The Brutal Suppression Of OWS Proves That The Rich & Business Will Tolerate No Dissent

[TheMastersNemesis]

Even the Democrats would not defend the Occupy movement. Even Democratic mayors sent in the police and swat teams to dismantle it. And DOJ and local officials continue to hunt down anyone associated or even meeting under OWS banner.

It now must seems the was have totalitarian capitalism that wants to be completely unregulated. So if you work and don't get paid or you get screwed economically, you just have to grin an bear it.

Something is terribly wrong in this country right now. And based on GOP vote and election rigging only 5 seats in the House are deemed "toss ups" nationally. The GOP has gerrymandered so well the House may not change hands for perhaps 30 years. So we can expect no government for the foreseeable future and if the GOP gets the Senate they can eliminate everything.

ADDENDUM - What has been most bothersome was how aggressive the authorities were with the grand jury in Washington state in pursuing OWS participants. And it seems like a lot of harassment of OWS participants has been kept silent. You just get the sense that the OWS movement has been under severe attack to keep it from doing anything.

[geek tragedy]

1. "DOJ and local officials continue to hunt down anyone associated or even meeting under OWS banner. "

Derp.

[sabrina 1]

4. You must have missed the brutal attacks on peaceful protesters, the near murder of two

Iraq veterans, the hospitalization and imprisonment of thousands of protesters, the false charges, thankfully being thrown out of court right now due to the preparations for the lies of the police, sad that we KNOW they will lie when it comes to Social Justice movements.

Not to mention the harassment of protesters, the raiding of apartments, the infiltration by 'intel' agents etc etc

If only this kind of diligence were applied to real terrorists.

[geek tragedy]

5. Do you believe the the Obama DOJ is trying to "hunt down anyone associated with OWS?"

Because, if you do, I have some ad time on the Alex Jones show I'd like to sell you.

[sabrina 1]

7. Another DUer who follows Alex Jones? Some advice, seek out reliable sources if you

are going to comment on issues such as this. That might explain why you are unaware of the facts here.

Are you saying everyone dreamed up the brutal assaults and crackdowns on OWS? Talk about CTs.

It is a social justice movement and it was a coordinated (did you read the documents obtained through the FOIA?)attempt to wipe it out at both the Federal and Local levels, and yes, many of the city mayors who shamefully participated WERE Democrats. I and many others will be working hard to primary those fake democrats and replace them with real ones, they do not belong in office.

I have no idea what Obama did, thought or anything else. I wish I did.


Eg, it would have been very nice if he had visited the Veterans who survived Iraq only to be nearly killed here for exercising the rights they supposedly risked their lives for in the military, by our own so-called 'Law Enforcement' agencies. But he didn't.

So I can't help you with your question re Obama, he remained silent on the whole issue even after the government was asked by the UN Rappateur to protect the American as the world witnessed elderly women, men, young, peaceful people being brutalized on the streets of America by their own employees in law enforcement.

I would love to know what he thinks of it all. Let me know if you find out.

Next time don't try to read other people's minds, you're not good at it. Ask them what they think, they will generally know better than some stranger on the internet. For your info, people on the internet really, really can not see into the minds of people they never met. I know people, maybe Alex Jones, think it is possible, but it isn't.

[geek tragedy]

8. Contrary to a lot of myth-making on the paranoid left, there has been no evidence

produced of any kind that the federal government coordinated the crackdowns.

None.

Zero.

Zilch.

The documents produced indicate that the DHS consciously recognized that OWS was political expression and took a hands-off approach.

And, yes, I have read the FOIA documents, instead of they hyping of them by self-serving orgs looking to chase publicity.

Cops in some places went overboard, brutally so (especially Oakland, which has a terrible PD). That was entirely predictable. No need for a conspiracy for that to happen.

[sabrina 1]

11. You're not part of the 'left'? Why are you here then?

As for the rest of your post, there is no doubt about the coordination between federal and local authorities. Even they are not denying it, in fact I believe they are quite proud of it.

[geek tragedy]

12. I am not part of the "paranoid left."

Of course there is general cooperation and coordination between federal and local authorities. That proves precisely nothing w/r/t the Occupy Protests. It merely shows a semi-functional system of governance.


What has not been shown is that the federal government played any role in directing crackdowns on the OWS protests.

[sabrina 1]

16. Really? I get the impression, mostly from what you write, that you have unfounded fears of

Last edited Wed May 1, 2013, 11:25 AM - Edit history (1)

democrats who are outspoken about the problems facing this country today. I don't know if that could be called 'paranoid' or not, but fear of people exercising their 1st Amendment rights generally is associated with paranoia.

I generally find the Left to have been right about almost everything over the past decade.

I remember being called a 'paranoid leftie' by Freepers and Right Wingers who I encountered on internet forums during the Bush years. Turns out we Paranoid Lefties were right. So proud paranoid leftie here. Why would you use language intended to be derogatory to democrats that is also used by right wingers?

Just so you know, though, 'paranoid lefties' are pretty tough and since this meme comes from the right, it gets all the 'credit it deserves' from rational people.

[geek tragedy]

18. I have no fear of Democrats who are outspoken about the many serious problems

facing this country.

Ideologically, the politician in DC closest to my views is Bernie Sanders.

There are paranoids on the left and the right in the United States--the paranoid right gives us Birtherism, the paranoid left gives us 911 Trutherism, the paranoid right gives us black helicopters, the paranoid left gives us a DHS crackdown on OWS straight out of the Tiananmen square playbook.

[sabrina 1]

41. The paranoid right is and always has been wrong about everything. The 'paranoid left' oth, is

absolutely correct and has been about most of the issues. Including the coordinated assaults on ordinary Americans protesting the corruption of Wall St and its influence on the political system. They proved OWS by getting the support of that same system to try to completely destroy the movement.

OWS is a perfect example of what the Left is and should be, by the people, for the people and of the people. So any reasonable Democrat at least, I don't expect much from the right, should have been facilitating those protests. Instead, local mayors and cops coordinated with the Federal authorities, to spy on, persecute, brutalize, imprison those American citizens, including Democratic mayors. Woke a lot of people up the way it was handled.

