally doing what was thought impossible – after a 20-year fight! And let’s not forget the other myth – the popular struggle from la communidad, all of it ginned up, when it existed at all, by patronizing gringos at the Center for Healthy Neighborhoods, etc.
The Big Q probably doesn’t want you to remember that she was on the Council for another 8 years after her mythical park revitalization “discussions” allegedly took place, and so if the park wasn’t “revitalized” under her careful stewardship, why not?
Then there’s her dopey, hare-brained husband, Jesus, who was on the council from 2016 through 2022. What was he doing to revitalize the park after it really was fenced off? Nada. That’s right fish farm fans. He and Ahmad Zahra, also mugging in the picture, were trying to illegally convert the parkland to an intrusive fenced off private event center. So much for “the community.” You couldn’t make this stuff up.
The Fullerton Observer sisters and these political types want us to forget the real history of the UP Park – a poisoned public nuisance created by and for City bureaucrats as a Redevelopment money plaything who’s history would be a civic shame, if anybody in City Hall had any shame.
Now maybe you think that this is all trivial, this whitewash of the past. Not so. The conditions which caused UP Park #1’s failure are still there, even as more millions are thrown at UP Park #2. No one is paying attention because nobody cares.
One of our commenters recently pointed out the “reply” string on a Fullerton Observer post supposedly written by a guy named Kevin Curriston, a chap who doesn’t appear to be the literary type. Some of comments are pretty good. Naturally Sharon, the elder Kennedy Sister, leaps into the breach to validate the theme of the essay. Amy the Angry Little Bird is on hand too, to lend her support.
A guy named Brian calls bullshit on the supposition that 40 public commenters represent anybody but a small percentage of Fullertonions.
That premise is not well-received in Fullerton Boohooville.
I particularly like Brian’s wicked request for Kennedy to share some of Zahra’s vast filmography.
A Mr. Matt Leslie reminds everybody that Zahra’s flipped on his first real decision and in doing so disenfranched a whole bunch of people when he appointed Jan Flory to complete Jesus Quirk-Silva’s term.
Here’s the reply thread, reproduced:
15 replies »
- Matt LeslieThe author neglects to inform readers that Council member Ahmad Zahra did not attend this important meeting. Although it seems unlikely that other council members would have supported him for mayor, he had the opportunity to support Shana Charles for the position, but was not present to do so.Ed Response: Councilmember Zahra had a work trip out of town so did not attend the meeting.
- BrianI see you seem to know a lot about council member Zahra, just what does he do for a living?
- Sharon KZahra is a filmmaker. Currently the only Councilmember who doesn’t work is Jung. You can discover this kind of thing through the form 700 financial filings of each Councilmember. – though I notice Valencia has failed to file. Not sure why.
- BrianI see you seem to know a lot about council member Zahra, just what does he do for a living?
- AmyDunlap and Jung continue to gaslight the public and delude themselves by saying that public commenters are not representative.Every meeting brings new attendees infuriated by the actions of the majority, but Jung, Dunlap, and Valencia keep telling themselves the public’s voices don’t count. It seems they can’t bring themselves to accept that anyone could possibly disagree with their blatant corruption and repeated defiance of the wishes of the public.
- BrianI’d imagine if you took two seconds to step outside your bubble, you may realize that in a town of 140,000+, 30 or 40 people don’t even represent a decimal of a percentage. And just because you comment, it doesn’t make your comments true. Much like this publication and the liberties it takes with the truth all the time.
- Sharon KBrian – sounds like you are talking to yourself on that critique.
Most people are busy with their lives and don’t pay that much attention. And of course over half of our town’s 140,000 or so residents are children. Others have jobs that interfere with council meeting hours, etc. Some don’t think it is possible to fight city hall. Some are just not interested. Having 40 people show up at a council meeting and speak on an issue is huge.
If people didn’t come out we wouldn’t have any trails in town; there would be a polluting flour mill across from Amerige Heights; the toxic park and McColl dump site would not be cleaned up; our museum center would be high rise office building; we wouldn’t have saved FOX or Coyote Hills and much much more.
