Occupy Wall Street

[Sub-Husker]

It was good that (mostly) peaceful demonstrations led to more equitable civil rights and helped end US involvement in Southeast Asia.

 

The police were responsible for only a few deaths, as most of those killed protesting civil rights were murdered by reactionaries on the other side of progress.

 

I pray for the full recovery of Scott Olson, whose head injury was totally uncalled for.

 

While I cannot protest myself, we have sent money and supplies to a local organizer.

[carlfense]

Dr. King and his protestors were assembling peacefully and were beaten, arrested and prosecuted by the police because the police disagreed with their agenda - NOT because they had broken a law. There is a direct parallel between Dr. King's movement and this movement, and it's not even a leap in logic. Two groups of peaceful protestors rousted by the cops. This isn't a situation of "I can't see the parallel," it's clearly, "I don't want to see the parallel." Remove your head from the sand and see what's really going on.

 

74, are you even bothering to read the articles in your google results? You should. They paint a FAR different picture than the one you're peddling.

 

From the very first results your google:

Who's going too far: Occupy protestors or the police?

Discussion of the police being the aggressors for little or no reason.

 

Scott Olsen 'cannot talk' after injury at Occupy Oakland protest

Oaktown cops injure an Iraqi war vet who had committed no known crime - he was simply assembling peacefully, using the rights granted to him under the First Amendment. Now he has a brain injury. His fault?

 

Occupy movement could be damaged by violent clashes

"Most Occupy gatherings have been peaceful, and protesters have developed good working relationships with the police. Most disputes have been over logistical issues like garbage and drumming."

 

Judge tells Tennessee to stop arresting Occupy protesters

"Political expression deserves the highest level of protection and it was unacceptable for the state to suddenly shut down protesters' speech and forcibly oust them from Legislative Plaza that has long been used as a place for peaceful expression," said Hedy Weinberg, executive director at the ACLU of Tennessee.

 

"The state conceded that the temporary restraining order should be issued and we hope that this is the first step (that) the state is recommitting itself to safeguarding -- not thwarting -- public political expression," she added.

 

 

You should stop assuming what these arrests are for and actually find out what's actually happening. Otherwise you are wasting your time.

But . . . knapplc . . . this unsourced email that I just received said that OWS is linked to the Muslim Brotherhood! ZOMG!

[Husker_x]

Dr. King and his protestors were assembling peacefully and were beaten, arrested and prosecuted by the police because the police disagreed with their agenda - NOT because they had broken a law. There is a direct parallel between Dr. King's movement and this movement, and it's not even a leap in logic. Two groups of peaceful protestors rousted by the cops. This isn't a situation of "I can't see the parallel," it's clearly, "I don't want to see the parallel." Remove your head from the sand and see what's really going on.

 

74, are you even bothering to read the articles in your google results? You should. They paint a FAR different picture than the one you're peddling.

 

From the very first results your google:

Who's going too far: Occupy protestors or the police?

Discussion of the police being the aggressors for little or no reason.

 

Scott Olsen 'cannot talk' after injury at Occupy Oakland protest

Oaktown cops injure an Iraqi war vet who had committed no known crime - he was simply assembling peacefully, using the rights granted to him under the First Amendment. Now he has a brain injury. His fault?

 

Occupy movement could be damaged by violent clashes

"Most Occupy gatherings have been peaceful, and protesters have developed good working relationships with the police. Most disputes have been over logistical issues like garbage and drumming."

 

Judge tells Tennessee to stop arresting Occupy protesters

"Political expression deserves the highest level of protection and it was unacceptable for the state to suddenly shut down protesters' speech and forcibly oust them from Legislative Plaza that has long been used as a place for peaceful expression," said Hedy Weinberg, executive director at the ACLU of Tennessee.

 

"The state conceded that the temporary restraining order should be issued and we hope that this is the first step (that) the state is recommitting itself to safeguarding -- not thwarting -- public political expression," she added.

 

 

You should stop assuming what these arrests are for and actually find out what's actually happening. Otherwise you are wasting your time.

But . . . knapplc . . . this unsourced email that I just received said that OWS is linked to the Muslim Brotherhood! ZOMG!

 

You get Beck's newsletter, too? We should be friends.

[Calla]

I've attended and offered material support to the local Occupy movement. I did so because I agree that there is a partnership between people with money and our elected officials and that this partnership is hurting our country. It needs to be pruned back. I also very strongly support citizens' right to peaceful assembly and oppose all the BS permit requirements that are meant to make it extremely difficult for citizens to exercise that right.