The brutality which the world witnessed and was shocked by, SHOULD have been condemned by any Democratic government, but the silence was deafening. There are only two possible reasons for silence in the face of such brutality against Americans by their own employees, either you are complicit and/or you approve of silencing the people.

[geek tragedy]

56. Repeating your beliefs as unassailable facts does not make them so.

1) There is still no evidence of a federal role in coordinating a crackdown. It doesn't exist. Saying "yes there is" does not serve as evidence.

2) OWS got evicted and loss public sympathy when it shifted its focus from income inequality to the right to camp full time in a public park. This was never a large scale movement speaking for the masses. It went from a broad-based message of economic injustice to an anarchist social experiment.

If OWS had succeeded in turning out even 1% of the population, there would have been 70,000 people in lower Manhattan alone instead of 700.

[sabrina 1]

63. OWS is stronger than ever, now winning every battle in court, succeeding in what our government

has failed to do, keep people in their homes by protecting them from illegal foreclosures, still helping the victims of Sandy, where they beat FEMA to get aid to those who lost everything. They are also buying and paying off student debt, something else the government has failed to do. All that happened is they moved to the next phase like any Social Justice movement. The numbers grow worldwide, as it is a Global Movement, the more the puppets in power inflict 'austerity' on populations.

Don't worry, just because the Right Wing thinks they were driven out of existence, airc you used to use very bad right wing sources to back up your anti-OWS claims, doesn't mean anything. What they can't see doesn't exist.

And they have just started a new news publication which is excellent. I will be contributing to that also. Free press, not corporate owned.

Don't worry, as a democrat I'm sure you're happy to know that this movement will continue to evolve, even running candidates for office. It is still in its infancy of course, so it will take a lot of time to undo the damage it took decades to do.

The Feds were deeply involved in the coordinated attacks on OWS. You can keep denying it all you want, but facts are facts. I don't know why OWS is so important to you if you think it no longer exists. They don't have time to waste on forums like this, they are very busy building a strong social justice movement around the world. But just because they don't bother with internet forums, doesn't mean they went anywhere, they didn't.

[geek tragedy]

68. "facts are facts"

You're not offering facts, you're offering accusations.

OWS is stronger than ever? If saying that makes you feel better, go for it.

[sabrina 1]

71. I haven't seen you offer anything other than your own opinion. And attacks on the 'left'.

That's your right of course, but just stating yet another fact.

[geek tragedy]

73. I have made a factual claim--that there exists no proof

that the federal government coordinated the evictions of Occupy Wall Street.

Similarly, I also make the factual claim that there are no brontosauruses walking down the streets of Manhattan, nor have their been any for the past 20 years.

It's very easy to disprove such claims--just provide evidence (not rumors, not claims, not speculation, not "anonymous tips&quot that the federal government coordinated the OWS evictions or provide evidence that there have been brontosauruses walking down the streets of Manhattan over the past two decades.

[sabrina 1]

84. You stated an opinion, that is not a factual claim. I saw a Brontosaurus, and a Tryrannosaurus

Rex in NYC but it was about 15 years ago to be honest.

[geek tragedy]

85. It is a factual claim.

If it can be disproven, it is a factual claim.

"Obama is a great President" and "Obama is a corporatist sellout" are opinions.

"There is no evidence Obama was born in Kenya" is a factual claim.

[zeemike]

99. When you say "there is no proof"

That is an opinion because there is evidence of it but not good enough for you to change your opinion.

I get really tired of people saying "there is no..." as if they have the power to dismiss things they don't like as not even existing at all...but it is done all the time with a strait. face and we are all supposed to accept it as a fact.

[geek tragedy]

100. There has been no such evidence produced.

Just a lot of spins from orgs and hacks seeking page hits.

Even Glenn Greenwald hasn't touched that fairy tale.

[zeemike]

103. No such evidence produced or

No evidence you consider proof?
I have seen lots of evidence...and all I need to do is produce one of them to make your statement a wrong opinion....that is unless you get to say whether it is or is not evidence that is...if you have that power then we know for sure your opinion will be upheld.

And no I will not produce the evidence here...there would be no point when you are the judge of it as being real or not because you have already passed that judgment.

And there is zero, zip, nada evidence that you have or ever will change your mind.

[geek tragedy]

105. Alex Jones has what he thinks is evidence that Boston was a false flag.

Until the DHS conspiracy theorist's actually produce a single piece of evidence, their claims of evidence are entitled to precisely the same level of deference.

[zeemike]

107. And this is not a single piece of evidence?

Homeland Security Tracked Occupy Wall Street 'Peaceful Activist Demonstrations'

NEW YORK -- A Department of Homeland Security division produced daily briefings on "peaceful activist demonstrations" during the height of the Occupy Wall Street protests, documents released Tuesday revealed.

The 252 pages of documents were obtained in a March 14 letter from DHS by the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, which in November 2011 launched a campaign to unearth public records that would show whether the federal government was spying on Occupy Wall Street. FBI records obtained by the group in December showed that the bureau investigated Occupy as a potential "domestic terrorism" threat.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/02/homeland-security-occupy-wall-street_n_3002445.html

[geek tragedy]

109. A blog post describing documents is not evidence.

Moreover, the fact that DHS talked about OWS is not evidence that it coordinated a crackdown.

[zeemike]

118. See...with that power to impeach you can call it nothing

no matter what...
You could have followed links and checked it out for yourself...buy why do that and impeach your own opinion?

And I guess if evidence of them spying on them does not evidence if a coordinated attack?...does that mean a coordinated attack does not use spying?...

[geek tragedy]

123. I did check it out.

The fact that they read Twitter and Facebook feeds and blog posts is not evidence they launched a crackdown, no.

In fact, the evidence produced thus far contradicts the conspiracy theory. DHS is shown making sure to emphasize that first amendment protected protest needs to be protected, that unless there's a threat to federal interests the federals aren't supposed to have any input, etc.

[zeemike]

124. So you do admit there is evidence then

But think the evidence points to the official story being right.
Well that is some progress.

[geek tragedy]

126. What evidence there is points in the opposite direction. nt

[JEB]

45. + 1000

[rhett o rick]

144. Climb back in your denial bubble. It's hard to recognize proof with your fingers in you ears and

your eyes closed.