Some politicians – just out for themselves and narrow special interests – can fool people for awhile but eventually the truth of their actions come out - AmyThose who disagree are welcome to attend a city council meeting, but for some reason they have not.Jung received unanimous opposition to his taking of the mayorship at the last meeting. Dozens of public comments unanimously supported creating a fund for immigrant support against ICE raids and kidnappings. Dozens still attended to beg city council not to kill the Walk on Wilshire – twice; the paltry number of voices in opposition were those financially aligned with Jung and Bushala. If opposition exists, it has yet to show up to city council meetings.
- BrianLike I said, just because you comment, doesn’t make your comments true. With this statement you proved my point again.
Full of inaccuracies. Do better.- AmyI don’t see how, but okay. I’m sure you know best.
- Matt LeslieAmy, I opposed Walk on Wilshire for several reasons, not because I was “aligned” with anyone. Please be careful not to be dismissive of the concerns of those with opinions contrary to your own.
- AmyI fully respect your right to your opinion, but I do disagree that the bollards – comparable to those used on nearly every trail in OC – were an actual impediment to cyclists traversing the Walk on Wilshire and merited removal of the whole thing. I definitely wouldn’t go so far as to say any opinion I disagree with is invalid. That would be absurd. But the argument seemed so ridiculous as to be disingenuous to me. Perhaps I’m reading too much into it.That said, as one of the fewer than 10 detractors, you’re certaintly entitled to your opinion. I hope the dismantling of the Walk on Wilshire that so many enjoyed brought you great happiness and satisfaction.
- BrianLike I said, just because you comment, doesn’t make your comments true. With this statement you proved my point again.
- FrankStep out of your bubble pal.
- Sharon KBrian – sounds like you are talking to yourself on that critique.
- BrianI’d imagine if you took two seconds to step outside your bubble, you may realize that in a town of 140,000+, 30 or 40 people don’t even represent a decimal of a percentage. And just because you comment, it doesn’t make your comments true. Much like this publication and the liberties it takes with the truth all the time.
- Sharon KBrian – if you are talking to me – you are right — I guessed that there are way more children than there are at least according to the stats I just looked up that say there are only 32,000 children under 18 in Fullerton.
But when you are figuring out percentages of people think about the fact that – according to the OC Registrar of Voters – only 7,432 voted for Jung; 9,546 for Dunlap and 3,489 for Valencia in the last election. That certainly does not make a majority. Some of those who voted for Jung, Dunlap are among those who have come to council and said they were unhappy with their votes on various things and felt fooled when the vote to keep Walk on Wilshire open – turned into an expansion suggested by the two – and then that vote was postponed until after the election and both Jung and Dunlap proceeded to vote no.
Really the point is that we residents of town want a fun place to live that we are proud of where people want to visit and small businesses can thrive. Dulling it down by reducing unique features, curtailing music, outdoor patios, walking paths, safe bike paths, etc does not make our town attractive to anyone. And everything turns into a big fight with residents begging for good decisions. And I am not alone in really hating their recent decision to not help residents targeted by ICE and other weird unfair decisions like not following fair rotation so every district gets chance to have their representative as mayor. - Matt LeslieAnd, by the way, if you want to talk about steamrolling over public opinion go watch the videos of Ahmad Zahra’s first council meetings in 2018. Dr. Zahra first voiced support for a special election to fill a vacant council seat, a position in line with nearly all public speakers on the issue during meetings. But he quickly changed his position entirely, aligning himself with a council majority who disregarded expressed public opinion in favor of an election and instead voted to appoint a someone to the vacant seat.Zahra’s swing vote to appoint a council member instead of holding an election disenfranchised an entire district of the city, instead foisting upon them an unelected representative for the two full years remaining in the council term. This decision was of much greater significance, in my opinion, than choosing a mayor from among sitting council members (something the appointed council member got to do). Where was the concern for “the public” then?
Somebody posted a comment the other day about some guy named Tim Johnson. I don’t know Tim Johnson, and I hadn’t even heard anything about him. I was directed to his performance at the last council meeting.