 

However - I've decided that I won't be giving them anymore money, food, blankets, tarps, etc. Why? Because the movement has a serious problem going on inside it that it needs to address. A serious and dangerous problem. There are people within it that want to incite violence from the police because they feel the PR advantage from the video is valuable to the movement. I've seen, either in person or on livefeeds that different Occupy groups have going, protestors taunting the police. They don't care that other people, the people around them, could get hurt, too. That's dangerous and shows a complete lack of concern for the safety and well-being of your fellow man. I can't support that.

 

You have a tense situation. Police are in full riot gear, lined up. The protestors are unarmed. So some idiots decide the best thing to do in this situation is to taunt the police. In-your-face taunting. Nasty taunting with some spitting thrown in.

 

Are you insane? Do you care nothing about the people around you? And why were they taunting the police? Because they thought it would be 'cool' to have the 'pigs' go all crazy on the livestream. It would help the cause and would be some awesome video, right? That was caught on the audio of the livestream, as well. Talking about how cool it would be and how people would rush out to support them after seeing the pigs attack on tv. I've also heard that discussed, by committee members, at OccupyMN when I've been there dropping off donations.

 

That kind of immaturity can get people killed.

 

I don't, and will never, condone or excuse excessive force used against peaceful, unarmed citizens. So don't think I'm saying if things turn violent, it's the fault of the protestors. (Unless, you know, it is.) What I'm saying is allowing people to stay within your movement that not only hope for violence, but are willing to incite it on their fellows for coolness points or because it's great PR is not something I can support in a way that allows the demonstrators to continue Occupying places.

 

It's not like these people are hidden. They are up front about what they want the 'pigs' to do and the advantages of being clubbed, gassed, or shot with rubber bullets. Some people who have this idea, are organizers and committee members in OccupyMN and I have to assume the same is true elsewhere. They appear to be fine with trying to provoke an action that will injure those around them. They don't care about people.

 

I still support many of the ideas. I support their right to peaceful assembly. But I will no longer do anything makes it possible for them to gather tear gas fodder around themselves. So no more money. No more blankets to keep them warm. No more tarps to keep the rain off. No more vats of warm oatmeal and soups.

 

Not until they get a handle on this dangerous sub-group within the movement that sees fellow protestors as expendable PR opportunities.

[knapplc]

Calla, would you stop supporting the football team because of one bad player, or a few? I think you have to overlook the inevitable idiots who are just there to incite trouble. There are people like this in most every group, movement, belief system, etc. Heck, there's a fringe group of radical Amish out there right now. I can't think of a group more stereotyped into peace love and harmony than the Amish.

 

How do you feel about the subgroups of police that are arresting the peaceful protestors? How do you feel about Tony Bologna, the pepper-spray cop from New York? Surely you're not pulling your support of all police because of a few bad apples, are you?

 

I'm still completely on the fence about the Occupiers. I don't really know what they're after, or how their occupying is supposed to accomplish whatever their goals are. But I will continue to support their right to assemble, and demonstrate. I won't do it financially, but they get positive vibes from me. Same goes for the cops, actually.

[Calla]

Calla, would you stop supporting the football team because of one bad player, or a few? I think you have to overlook the inevitable idiots who are just there to incite trouble. There are people like this in most every group, movement, belief system, etc. Heck, there's a fringe group of radical Amish out there right now. I can't think of a group more stereotyped into peace love and harmony than the Amish.

 

How do you feel about the subgroups of police that are arresting the peaceful protestors? How do you feel about Tony Bologna, the pepper-spray cop from New York? Surely you're not pulling your support of all police because of a few bad apples, are you?

 

I'm still completely on the fence about the Occupiers. I don't really know what they're after, or how their occupying is supposed to accomplish whatever their goals are. But I will continue to support their right to assemble, and demonstrate. I won't do it financially, but they get positive vibes from me. Same goes for the cops, actually.

 

This decision, to stop supporting them materially, was made after observing several different Occupy protests - either in person or through watching their own livestreams. It's more than a 'few bad apples' and some of these people are in leadership positions within the movement. (I know, they say they don't have leaders, but they do. All groups form leaders) The movement needs to face it that people who have this view, that they should goad violence for PR value, need to be pushed out of the movement. Until they do, they are contributing to an intentionally unsafe environment.

 

Now - if we found out the Coaches or trainers for the Huskers were intentionally creating unsafe conditions that would get their players hurt - and then the U asked me for a donation for the football program - I think many in Husker Nation would rightfully tell them "No. Not until you fix this problem." Doesn't mean they now hate the Huskers or hope for the best for the team.

