OCCUPYWALLSTREET REINFORCEMENTS!

[Elderberry]

I can only comment on several protests I have marched in here in Los Angeles, and we had large numbers of people and we intentionally blocked major intersections as we marched. (intentionally in that we were walking down a Johor street crossing major intersections and we weren't waiting for any lights to change.) The Los Angeles police didn't bother one of the marchers/protesters, but chose instead to just block the traffic until the last one of us passed, and they did this along the entire route.

I don't believe there ever was a direct confrontation between a police officer and a protestor, let alone anyone getting sprayed with pepper spray. (and there were some protestors who I am sure taxed the police almost to their limit.)

So from my perspective based on those experiences, I would say that the NYPD was out of line.

I don't like to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I think the stakes are pretty high here and there are lots of people in high places that would prefer this was all nipped in the bud, and what better way of doing it than to make marching appear risky.

Look at the comments already in this thread by people afraid to come out and march.

Just saying...

[Elderberry]

I usually don't comment on typos but that's the second time you used it, the first time I censored my thoughts of spacious and pricey accomodations.


This time I didn't.

Actually, I prefer to be corrected if my usage is incorrect, as it's easy to get sloppy with grammar and it keeps me on my toes. That wasn't a typo, just a mistake. I even googled it to make sure.

[Simon of the Playa]

[youtube][/youtube]

[Sic Pup]

The pepper spray incident was LAST Saturday, NYPD has already acknowledged it appears unwarranted and IA is investigating. There are rogues in every group, but I'm not a NYPD defender just someone interested in the truth.

That video was edited to prove a point and forward an agenda, evidently successfully.

Do what suits you but were I you I would expand my sources of information before coming to conclusions.

[Sic Pup]

I don't like to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I think the stakes are pretty high here and there are lots of people in high places that would prefer this was all nipped in the bud, and what better way of doing it than to make marching appear risky.

Look at the comments already in this thread by people afraid to come out and march.

Just saying...

Er, that's what led me to comment on it, I don't think my message implied that one shouldn't protest.



As I said originally if it was clear exactly what they were protesting and had a concise message I'd be there myself.

[Elderberry]

It didn't. I was referring to those that posted earlier in the thread that said they couldn't, wouldn't, or were afraid to protest because they had too much to lose...house, family, kids, etc.

This, I think, is exactly the reaction that the harsh police tactics are trying to illicit. Keep people at home, afraid to march, thus limiting the numbers of protestors or even stopping them entirely. Now where would they have gotten the idea to do that?

I don't like to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I think the stakes are pretty high here and there are lots of people in high places that would prefer this was all nipped in the bud, and what better way of doing it than to make marching appear risky.

Look at the comments already in this thread by people afraid to come out and march.

Just saying...

Er, that's what led me to comment on it, I don't think my message implied that one shouldn't protest.



As I said originally if it was clear exactly what they were protesting and had a clear and concise message I'd be there myself.

[Sola Gangsta]

I don't like to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but I think the stakes are pretty high here and there are lots of people in high places that would prefer this was all nipped in the bud, and what better way of doing it than to make marching appear risky.

I don't think marches by themselves will accomplish much of anything at this point. Laws need to be changed or the system needs to be broken so that it can't work for either rich or poor.

Most of your power (usually misrepresented as your vote) is in your wallet, not at the voting booth. Where you spend your money shows who you empower to represent your interests in govt. If you buy from Walmart, you make their lobby powerful in DC. Likewise with other corporations who will attempt to replace your interests with theirs.

It is quite obvious that those in power will resort to violence to maintain control. Unless you are prepared for that eventuality, organizing marches is irresponsible and needlessly puts people in harms way for nothing. Hippies need to read the art of war or they will get slaughtered. I'd never put myself in a situation like that without a gun. I think people should change the way they protest because it really is as simple as where you put your money. If you don't give them the power (your money) to abuse you in the first place, they can't do anything against you.