I equate hating OWS with conservatism. You are on the wrong side of this war my friend.

[geek tragedy]

145. I apologize for living outside your echo chamber. nt

[el_bryanto]

2. The Gerrymandering is pretty awful - both sides engage in it of course

but Republicans are more draconian and more upfront about why they are doing it and so can get more bang for their buck.

Bryant

[sabrina 1]

3. Looks like if you are a real terrorist you can't get your name on a no-fly list. But if you

are part of a peaceful, social justice movement it's easy to make all those 'watch lists'.

Money in politics is a threat to this country. And until something is done about it, nothing will change, it will only get worse.

[mick063]

6. There are DUers that claim the term "police state" is not appropriate

I would.have.agreed until I witnessed the.coordinated, brutal crackdown on OWS.

The Department of Homeland Security enjoys a wealth of taxpayer contributions to.suppress such things.

Folks don't even comprehend that we are well positioned for whimsical oppression.

[geek tragedy]

9. The "DHS crushed OWS" stuff is dumber than most stuff Alex Jones says. nt

[FSogol]

10. +1 n/t

[sabrina 1]

13. Seriously, you need to stop following Alex Jones.

[geek tragedy]

14. Nah, it's others who need to stop emulating him. nt

[sabrina 1]

42. Yes I agree. They need to start facing reality and facts rather than living in a state of denial.

[geek tragedy]

61. Yes. They should read the actual FOIA documents re: OWS

instead of the hype from advocacy groups misrepresenting what they say.

[Number23]

131. Absolutely. This moronic story has been going on for almost two years now

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2382206

and the response http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x821842

And there isn't one more shred of evidence in May 2013 than there was a year and a half ago when this was actual news.

A really stupid article was posted on this in the Examiner (yes, the Examiner) and one really... devoted poster ran all over DU with it and declaring that Occupy was being beaten down by Homeland Security. The guy at the Examiner eventually walked back damn near his entire article but this person on DU still claimed it was the truth. Any person with a shred of integrity would have been mortified.

[Newest Reality]

62. Or, maybe

I could suggest not conflating Alex Jones with other people's views?

The argumentum ad hominem approach becomes rather tiring and ineffective when it becomes what seems like a knee-jerk, canned response that may actually be influence by others.

argumentum ad hominem

(also known as: association fallacy, bad company fallacy, company that you keep fallacy, they’re not like us fallacy, transfer fallacy)

For instance:

What kind of people do you hang around with that tend to associate critical facts and views with extremist conspiracy shows? It seems that the company you must keep is in line with some radical Right-wing views I've seen expressed by rabid followers of certain policies.

Does that put the fallacy you present more in focus?

Gosh, there is a lot of that going on here today. I don't understand what good it does other than to create conflict and to obscure the issues at hand. Time waster?

[geek tragedy]

69. The standards of evidence and logic between

"Boston was a false flag" and "the DHS coordinated the crackdowns on OWS" are substantially the same.

[Newest Reality]

93. Ah, well that is debatable when you put it that way.

Maybe you would like to refute this for our edification based on your particular views. I would be interesting to see your take on the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund's obtained documents and Naomi Kline's reporting on it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/29/fbi-coordinated-crackdown-occupy

"FBI documents just obtained by the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF) … reveal that from its inception, the FBI treated the Occupy movement as a potential criminal and terrorist threat … The PCJF has obtained heavily redacted documents showing that FBI offices and agents around the country were in high gear conducting surveillance against the movement even as early as August 2011, a month prior to the establishment of the OWS encampment in Zuccotti Park and other Occupy actions around the country."

I'm not seeing the relationship between extreme, paranoid, rabble-rowsing conspiracy sites or prominent figures and this information in total.

[geek tragedy]

96. I've seen the documents.

Not just the breathless descriptions from writers and orgs seeking page hits.

Mundane stuff. Note that a lot of this 'sinister' stuff was the FBI investigating plots by rightwing terrorists to shoot or use homemade chemical bombs against OWS protestors. There was also concern that local cops might throw non-violent OWS protestors engaged in civil disobedience in jail cells with violent criminals.

An excerpt of the smoking guns (page 88, regarding possible protests at Iowa caucuses):

Sgt. ___ emphasized the need to respect protestors' first amendment rights. He distributed a Department of Homeland Security publication, entitled "Law Enforcement Guidelines for First-Amendment Protected Events," which is hereafter attached. Sgt. ____ stressed that if local agencies learned that protestors would be demonstrating in their respective towns, that the DMPD's (Des Moines Police Department) experience had been that it was helpful to ensure that the protestors had a designated area where they could protest and that they supply enough officers on the scene to ensure the protestors' safety. Sgt._____ advised that any intelligence received regarding criminal behavior that could be a threat to public safety should be reported to the Iowa Fusion Center.

The writer and SA ____ were present to ensure that no Federal nexus existed. As none was articulated, SSRA ____ and SA_____ did not offer any commentary.

Terrifying stuff.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

38. We also have the type of brutalization of Americans that we have never seen before by

military-garb wearing cops.

Never before have we seen the cruel tazing of people, including those who are already handcuffed, children, and pregnant women. We've never seen this before. A search on Youtube will show that this type of brutality is more common that the occasional but rare use of cattle prods against Civil Rights demonstrators in the '60's.

We've never before seen the gang-tackling and ground slamming of ordinary Americans, including people who are totally innocent of anything.

We've never seen the group shootings of suspects without warning, including the group shootings of people who are not guilt of anything.

We've never seen the repeated invasions of the wrong houses by shock-and-awe groups of cops dressed like the military and treating the innocent homeowners like the enemy.

We've never seen so much police brutality in our country. And when the cops are caught on camera, we've never seen so many cops get paid vacations (or suspended WITH PAY) instead of being prosecuted for Civil Rights violations.

[jtuck004]

90. " We've never seen so much police brutality in our country." ?

Our labor history would belie that statement. Today is actually pretty mild compared to what has gone on in our past...read some of the stuff from 1865 to 1930, it'll curl your hair if it's not curly already.