I would really worry about this guy’s mental and emotional well-being. Or I would if he weren’t such a puckered asshole.
You can watch his performance on the City Clerk’s website. His diatribe starts at 1:49:35 mark, right after young Oliver, the No Account of Montecristo.
It’s become a rather worrisome trend lately for the harangues of a few malcontents at council meetings to vent their angry spleen in increasingly agitated, even violent language and behavior. This Tim Johnson individual is a good example.
Constantly slapping the podium; offering wild gesticulations; pointing at councilmembers; shouting angry and abusive language; this seems to be this person’s stock-in-trade.
There was no substance in Mr. Johnson’s diatribe except hatred for Fred Jung who has not been sufficiently contributory to making Fullerton fun! Like his kindred spirits at said podium he seems to think insulting people is an effective way to get them to do what you want. He also seemed to think he has a right for councilmembers to look at him as he denigrates them.
A little research suggests Tim Johnson organizes a bike parade on the 4th of July. His web presence is something called “Fullerton Loves.” He is therefore qualified to determine right from wrong.
Like many other local oracles he approves of those who gives him attention. Nick Dunlap does, apparently, and so does the relentless self-promoter Shana Charles, the otiose councilmember from District 3. The cops and firepersons go to his parades, I guess. And that is the launching pad for his little rocket: Jung makes backroom deals in a cigar lounge, etc., etc.
I’m glad there is a police presence at council hearings as a handful of angry people try to shout down councilmembers with catcalls from the back rows. The obnoxious Kennedy Sisters have already been escorted out for disrupting meetings. Sooner or later civility is going to have to be enforced by the FPD.
There is a conga line of eccentric bloviators who keep showing up at Fullerton City Council meetings to berate the so-called “council majority.” Some of them are quite abusive and accusatory. Some then try, or pretend to try, to get the objects of their disapprobation to do something for them. Any attaching tissue to reality seems to be non-existent.
Who is your favorite?
Is it true. When his lips are moving he’s generally lying, as the saying goes.
It was all about “serving,” mostly serving himself, of course. Never forget: his second big decision was to get himself appointed to the lucrative OCWD board in exchange for appointing Jan Flory to the City Council in 2019; his first big decision had been to call for a replacement election.
“Community-driven representation” means stirring up a handful of uninformed people to harangue honest council members and bully them into submission on a useless $2,300,000 trail through a blighted industrial area.
Is this a true statement or only a feint? Is it a mechanism to win sympathy for a mayoral appointment on December 16th? The latter certainly isn’t going to happen any way you slice it. Or is this a realization that his self-serving ego leap is over and that he landed in the sand some time ago?
On Tuesday the Fullerton City Council killed a plan by Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles to dole out $200,000 to the victims of Immigration and Custom Enforcement depredations.
The item was “tabled,” meaning it isn’t coming back. Fullerton does this because two councilmembers can keep bringing something back ad infinitum unless a majority makes a positive vote that it not come back. Fred Jung, Jamie Valencia and Nick Dunlap voted in the affirmative.
The idea itself, as with most squishy-feely liberal brainstorms, was based on the supposition that the people of Fullerton should pay for legal help and “basic necessities” i.e. food, rent, etc., for people harassed by ICE – even and especially undocumented immigrants, i.e. Illegal aliens.
The idea was to toss the money into the caring hands of non-profit entities who would then distribute the largesse, somehow, somewhere, to somebody. Deduct administrative overhead all around. The opportunity for waste, even if the cause were just and appropriate, should be obvious to anybody with sense.
Sense. Therein lay a problem.
As usual with this sort of thing, the council chamber was packed with pro-government giveaway types, many from outside Fullerton – people who believe it is the taxpayers job to subsidize their charitable impulses. This attendance will be misrepresented by the Fullerton Observer Kennedy Sisters and other boohoos, of course, as “the People” want this or that; or “the People have spoken;” or “listen to the People;” or to be more precise “Fred Jung failed to listen to the People.”
What the majority of people in Fullerton really think about this Berkeleyesque scheme isn’t known, but I bet eight or nine in ten would be against jumping this issue up to first in line.