[Sic Pup]

It didn't. I was referring to those that posted earlier in the thread that said they couldn't, wouldn't, or were afraid to protest because they had too much to lose...house, family, kids, etc.

This, I think, is exactly the reaction that the harsh police tactics are trying to illicit. Keep people at home, afraid to march, thus limiting the numbers of protestors or even stopping them entirely. Now where would they have gotten the idea to do that?

I've yet to see an documentation of "harsh police tactics" other than video taken out of context and what appears to be one incident of a seemingly unwarranted attack. We don't know what instructions were given, and what was ignored prior to police action.

I'll also remind you that that video can also be used to incite people to rise up against the man which is the way it strikes me. In fact, that's a well worn tactic to motivate the masses against a common enemy (see martyr)

Whatever the case, time will tell.

ETA: At your request I think you mean "elicit" although I Iike the implication of "Illicit".

[H.G.Crosby]

http://www.boston.com/Boston/metrodesk/ ... index.html

[Elderberry]

LOL I realized it as soon as I saw the emphasis. Carelessness. Thanks.

Well, it will definitely be interesting to see how this all plays out.

It didn't. I was referring to those that posted earlier in the thread that said they couldn't, wouldn't, or were afraid to protest because they had too much to lose...house, family, kids, etc.

This, I think, is exactly the reaction that the harsh police tactics are trying to illicit. Keep people at home, afraid to march, thus limiting the numbers of protestors or even stopping them entirely. Now where would they have gotten the idea to do that?

I've yet to see an documentation of "harsh police tactics" other than video taken out of context and what appears to be one incident of a seemingly unwarranted attack. We don't know what instructions were given, and what was ignored prior to police action.

I'll also remind you that that video can also be used to incite people to rise up against the man which is the way it strikes me. In fact, that's a well worn tactic to motivate the masses against a common enemy (see martyr)

Whatever the case, time will tell.

ETA: At your request I think you mean "elicit" although I Iike the implication of "Illicit".

[Radical Self]

Simon - thanks for the Chaplin/Moby post! "More than machinery, we need humanity." Very inspiring.

Openmndhlr - Interesting suggestion. I've been following this occupation via the web. I saw on their website "We need food" and immediately thought about Burning Man. If I was in the area, I would consider making them some bacon.

So let's make a "distribution of wealth" parallel between BM and what's happening here in the US. What would happen if a rich male Burner flew into Black Rock City one year and roped off several city blocks for his own personal use? What do you all think would happen? There are no rules or even principles against this to my knowledge. I am interested to have some discussion on this.

The hesitation that I am feeling about this occupation is that of fear. We fear what we don't know. And I can't know "anonymous". I get the whole concept of the mask thing and the digital voice and thus not being able to use ad hominem arguments against one person or group of people, but frankly it all freaks me out. While I understand that this is meant to be a non-violent protest, it seems rather ominous and angry. "We will never forgive. We will never forget". I think it's sending a real mixed message. So inhuman. To me, thats what this occupation is missing. Humanity. Maybe if I was closer to it I would feel differently. That's what I love about Burning Man. It's a celebration of humanity in all its radical forms.

[cowboyangel]

Radical Self....dude, it ain't the protesters we have to fear, it's the Wall St driven zombies who sit in congress and the white house....read on....


The Men We Trusted to Lead Us Have Failed
Friday 30 September 2011
by: Robert Scheer, Truthdig | Op-Ed

Now he tells us.

On Wednesday, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke referred to the nation's unemployment rate as a "national crisis," a depressing if obvious fact of life for the 25 million Americans who have been unsuccessfully attempting to find full-time employment.

But to finally hear those words from the man George W. Bush and Barack Obama both appointed to lead us out of the great recession is a bracing reminder of how markedly the policies of both those presidents have failed. "We've had close to 10 percent unemployment now for a number of years, and of the people who are unemployed, about 45 percent have been unemployed for six months or more," Bernanke said. "This is unheard of."