Just across the border from here the police rounded up "wobblies" and working men, put them in open pens, brutalized their wives in front of them when they would come to visit. In lots of places the police shot them, hung them, rode through crowds on horses shooting and killing women, men, children, whomever, entered houses and killed people in their beds - and that was just the overt police violence, leaving aside the far worse violence perpetrated by employers and their hired thug, rats, and assassins, often with the consent or help of law enforcement. In our fair city we passed ordinances against free speech, whereupon the police jailed protesters, turning up steam on them and then letting them freeze, where several died in the jail. They reportedly ran a brothel out of the women's side. And heck, that's just this area. There were far worse things done, all the way up to and including the Federal level.

But I agree with the spirit of your post. Given our history, it seems worse to me that this country of schooled and managed people are allowing the things that are happening today.

[loyalsister]

92. And...

women who were force fed as the inmates in Guantanamo are now experiencing

[AnotherMcIntosh]

97. In a literal sense, "we" have not. Our predecessors have, but "we" have not.

Those who were around from 1865 to 1930 are, of course, no longer around.

[jtuck004]

102. Okay, if one wants to limit it to a self-serving description of how they have had it so

much worse than anyone else, to bolster their own case or sensationalize something, sure.

But I have read, seen pictures, and spoken with people who did experience those years, and I am far from alone - not much different from the majority of people who are only aware of OWS's struggle from the newspaper or tv.

So the use of the word "we" is gratuitous. Not to mention suggesting a serious lack of historical and social knowledge.

But whatever floats your boat.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

114. Well, I'm a former steelworker.

My father was a teamster and a Jimmy Hoffa supporter at a time when it wasn't safe to be a teamster or a Hoffa supporter. Management didn't like it.

Some of my ancestors were coal miners in the Harlan, Ky area. Management didn't always get along with them either.

So please don't give me any shit about "gratuitous," "serious lack of historical and social knowledge," ...

And YOU "have read, seen pictures, and spoken with people who did experience those years, and I am far from alone".

I'm sure that you have. And I'm sure that you've never been on strike. Not even once. With your intemperate remarks about me, for no good reason, reminds me of the chicken-hawks who were behind the troops in Viet Nam. They, too, read, saw pictures, spoke with people who had experience, and were behind the troops. The question was how far behind.

[jtuck004]

116. At least I didn't use the word "we" without knowing what I was talking about.

And feel free to be sure of whatever you want to feel sure of. It sound like you think you know it all already.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

117. You already admitted at #102 that, at most, you "have read, seen pictures, and spoken with people

who did experience those years." That's it.

You can't not literally claim to have seen as "much police brutality in our country" in the past and refer to such events occurring in 1865 to 1930. It is literally not true. For some reason, you want to rely upon your imagination to believe that you saw that. You didn't.

You didn't actually see that. You didn't claim to have actually seen that. Here's flash for you. You're virulent insults don't make up for the fact that you didn't see what you claimed to have seen. You didn't see it. Get over it.

[jtuck004]

152. Those words remind me of that Obi Wan Baloney from that kid's movie,

who pleasured himself in the forest until some kid and a princess showed up and he deigned to talk to them.

You added the words "the most", I see. Nothing like rewriting history, George.

As far as today's unions and protests, I am fairly well convinced that between their (and the schools and political administration's) paternalistic attitudes, they have been pretty much responsible for the wealth inequality in this country today. Way back in the 1920's the prick at the head of the AFL decided to cast his lot with business instead of the workers, and cooperated with business to make the lives of the workers subordinate to business interests. They gave them protests, never told them (unlike the UE) that they were just as important, and smart, and capable, and able as any stinkin' business owner of owning the assets. Looks like nothing has changed. So if that's all you got, we're done.

I won't bother your beneficence any longer. Feel free to speak to the forest...

[Coyotl]

15. It was my impression that they needed dismantling

I went to an Occupy camp and it was ridiculous. What i found was a lot of homeless street people taking advantage of a place to hang.

I can certainly understand not wanting to be associated with occupy. I wouldn't want to be.

[zeemike]

37. And that surprises you?

You do understand that homeless people are in the 99% don't you?....and homeless people live in the streets...so it was their territory not yours.

Would that we could dismiss the Tea Party so easily by just pointing to their gun nuts. But conservatives would never do that to themselves and would not allow the right to characterize them that way.

[sabrina 1]

60. Democrats wouldn't do it either. It has always been experience as a democrat that our party

supports helping the poor, disabled, homeless, children and minorities to get the help the need to make their lives better. That is why there many homeless people who were welcomed at OWS encampments and there are some wonderful stories about how they received help and in return, worked to help the protesters themselves. I remember one homeless man saying that this was the 'first time I felt useful and worthwhile' in a long time. He was given responsibility and trusted with it and as a result, restored some of his lost self esteem.

OWS always worked with the homeless, so it's odd to see any surprise from a democrat that those people, also citizens and more in need of change in our government than many of us are, should have been there and that as a result of their presence 'the encampment needed to be disbanded'. Talk about missing the point. I have a feeling that people who came away with that attitude, went there only to 'observe' not participate.

[zeemike]

66. And some went there with the intent to find fault.

No matter how we cut it the homeless are casualties of our society one way or the other...and it don't matter why they are homeless...even the drug addicts and alcoholics are that way because we made them that way or we failed to intervene and help them to deal with things.
It is absolutely true that the measure of any society is how well it treats the least among them.

[sabrina 1]

70. Yes, they did, they were generally pretty obvious. I remember a more 'famous' example of that

when Fox sent a 'reporter' to Zuccotti park under the pretext of 'covering' the story. He had his head handed to him by a very articulate OWS protester and of course never aired the footage, as his 'interviewee' predicted. Then there was CNN's Wall St 'girl' who pretended to be just 'curious' and neglected to tell her audience of her own Wall St. ties. That was fun.

And of course the right wingers, like Breitbart and his minions, or the Third Way crowd, some of whom tried 'mingle' but it's hard to mingle with genuine honest people when you are unable to relate to the issues they represent.

The language they use generally gives them away. 'fringe left' lol, I am happy to be referred to as 'fringe' when I know we are usually right about the issues. Name-calling and a disdain for the left, adding adjectives to pretend you really are a democrat and only object to the 'fringe' or 'radical' left, exposes them every time. I have fun playing with them though.