 

Likewise, as I said before, "I still support many of the ideas. I support their right to peaceful assembly." But I have withdrawn my material support from the Occupy movement and I have discussed why with the local protestors. Some of them understood and agreed this was a serious problem to address. Some were frustrated - frustrated in general, I think. And some were very angry with me and reiterated that they were at war with the 1% and those who are tools of the 1% (which meant the cops) and told me I wasn't steadfast enough to the ideals and too soft.

[bulletbait]

Calla, would you stop supporting the football team because of one bad player, or a few? I think you have to overlook the inevitable idiots who are just there to incite trouble. There are people like this in most every group, movement, belief system, etc. Heck, there's a fringe group of radical Amish out there right now. I can't think of a group more stereotyped into peace love and harmony than the Amish.

 

How do you feel about the subgroups of police that are arresting the peaceful protestors? How do you feel about Tony Bologna, the pepper-spray cop from New York? Surely you're not pulling your support of all police because of a few bad apples, are you?

 

I'm still completely on the fence about the Occupiers. I don't really know what they're after, or how their occupying is supposed to accomplish whatever their goals are. But I will continue to support their right to assemble, and demonstrate. I won't do it financially, but they get positive vibes from me. Same goes for the cops, actually.

 

This decision, to stop supporting them materially, was made after observing several different Occupy protests - either in person or through watching their own livestreams. It's more than a 'few bad apples' and some of these people are in leadership positions within the movement. (I know, they say they don't have leaders, but they do. All groups form leaders) The movement needs to face it that people who have this view, that they should goad violence for PR value, need to be pushed out of the movement. Until they do, they are contributing to an intentionally unsafe environment.

 

Now - if we found out the Coaches or trainers for the Huskers were intentionally creating unsafe conditions that would get their players hurt - and then the U asked me for a donation for the football program - I think many in Husker Nation would rightfully tell them "No. Not until you fix this problem." Doesn't mean they now hate the Huskers or hope for the best for the team.

 

Likewise, as I said before, "I still support many of the ideas. I support their right to peaceful assembly." But I have withdrawn my material support from the Occupy movement and I have discussed why with the local protestors. Some of them understood and agreed this was a serious problem to address. Some were frustrated - frustrated in general, I think. And some were very angry with me and reiterated that they were at war with the 1% and those who are tools of the 1% (which meant the cops) and told me I wasn't steadfast enough to the ideals and too soft.

 

Speaking solely for myself, I don't see how the change that Occupy protesters want can be achieved without eventual violence. To be honest, I've long felt that violent revolution is something I'll see in my lifetime within this country. I'm sure someone will now bring up Ghandi as an example of non-violent protest achieving great things, but you have to understand context. Ghandi was pitted against a waning empire operating half a world away in a country that they couldn't realistically control due to size. That isn't very comparable to the United States today.

[Sub-Husker]

Not until they get a handle on this dangerous sub-group within the movement that sees fellow protestors as expendable PR opportunities.

 

Really... it wasn't my fault!

 

I believe that half the Unitarian fellowship I attend is part of the Occupy movement. The main demonstrations are Occupy Albany, but we have had a few small occupations in my home town.

 

The organizers are doing a great job in keeping the fringe (violent) elements out, and have kept out Democrat Party plants who want to piggyback their pro-Obama message with ours.

[Calla]

Calla, would you stop supporting the football team because of one bad player, or a few? I think you have to overlook the inevitable idiots who are just there to incite trouble. There are people like this in most every group, movement, belief system, etc. Heck, there's a fringe group of radical Amish out there right now. I can't think of a group more stereotyped into peace love and harmony than the Amish.

 

How do you feel about the subgroups of police that are arresting the peaceful protestors? How do you feel about Tony Bologna, the pepper-spray cop from New York? Surely you're not pulling your support of all police because of a few bad apples, are you?

 

I'm still completely on the fence about the Occupiers. I don't really know what they're after, or how their occupying is supposed to accomplish whatever their goals are. But I will continue to support their right to assemble, and demonstrate. I won't do it financially, but they get positive vibes from me. Same goes for the cops, actually.

 

This decision, to stop supporting them materially, was made after observing several different Occupy protests - either in person or through watching their own livestreams. It's more than a 'few bad apples' and some of these people are in leadership positions within the movement. (I know, they say they don't have leaders, but they do. All groups form leaders) The movement needs to face it that people who have this view, that they should goad violence for PR value, need to be pushed out of the movement. Until they do, they are contributing to an intentionally unsafe environment.