But why is Bernanke just now discovering this after having overseen the Fed's purchase of trillions in toxic mortgage-backed securities from the too-big-to-fail banks that sacrificed people's homes in a giant Ponzi scheme? Why did he throw all of that money at the banks without getting anything back in the way of relief for the people the bankers swindled?

The housing meltdown, which has robbed Americans of a considerable portion of their net worth, has led to the continued depressed consumer confidence that is the prime cause of crisis-level unemployment. In another of his too-late-to-matter moments, Bernanke acknowledged that "strong housing policies to help the market recover" would "clearly be very useful." But he failed to suggest any.

Bernanke, along with then-New York Fed President Timothy Geithner, helped implement the Bush strategy of saving the banks in the hope that their rising tide would lift our little boats. That remained the strategy when President Obama rewarded Geithner for having saved AIG and Citigroup by naming him Treasury secretary in the incoming government.

With the Geithner appointment and the even more disturbing selection of Lawrence Summers to be his top economic adviser, Obama sealed his own fate as president. By turning to those disciples of Clinton-era Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, a prime enabler of Wall Street greed, the new president fatally betrayed his promise of hope.

If you still need confirmation of just how decisive a betrayal those appointments were, check out Ron Suskind's new book, "Confidence Men," a devastating insider account of the Obama White House that clearly identifies as the source of this president's failure "Rubin's B-Team" -- Summers and Geithner -- "two men whose actions had contributed to the very financial disaster they were hired to solve." Suskind quotes then-Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., one of the few who dared stand up to the Wall Street lobbyists, as telling Obama, "I don't understand how you could do this; you've picked the wrong people!"

Of course, the Democrats from the Clinton era don't bear all of the responsibility for the radical deregulation of the financial industry that ended the sensible restraints on greed installed by Franklin Roosevelt in response to the Great Depression. Indeed, the inspiration came from Republicans led by Phil Gramm, then-senator from Texas, who, as head of the Banking Committee, authored the legislation that Wall Street lobbyists had long pushed unsuccessfully.

The mayhem they wrought and the subsequent big-money rewards to Rubin and Gramm do not seem to have shocked this president or the leading contenders for the Republican presidential nomination. Rubin became chairman of Citigroup and was rewarded with $120 million while he guided the bank to the edge of bankruptcy. Gramm went on to a leading position at Swiss financial services company UBS, a continually troubled institution now in the midst of its latest scandal, which involves fraudulent trading. In addition to a $45 billion direct TARP bailout, Citigroup got $99.5 billion, and Gramm's UBS received $77.2 billion from a $1.2 trillion secret Fed loan fund.

Gramm and Rubin were partners in what should be considered the crime of the century -- speaking in moral and not legal terms, since, in the financial world, the bad guys get to write the laws. Thanks to their efforts, which allowed the creation of the "too-big-to-fail banks" and a totally unregulated derivatives market in toxic home mortgage securities, we entered the Great Recession. But neither of its authors has ever been held seriously accountable for the enormous suffering he caused.

On the contrary, Gramm and Rubin's "just free Wall Street to do its thing" ideology still dominates the economic policies of both major political parties. Rubin's acolytes have controlled the Obama administration's economic strategy of saving Wall Street by betraying Main Street, and Gramm, who recently endorsed his former student at Texas A&M, Rick Perry, for president, remains the free-market-mayhem guru for Republicans. On Election Day, whoever wins, we lose.

[Simon of the Playa]

TAKE NO PRISONERS!


we are anonymous.

we will prevail.

expect us.

[Simon of the Playa]

New York has welcomed me with my own protest zone.

[Simon of the Playa]

[youtube][/youtube]

[Simon of the Playa]

GOT FIRE?

[Roberto Dobbisano]

10,000 strong and growing.

[Sola Gangsta]

GOT FIRE?