[sabrina 1]

44. Well, how dare those homeless people find a place to 'hang'. OWS fed the homeless, provided

counseling for them, some of them are no longer homeless as a result of the work done and still being done by OWS.

I'm sorry you were offended by the presence of homeless people. I thought it was wonderful, especially to see the homeless veterans finally getting some care from their fellow citizens.

THIS is what a decent society does, they do not throw people away as we do here.

Interesting that your objection about the homeless was not to the fact that we HAVE homeless in this wealthy country at all. One third of all the homeless are veterans.

Support the troops!! I remember laughing at Republicans with their signs knowing full well that they would never support them once they came home and ended up on the streets and I told them so.

[JEB]

46. Homeless are citizens too.

Many are probably more moral than Wall Street profiteers. Rich people don't need an occupy site for a place to hang out. Sorry, but everybody takes up space.

[ananda]

17. Well, they'll tolerate dissent as long as ...

... it isn't effective.

[randome]

19. OWS did it to themselves.

http://www.wired.com/opinion/2012/12/a-eulogy-for-occupy/

[factsarenotfair]

64. That is an EXCELLENT article, but I wouldn't say that Occupy destroyed themselves;

rather, I would say that the actual physical protest camps failed due to faulty governing mechanisms in addition to police actions. The movement still lives but has morphed into different forms, like Rolling Jubilee and Occupy Sandy and the article makes the point that it changed everyone who participated.

[MineralMan]

20. I'm not really sure you understand what "brutal suppression" is.

Truly.

[sabrina 1]

47. I'm sure those who ended up nearly dead, including Iraq veterans, have a fairly good idea of what

brutal suppression is. Of course if you are a poor minority or a protester against Wall St corruption and influence on our government, it is to be expected you would not be the target of such brutal suppression.

How much beating up of peaceful protesters is acceptable do you think before we call it 'brutal support suppression'? Having your spleen destroyed by a brutal beating delivered by our very own robo cops? Maybe being shot in the head deliberately while standing holding the flag you went to war under, unarmed, peaceful, and nearly killed, symbolically silenced from your injuries, probably is okay in today's America, but no way is it brutal suppression!

I think I might put together a collage of the evidence that attracted the attention of the world, due mainly to the forethought of the organizers who instructed protesters to film everything, and caused the UN Rappateur to ask the US Government to stop the brutality by the cops against the people.

My standards must be different, I don't expect to see citizens peacefully exercising their free speech rights, especially Veterans who are told this is what they fight for, being beaten into a coma for doing so. By my standards, just one such incident is one too many in a democracy. And of course if we only had one, and even that one had resulted in accountability, we might have people looking at this country in shock, and now fear.

[JEB]

48. Is that a threat?

[MineralMan]

50. How would that be a threat?

Uff da!

[JEB]

53. Not brutal enough for your tastes.

[MineralMan]

54. Stuff & Nonsense!

[JEB]

59. Too brutal, not brutal enough or just right. Your choice.

[JaneyVee]

21. It was surreal to watch middle class cops beating middle class protesters while the rich

laughed at them all from their apartment balconies high above Wall St.

[badtoworse]

24. Rich people don't live around Wall Street

They commute in from places like Scarsdale, Larchmont, Bergen County or maybe Fairfield.

[JaneyVee]

25. The median income for the Wall St area is $188,000/yr.

[badtoworse]

26. That's not even close to rich by Wall Street standards.

[JaneyVee]

29. The highest median state income in America is $70,000. Wall St almost triples that.

[badtoworse]

31. You don't live in or near New York City do you?

[JaneyVee]

33. I live on 12th street in Manhattan.

[badtoworse]

35. ...and you really believe Wall Street is a nice place to live?

Wall Street isn't a slum or a dive, but why would you want to live there? Just to be able to walk to the office?

There is no accounting for taste.

[sabrina 1]

51. Who said the morons on the balcony lived there? They party there, that doesn't mean they live

there.

[badtoworse]

72. Read Post No. 21. Seemed like a reasonable assumption to me.

[randome]

27. Renting an apartment in NY can take up to half of that.

[JaneyVee]

32. I know I live in Manhattan. It can be expensive. But you save money in other ways.

[geek tragedy]

28. $188k household income is not rich in NYC.

Affluent, most likely, if they don't have huge student loans.

But, certainly not rich. A household making $188K in NYC will take home around $127K.

Or, just over $10,000 a month.

Which is a lot of money.

Until one considers that a 2 bedroom apartment in the area costs $5000/rent.

Throw in $1000/month for likely student loans, and the people have $4000 to cover all additional expenses (food, travel, clothing) plus savings.

If they're frugal, they can probably save $2000 a month.

Again, that's really good, and they're better off than most people.

But, those people would need to save $2000 a month for 6-10 YEARS in order to come up with a down payment for a 1-2 bedroom apartment in Manhattan.

So, yeah, most of the residents there are affluent, but they're still on the same debt/wealth treadmill as most people.

[JaneyVee]

30. This is the MEDIAN income. It means there are some people making $25Million.

[badtoworse]

34. There are probably some making ten times that

They're not living in the Wall Street area. There are much nicer places to live in the high end, nearby suburbs.

[geek tragedy]

36. Yes, with 50% of households making that much or less.

Assuming a bell-shaped curve, most who are over $188K aren't over by that much. Certainly not $25 million.

There are no doubt some very rich people living in the financial district (not as many as you'd assume though--most truly rich people live in places like TriBeCaor the Upper East Side).

[JaneyVee]

40. The median income for America is about $40,000, that includes rich & poor. Do you

realize how high income has to be in order to drag a median income up to $188,000?

[geek tragedy]

52. High income with high expenses is often not wealthy.

Affluent, in most cases absolutely.

But rich? Depends greatly on circumstances. If you have high income but also very high expenses, you're not going to be able to accumulate much wealth.

Madison, WI has a median income of $41K.

Here's what a home valued at $350K looks like in Madison.

http://www.zillow.com/homedetails/10-Pelham-Ct-Madison-WI-53713/55386526_zpid/

Fabulous contemporary home on wooded cul-de-sac across from park. 4 generous sized bedrooms + 1st floor study, formal & informal dining, 2 story living rm w/wood burning fireplace-gas starter, 1st floor laundry, gorgeous hardwood floors w/walnut inlay. Gourmet kitchen, newer appliances, screen porch & newer deck. LL walkout has large family room, 4th bedroom & 3/4 bath. Energy efficient home, solar hot water, super insulation, low E windows, air to air heat exchanger & passive solar heat.