The discussion did give opportunity for a budget discussion that proved more cloudy that clear. Shana Charles seemed to think she had discovered a vein of gold somewhere in the give-and-take, but of course didn’t have a clue about what she had heard. To her and her playmate, Zahra, $200,000 is just a drop in the proverbial bucket and of no real concern.
The funnest part of the evening came when the serial liar Zahra told his own immigration tale of hardship getting a green card.
This is fabulously disingenuous because we all know now that he got his green card through marriage fraud with one Michele Salmon, an Arkansas woman whom he married, then quickly abandoned in Little Rock as he went to pursue his Hollywood Dream. FFFF will be sharing a video clip of this newest chapter in Zahra’s chameleon-like origin story, when the City puts it on online.
The whole scenario was another one of those Zahra/Charles performative, made-for-effect gatherings to promote themselves, and no doubt to try to make the council majority look bad. That’s a poor political strategy. It’s going to backfire badly on Zahra, if he decides he still needs a councilman’s income after 2026; and just as disastrous for Shana Charles who has already announced her continuing “journey.”
“Charles Voted to give $200,000 to Illegal Aliens.” And so on.
At last night’s City Council meeting, “Doctor” Ahmad Zahra, the Dissimulator of Damascus, informed the packed audience the he had written an opinion piece in the Fullerton Observer. The thrust of the article he said, was to point out the disparity in park spending in south Fullerton when compared to the north.
I was curious to see what Zahra had written, knowing as I do his penchant for plagiarism in the Observer, and his special brand of hand-wringing. I wondered if it might be AI written as has appeared to be the case before. So I found the online copy of the print edition.
Naturally the first thing Zahra does to establish his position is to tell a bald-faced lie. People in the neighborhood have been waiting 20 years, he bemoaned, for the Union Pacific Park to “finally” be opened! One poor mom could become a grandmother waiting for the park to open! The shame! Zahra was peddling the same false history bullshit as his pal Skiaka Kennedy.
Of course Zahra’s implication is that the closed park symbolizes profound unfairness, proving bias against south Fullerton, presumably by white City Councils from north Fullerton (not so subtle racism and hideous classism would be the obvious cause, Zahra hoped, to the Latino-packed audience). That’s the official Fullerton Boohoo narrative.
The problem is that this weeping about Union Pacific Park is completely untrue, and the history of the park, while demonstrating gross incompetence by City staff and councils, in no way shows an anti-south Fullerton bias. Actually, just the opposite.
Here’s the truth: the park had been opened back in the early 2000s at a cost of several million bucks to the public – all of Fullerton’s public. In a year or two part of the park was fenced off due to soil contamination – but a small part of the western end. The balance of the park remained wide open to the public and stayed open for ten years or so. Then the park was closed by Fullerton’s City Manager, and former Parks and Rec Director, Joe Felz.
Why?
Because the Union Pacific Park had become a haven for borrachos, gang members and drug addicts. The City finally put up a fence around the whole damn thing. The small toilet building was a magnet for illicit activity; it was closed, then demolished. Homeless started to haunt the walkways and build wickiups against the fence. No City Council ever voted on this closure, by the way. A public explanation would be too damn damning. It has been painfully obvious that there never should have been a park there in the first place, and there wouldn’t have been except for the ego of the then Parks Director and lots of Redevelopment play money.
The sad truth is that nothing has changed to make the new version of the Union Pacific Park successful. All of the same socio-economic, criminal, and drug abuse issues still exist. Zahra will not be in office after next November’s election, but the legacy of his foolish, patronizing make-work projects – the Trail to Nowhere and the Union Pacific Park – will be notorious to anybody willing to look at the topic honestly.
Alas, honesty is not a commodity in high demand in the world of uber-liberal politics, made manifest locally in the precincts of Fullerton BooHoo. Here, governance, if you want to call it that, is based on seeking out, and appearing sensitive to the plight of some victim or other, some “underserved” person or class, whether they want that solicitude or not. The more you spend, the more you appear to care, even if the money is utterly wasted, as were the millions spent acquiring and building the first Union Pacific Park.