That could be the 2012 BM ticket.

[FIGJAM]

[youtube][/youtube]

[H.G.Crosby]

[youtube][/youtube]

[moonrise]

Like I’ve said elsewhere I’m no activist, as important as I think this is and as just I think many of the causes to be, at this time I can’t join the protests on the street. I like so many others are already caught deep in the trap. I work for a nonprofit, my mortgage takes over half my monthly income, I need heat and food in the months to come and I have no savings. I can’t afford the repercussions of even one night in jail and mounting a defense against the simplest charges. I try to diminish the gilt I feel for not being there by trying to help others to do what needs to be done.

Some links people might be interested in:

Chicago http://occupychi.org/
Iowa http://www.facebook.com/pages/Occupy-IO ... 9081297272
Michigan http://www.facebook.com/OccupyMichigan
Minnesota http://www.occupymn.org/
Kansas City http://www.facebook.com/occupykc
Salt Lake City https://www.facebook.com/pages/OccupyST ... 3469481751
Omaha http://www.facebook.com/pages/Occupy-Om ... 305?ref=ts
Fargo https://www.facebook.com/pages/Occupy-F ... 5512429142
Cincinnati https://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=120301874743081
Cleveland https://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=209338735799061
Milwaukee https://www.facebook.com/pages/Occupy-M ... 2382232714
Madison http://www.facebook.com/OccupyMadison
Oklahoma https://www.facebook.com/OccupyOklahomaCity
DC https://www.facebook.com/pages/OCCUPYDC ... 2683652471
Birmingham http://www.facebook.com/occupy.birmingham?sk=info
Maine https://www.facebook.com/OccupyMaine
Tampa, FL http://www.facebook.com/OccupyTampa
Floridahttp://www.facebook.com/occupyflorida
Louisville http://www.facebook.com/OccupyLouisville
Atlanta http://occupyatlanta.org/
Dallas https://www.facebook.com/OccupyDallas
Los Angeles http://occupylosangeles.org/
San Francisco http://occupysf.com/
San Francisco https://www.facebook.com/OccupySF
Montana https://www.facebook.com/groups/258609357511713/
Reno https://www.facebook.com/occupyreno
Eugene https://www.facebook.com/groups/198569370212056/
Portland https://www.facebook.com/OccupyPortland
Seattle http://www.facebook.com/OccupySeattle

If you don’t see your state or city look here.
http://www.occupytogether.org/

Exercise your rights!

[moonrise]

The time has been long overdue for this. I was wondering why there weren't riots in 1988 after the Keating savings and load scandal, Rodney King, etc... When would people wake up if not for these things?

Since then I've thought of many ways to bring down the leadership as have my friends but everyone is on a different page. If everyone did one of the following in unison it would have widespread consequences and cause a major shift in leadership:

1. Get rid of your cable tv and stop watching television all together.
2. Stop buying from corporations like Walmart, McDonalds, etc. (The vote that really counts is in your wallet, not at the voting booth).
3. Trade with your neighbors in your own currency (barter to start with).
4. If you have Amish farms nearby, support them by paying them for the things that you would have paid corporations.
5. Localize everything you can. Globalization has been hyped to be the "solve everything" solution but it creates more problems than it solves and allows the middle man to come in (government especially). The federal govt is a parasite upon the state governments and likewise the state to county.

There are other options for the above list but I want to point out a fundamental problem which is not what you might think (the economy). The real problem from the perspective of the true rulers of the world is overpopulation. Part of the reason for cutting into prosperity and making us poor is that we are far out-stripping their ability to cope and stay in control. So wars are their favorite solution to keep down the population and stop us from breeding like rabbits. When prosperity comes to the people, they have families and in a generation you have a whole new group much larger than before who need jobs.