Bedrooms:4 beds
Bathrooms:4 bathsS
ingle Family:3,000 sq ft
Lot:19,307 sq ft

Double that price--to $700K, and what do you get in the Financial District?

http://www.elliman.com/new-york-city/21-23-south-william-street-unit-2b-manhattan-irvtebt

Property Details:
21-23 South William Street, 2B
Price: $699,000
Maintenance/CC: $653
Monthly Real Estate Tax: $1
Minimum Percent Down: 10%
Neighborhood: Financial District
Condo, Doorman
1 Bed | 1 Bath
Approximate Square Feet: 700

If you can't afford a two-bedroom apartment, you are not rich.

[KittyWampus]

49. someone making 25 million in NYC lives on Central Park or somewhere w/river view not in Wall Street.

[sabrina 1]

65. No one said the cocktail partiers lived on Wall St. They were partying on Wall St. when they

saw fit to mock the people asking their government to end the corruption on Wall St and to hold people accountable for the damage they did to this and other countries. And to get Wall St. money out of politics.

Unfortunately some of them were filmed on the balconies and the world got to see their attitude, proving OWS to be correct. They despise the working class. Not all of them of course, but more than enough and those photos were very symbolic.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

39. The rich, of course, make most of their money from capital gains. The $188,000/yr figure

is way too low.

[badtoworse]

22. Maybe camping in public parks and crapping in the streets was the real problem.

If memory serves, Zuccotti Park and the surrounding blocks got to be pretty disgusting after a while. People who lived or had businesses in the area got pretty fed up with OWS and might have evicted them if the police hadn't done it first

[Phillip McCleod]

140. i think was the point entirely..

..to bring reality home. hello?

sorry if i don't feel sorry for the businesses.

[badtoworse]

142. From what I could see, the OWS people behaved like they were the only ones with rights.

I saw it very differently.

[Hotler]

23. Things might be different if we had tens of thousands in the streets....

instead of just a few hundred at best.

[harmonicon]

43. Don't just blame the GOP for gerrymandering.

The problem is that "difference" is accepted so long as it's actually not different.

Time and again on DU, I've read posts by people defending gerrymandering, with the argument of "the other side does it too, so we have to in order to compete."

Well, the side I'm on doesn't do it. I care far more about democracy than I do about Democratic victory.

There's no point in blaming the GOP for gerrymandering until the Democratic party makes non-partisan congressional redistricting part of its nation-wide party platform. As I see it, this is more important than any chosen issue someone might have, whether it's civil rights, healthcare reform, or militarization, etc. The reason is that 1. real progress would be far more likely with those things if we had an actual representative democracy, and 2. if we didn't get the result we wanted on those fronts, at least we'd know that it was more likely because representative democracy actually worked, and our chosen position was that of a minority.

Of course there are also things that would go to great lengths to help this, the greatest probably being an implementation of instant runoff voting, but, again, without having a congress which actually represent the voters, what's the point?

[Savannahmann]

55. Um perhaps you haven't noticed

But DU is becomming a subsidiary of the police supporters league. For many, the cops can do no wrong because they are protecting us. Perhaps you should edit thread to say that glorious police continue to hunt down malcontents. From what I've read on this board for the last couple years, that will go over a little better.

[geek tragedy]

58. Derp.

Strawmen aplenty in that post.

[sabrina 1]

67. You are correct, that is because many progressives have left so it seems like there are more of

the right leaning authoritarian, anti-social movement views here, but I think it's simply because many progressives have found better things to do than argue on a left wing forum with those views.

[datasuspect]

77. got milk?

[Savannahmann]

86. LOL

I keep waiting for that picture to be posted here.

[hfojvt]

57. they should not tolerate dissent for the sake of dissent

Public spaces are public, for all of the public to use, not for a part of the public to monopolize.

Further, Democrats are not gonna support a movement which is seen as stupid.

I am just guessing that the vast majority of the country does not support, and did not support the "Occupy movement".

But for myself, I saw the movement as kinda stupid. I mean, it seemed to start out good, although I thought the "99" was the wrong number, and have said so, many, many times here. But that was the first error, in my view. Like the 2% is on the same side as the 98%. Like the 3% is on the same side as the 97%.

Second, what was their point again? Their whole purpose seemed to be, and what was cracked down on, was that they wanted to create some permanent tent camps. What is the point of that? It just seems like an obnoxious minority being obnoxious until they get their way. That is not how democracy works, or how it is even supposed to work. You need to win the majority to your side with your dissent. If you just annoy the majority with your obnoxiousness, then yes they will be happy to see you swatted down, but it is the 99% that is swatting you down, not the 1%.

Because Gerrymandered or not, in order to win elections, like we did in the past (imagine FDR or LBJ complaining about Gerrymandering - LBJ won Kansas by 54 to 45 and Idaho by 59-49 and Utah (!!!) by 55 to 45) by getting those conservative people to vote for our side. If we really are "the 99%" then it shouldn't matter if a district is Gerrymandered, because you cannot Gerrymander a district in any way at all to get the 20% to defeat the 80%.

Okay, except in Kansas where the 1% probably makes up a majority of voters in JoCo. (I exaggerate a little bit for purposes of humor - just a little bit.)

[nadinbrzezinski]

80. Occupy went over your head

We get it.

And it's not gone either.

As much as you wish it.

And the lovely part is that 99% became part of the political lexicon

[Tarheel_Dem]

74. Sorry to say, but Occupy was a party in the park, and not only was DOJ not interested, but

after about 2 weeks, neither were the American people. Perhaps the occupants should take a long hard look at themselves to see why the "movement" was such a huge failure in this country. They're still occupying abroad, but then they actually know what they're upset about, and have the fortitude to stick it out. A bunch of American kids & Anarchist wannabes, smoking pot and bangin' on bongos in the park, does not a movement make, that was Woodstock.