 

Now - if we found out the Coaches or trainers for the Huskers were intentionally creating unsafe conditions that would get their players hurt - and then the U asked me for a donation for the football program - I think many in Husker Nation would rightfully tell them "No. Not until you fix this problem." Doesn't mean they now hate the Huskers or hope for the best for the team.

 

Likewise, as I said before, "I still support many of the ideas. I support their right to peaceful assembly." But I have withdrawn my material support from the Occupy movement and I have discussed why with the local protestors. Some of them understood and agreed this was a serious problem to address. Some were frustrated - frustrated in general, I think. And some were very angry with me and reiterated that they were at war with the 1% and those who are tools of the 1% (which meant the cops) and told me I wasn't steadfast enough to the ideals and too soft.

 

Speaking solely for myself, I don't see how the change that Occupy protesters want can be achieved without eventual violence. To be honest, I've long felt that violent revolution is something I'll see in my lifetime within this country. I'm sure someone will now bring up Ghandi as an example of non-violent protest achieving great things, but you have to understand context. Ghandi was pitted against a waning empire operating half a world away in a country that they couldn't realistically control due to size. That isn't very comparable to the United States today.

 

I don't think you are alone in feeling that way. There's a difference in how you express this (and others within the movement) - you sound resigned that violence may not be avoided - and that's a sane, thoughtful outlook.

[Sub-Husker]

Speaking solely for myself, I don't see how the change that Occupy protesters want can be achieved without eventual violence. To be honest, I've long felt that violent revolution is something I'll see in my lifetime within this country. I'm sure someone will now bring up Ghandi as an example of non-violent protest achieving great things, but you have to understand context. Ghandi was pitted against a waning empire operating half a world away in a country that they couldn't realistically control due to size. That isn't very comparable to the United States today.

 

Last year after the Tea Party won the mid-term elections, I predicted that the violence would start in Spring of 2012 as people would be fed up by terrible govermnent and no good outlooks on the horizon.

 

What has encouraged me, not that violence will be avoided, but by the prospect of OWC candidates winning local and state elections.

[gobiggergoredder]

Speaking solely for myself, I don't see how the change that Occupy protesters want can be achieved without eventual violence. To be honest, I've long felt that violent revolution is something I'll see in my lifetime within this country. I'm sure someone will now bring up Ghandi as an example of non-violent protest achieving great things, but you have to understand context. Ghandi was pitted against a waning empire operating half a world away in a country that they couldn't realistically control due to size. That isn't very comparable to the United States today.

 

Last year after the Tea Party won the mid-term elections, I predicted that the violence would start in Spring of 2012 as people would be fed up by terrible govermnent and no good outlooks on the horizon.

 

What has encouraged me, not that violence will be avoided, but by the prospect of OWC candidates winning local and state elections.

 

 

Are suggesting that violence is associated with the mid term elections and/or the election of tea party backed candidates? Who might these OWC candidates be?

[gobiggergoredder]

I find it ironic that I have seen several outlets reporting Bank of America's decision to drop a new fee as a victory for the 'Occupy Wall Street' group. In my opinion, it is nothing short of Capitalism.

 

I actually think it's a great example of how capitalism should work.

[knapplc]

I find it ironic that I have seen several outlets reporting Bank of America's decision to drop a new fee as a victory for the 'Occupy Wall Street' group. In my opinion, it is nothing short of Capitalism.

 

I actually think it's a great example of how capitalism should work.

Really? In what way are they claiming that OWS has anything to do with that decision? I agree - seems like pure capitalism to me. Business decision to do it, wiser business decision not to do it.

 

I didn't know the OWSers were concerned with the BofA fee. Maybe I should read up on that more?

[Sub-Husker]

Unfortunately this type of post is not uncommon at HuskerMax...

 

Skull busting is underrated.

[Sub-Husker]

Last year after the Tea Party won the mid-term elections, I predicted that the violence would start in Spring of 2012 as people would be fed up by terrible govermnent and no good outlooks on the horizon.

 

What has encouraged me, not that violence will be avoided, but by the prospect of OWC candidates winning local and state elections.

 

Are suggesting that violence is associated with the mid term elections and/or the election of tea party backed candidates? Who might these OWC candidates be?

 

No, that's not what I was suggesting... but it is a part of it.

 

The Tea party will accelerate the growth of the wealth gap, and will further do damage to the middle class, and will continue voter suppression.

 

However the real driver for violence (my prediction) will be the complete lack of good choices in 2012.