I've heard it said that you can fit the entire population of the world in the area the size of Los Angeles. If people would limit their control and elbow room to their shoulders then population would not be much of a problem, but I'm even feeling it out in the desert camping after burning man in the Mt. Charleston area (Spring Mountains). After coming down, I was approached by BLM forest service asking if I'd like to take a survey which had such questions as "Do you feel safe here?, How many times have you visited?, what do you think of the condition of the roads?, etc... (obviously the goal was to see if they could charge entrance fees). I guess I'll have to find someplace else because the main reason I went up there was to not be bothered. As far a safety is concerned, I was curious what threats they perceived? Drug gangs? The greatest dangers up there are rattle snakes and black widows, but she seemed so "civilized" that I was afraid that I'd have to coach her on proper survival and wondered if she even knew what real dangers there were.

True!

...and everything Simon (and his beloved socks said and posted) True!

[Simon of the Playa]

[youtube][/youtube]

[BBadger]

So uh, what is the end-game of this protest? Make it harder for day traders who have to walk further to get to work?

This whole protest is a waste of time. There's weak organization, no leaders, no aims. Politicians aren't paying attention, and with such ambiguous and unattainable demands, why would they? Just a bunch of proles sitting around thinking they're involved. After the food runs out, after the police learn to give the protesters the silent treatment, it'll all go away. Not only that, but most of these protesters don't really care about some lofty ideals. They're just pissed that they're not joining in on the party like "Wall Street" is. The lure of easy money made through little work. Quite frankly I'd rather see such folk out of jobs.

If you want something to actually change, the protests and aims must be coordinated and aimed at what will attract useful attention. It's the difference between having the LA riots after the Rodney King court case, and having organized boycotts during MLK's civil rights movement. The former is a temporary show of force that is easily placated with a few more scraps from the establishment; the latter is an organized movement that must be negotiated with, and involved in the process of change.

Normal folk have the power to change the situation, but not through some dumb sitdown in Wall Street. "Normal folk" have already inflicted a huge wound on Wall Street through the 2008 recession. Millions of people buying homes on debt, only to sink the lenders with bad loans. It's destroyed banks, killed companies, hurt Wall Street. Likewise, if these people want to do something useful against "Wall Street" or these big companies they need to start boycotting, stop borrowing, start working outside the institutions, while still within the system. Easy? Not at all, but better than accomplishing nothing with a pointless protest.

Until this "protest" evolves into something more substantial, I'm just going to read other news on the Internet and not waste my time with this temporary incident.

[Simon of the Playa]

DUH.

[H.G.Crosby]

from Occupy L.A
‎@OccupyWallStreet twitter account has been suspended.

[Simon of the Playa]

http://www.vanityfair.com/society/featu ... ent-201105

[International Incident]

http://www.vanityfair.com/society/featu ... ent-201105

good article
Travelling around parts of your country recently was like being in a third world country. By that I mean the obvoius discrepencies in any form of equality, infrastructure and how downbeat many people are. So many people without hope or a chance to pull themselves up.

The rich folks I met talked about their tax scams and how they felt hard done by Obama, the poor blamed the immigrants, and the (probably illegal) immigrants I met in Colorado just seemed to wish they didn't have to be there.

It was really sad

[Elderberry]

I would venture to guess you really didn't meet any of the "rich" folks; they don't tend to be easily accessible to those just casually traveling around parts of our country. Now if you went to one of those $35,000.00 a plate political dinners, then I will stand corrected.

http://www.vanityfair.com/society/featu ... ent-201105

good article
Travelling around parts of your country recently was like being in a third world country. By that I mean the obvoius discrepencies in any form of equality, infrastructure and how downbeat many people are. So many people without hope or a chance to pull themselves up.

The rich folks I met talked about their tax scams and how they felt hard done by Obama, the poor blamed the immigrants, and the (probably illegal) immigrants I met in Colorado just seemed to wish they didn't have to be there.

It was really sad

[moonrise]

Interesting.

Don't the French simply go on strike and stop buying anything and everything?
I recall it's been very effective.