If it consoles you to try and redirect the blame to DOJ, DHS, IBM or anyone other than the participants for the colossal failure that is OWS, then do what makes you feel better. It made me queasy when I saw the Ron Paul signs, but when they booed a black civil rights legend off the stage, I knew this "movement" was a crock. After that, I had absolutely no sympathy for them, whatsoever. You lost a lot of people that day. It might make you feel good to rewrite history, but there are enough people here who know that Occupy and its participants were full of shit, from the start.

[badtoworse]

75. ...and I thought I was hard on them.

[Throd]

79. The "bong hits and bongos" crowd didn't resonate with most working Americans.

I was excited by the prospect of OWS in its initial stages, but it shortly devolved into an incoherent mess.

[badtoworse]

81. That's fair

[Tarheel_Dem]

108. And the claims of sexual assault in the park didn't do much to endear the "movement" either.

[zeemike]

76. And by the same token....

There are enough people here who know that third way people were full of shit from the start too.

You would never see someone who called themselves conservatives talking down the tea party...and if they did they would get shouted down by the rest...but we are tolerant, and thus susceptible to be divided by division.

[Tarheel_Dem]

89. Occupy was the fucking Tea Party. Ron Paul? Give me a fucking break. Fake assed libertarian.....

bullshit. That was Occupy. And one doesn't have to be "third way" to acknowledge that OWS was a huge failure, and had absolutely no point, and no impact on the political system they claim to want to overthrow. And there aren't enough of you "to shout anybody down". Occupy was a fake ass "movement", with a bunch of fake ass anarchist wannabes, who have much more spare time than common sense, until it got cold in Zucotti Park that is.

I'm not sure what you think Occupy has to do with the left. The tea party comparison is gratuitous at best. The tea party actually had an impact. Where are the Occupy candidates?

[zeemike]

91. I was not comparing the teal party to Occupy.

I was comparing the right wing treatment of their phony movement to our treatment of the Occupy movement...and the difference is stark and informative...that is if you care to think about it or look.
Why they always win is because they obey the eleventh commandment as set out by Reagan...tho shalt not speak evil of a fellow conservatives...and we don't
And so it is simple for the conservatives to divide us by pointing out our differences cause we have those among us that will fall for it...while they support one another and vote accordingly and consistently.

But right...where are the Occupy candidates?...could it be that they don't have any 1%ers to finance and sponsor them?...cause you will not get elected to a major office if you don't have that....and the tea party have the Koch brothers and all the 1% to finance it.

This is not a level playing field...and so you cannot expect our side to win if we play the same game.

[Tarheel_Dem]

94. You should've given the spiel to the Occupier assholes who boo'd John Lewis off the stage. Loyalty

works both ways. Fuck Occupy!

[zeemike]

98. Well so then you got me there

That changes everything I said....you are right....we need to eat our own and enjoy it...and continue to lose.
Divide and lose is a great strategy for progress.

[Tarheel_Dem]

104. I guess the difference between us is, I never considered OWS as "our own", and neither did they.

They made a huge stink about not being identified with either major party, this is why Democrats got savaged by these assholes. John Lewis has done & sacrificed more for the 99% in his lifetime, than this entire fake ass "movement" combined. It was full of Ron Paul accolytes, and rebel wannabe's, until the weather changed. I repeat, they were/are all full of shit! I've seen more interesting movements in my own bathroom.

[badtoworse]

111. "I've seen more interesting movements in my own bathroom."

I'm going to have to remember that one.

[Tarheel_Dem]

112. Have at it! I'm just amazed that anyone still thinks OWS is relevant outside the minds of OWS!

I just read here that "OWS is stronger than ever". That's either one helluva pep talk from an OWS devotee, or an attempt to fluff up an impotent & nearly defunct "movement".

[badtoworse]

113. Anyone with an elementary understanding of the political process could have predicted what happened

No focus, no leadership structure and no attempt to participate in the political process. As soon as the novelty wore off, they were irrelevant.

[Tarheel_Dem]

115. Concise & to the point. "The novelty wore off".

[Number23]

132. You just killed this thread. Killed it dead

[Tarheel_Dem]

134. They are not dealing with the post mortem in a realistic way. Much like Alex Jones, they blame.....

the black helicopters, the jack-booted thugs, the "rich & powerful"; anything to avoid doing any kind of honest introspection. You know how that goes. My contention is that nobody killed Occupy, it was suicide. Case closed. If taxpayers don't want to pay for you to piss, shit, smoke dope, and have sex in a public park, you pack your shit up, and take your ass home.

[Number23]

137. It definitely didn't appear to resonate with many people

Last edited Wed May 1, 2013, 10:09 PM - Edit history (1)

Which is a shame because it started with such hope and promise and I think so many people were just electrified by it.

But the fact that it didn't seem to be for anything except "we hate capitalism" and "we love weed" which definitely resonates with a small number of politically impotent people, was the first clue that it wasn't going to be around for too long.

I actually think that with a different group spearheading the efforts, it could be a very promising social/political movement with some serious impact. But if the same group of people who seemed to bafflingly be much more concerned with legalizing weed than anything else decide to get involved, I hope that others will step forward to take the helms before they get a chance to.

[Tarheel_Dem]

143. "we hate capitalism" and "we love weed". That definitely is not the foundation for......

a potent, long term, impactful movement. First of all, somebody has to be in charge of waking up the stoners to get the protest underway. That's not a job I'd want.

Like you, I mourn the loss of the incredible potential that OWS started out with. Lack of focus, and the invasion of potheads, 911 truthers, and other assorted nuts & freaks, a movement with limitless possibilities took a nosedive. For instance, can you imagine how such a movement, minus the libertarian influence, could have impacted the gun debate? What a waste.

[RKP5637]

78. When it comes to big $$$$$ and any infringement thereof, IMO, D=R=I. "We the

people" will come last.

[graham4anything]

82. Yet there are 1000s of anti-govermental and anti-Democratic posts on the open internet

oops.

hyperbole redux.

[nadinbrzezinski]

83. It's not gone

And that is the best part

Locally the core is still engaged in that good fight...just ask the California Public Utilities Commission, Our Wallmart and the NRC for example...

And I make a point of making this clear.

I see this as the first round of a social justice movement. The second round has started with food workers strikes and Our Wallmart. This is work for the long haul.

[marions ghost]

110. right

chipping away, brick by brick...

Tear down that Wall.

"The long haul." -- yep

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

87. Occupy their homes

Ii was listening to Ed and a càller said he just quit his job as chef at a high end restaurant in CT where the real power elite reside. He said one thing they hate is to wait, so he suggested the occupy movement mobilize. He thought a few hundred cars crowding their steers and gas stations would be a huge inconvenience. Same with grocery stores and restaurants. It's not about purchases, it's about "heavy traffic" and delays. Buy $2 of gas, pay in cash, and the next person and so on. Buy an apple and orange, and the next person, and so on.

I liked the idea, anyway.

[Laelth]

128. I like it too.

It appears that the only way to get something done in this country is to get the attention of our richest citizens. When they feel a little pain too, they will demand and get change, no matter which party is in office.

Good idea!

-Laelth

[G_j]

88. Occupiers Prevail Over Infiltrators, Unconstitutional Ordinances, Vindictive DAs

http://www.nlg.org/news/blog/occupiers-prevail-over-infiltrators-unconstitutional-ordinances-vindictive-das

March 19, 2013

On the second Friday in February, Boston prosecutors announced that they were dropping all charges against 26 people who had been swept up in two late night raids of Occupy Boston almost a year and a half earlier. The move came as a surprise to the arrestees and their NLG defense team who were deep in preparation for a trial the following Monday. While it would be welcome news to any criminal defendant, the evaporation of the charges was a strange end to a long and grueling saga, especially because of what came with the announcement:

“There’s now parity with prior cases arising from the protests,” Suffolk County District Attorney’s Office spokesman Jake Wark told the Boston Globe. “They’ve served essentially the same sentences.”

Occupy Boston activists, though glad to see their charges dropped, were outraged that the D.A.’s office could confirm their harshest critiques—which held that the criminal justice process is itself a punishment enacted by the state to deter continued activism—and keep a straight face.

Despite the mixed emotions they evoked, the dismissals are undoubtedly a victory for Occupy Boston and for the Massachusetts NLG chapter, which provided legal support to the protest camp from the beginning. The win is only the latest in a string of NLG victories as the saga of the Occupy movement continues to play out in courthouses across the country.

Texas

Greg Gladden, a Texas Guild lawyer and newly elected Mass Defense Committee co-chair scored a major win in helping to secure the dismissal of felony charges facing seven Occupy Austin protesters charged with felonies after participating in a port facility lockdown. The charges, felony possession of a criminal instrument, stemmed from the activists’ use of a lockbox which Gladden showed through an aggressive discovery strategy to have been hand-built and delivered by three Austin police officers posing as protesters.

The revelation of police involvement led to the dismissals which were actually the second time a judge tossed out the charges—after the first, a prosecutor had them reinstated through a federal grand jury. Gladden represented Ronnie Garza, one of seven Occupy Austin protesters charged for blocking an entrance to the Port of Houston with a sleeping dragon as part of the December 2011 Occupy port shutdown. In addition to the three infiltrators named for their direct involvement in the criminal case, the discovery points to the presence of at least three more undercover agents working within the Occupy camp in coordination with a local fusion center.

Also in Austin, Guild member Jim Harrington in his capacity as Director of the Texas Civil Rights Project prevailed in a federal lawsuit challenging the City’s practice of banning people from City Hall Plaza, which had been used to deter 37 Occupy Austin protesters from returning to the encampment site. Federal Judge Lee Yeakel ruled that the city’s use of criminal trespass notices violated the First Amendment and due process and banned the practice.

Chicago

Lawyers and legal workers from the NLG’s Chicago chapter coordinated the defense of nearly all of the several hundred activists arrested during Occupy Chicago demonstrations. In September, the 92 arrestees whose curfew violation cases were still open saw their charges dismissed by a Cook County Court judge. In his written ruling, Judge Thomas Donnelly upheld Guild lawyers’ motion to dismiss, finding that the park curfew ordinance was unconstitutional on its face and as applied.

The ruling states:

While the City arrested everyone remaining in Grant Park during the Occupy Chicago rally, the City arrested no one at the Obama 2008 presidential election victory rally, even though the Obama rally was equally in violation of the Curfew. That violates Defendants’ right to equal protection because it treats similarly situated citizens differently.


...MUCH MORE...

[BelgianMadCow]

120. ^^^^ this ^^^^

How can anyone NOT see how OWS was dealt with as evidence of a scared police state?

Sometimes even THIS place gives me the creeps. Lilke the acceptance of how Boston was dealt with, sorry that' s a side note.

[G_j]

125. it is

creepy and disheartening

And yes, the NLG knows the facts as well or better than anyone.

[BelgianMadCow]

130. what especially strikes me is how limited the debate has become

I mean, back in 2001 (on another name) this was a place where anything was discussed. 9/11 and the sElection of Bush come to mind.
Nowadays, it seems contesting the official version of things gets you labelled "conspiracy theorist" in a split second. It's a hat I proudly wear, then. I'm an engineer and I don't believe in buildings falling through the path of greatest resistance at freefall speed. When I post that on the Guardian, I get a bunch of recs and zero dispute or CT labeling. Here, I should go play in a dungeon. No thanks.

DU used to be literally ahead of the curve because of the freewheeling and independent research people were doing. There's very little of that now.

Still, I don't want to to detract from the site too much. Some of the admins taking position on the CPI thing I found very encouraging.

But, who is NLG?

[G_j]

135. The National Lawyers Guild

they are the "legal observers" with the green hats often present at larger demonstrations, and have been especially involved in supporting the legal rights of Occupy. They are volunteers and offer their services without charge.

http://www.nlg.org/

"The NLG is dedicated to the need for basic change in the structure of our political and economic system. We seek to unite the lawyers, law students, legal workers and jailhouse lawyers to function as an effective force in the service of the people, to the end that human rights shall be regarded as more sacred than property interests.

Our aim is to bring together all those who recognize the importance of safeguarding and extending the rights of workers, women, LGBTQ people, farmers, people with disabilities and people of color, upon whom the welfare of the entire nation depends; who seek actively to eliminate racism; who work to maintain and protect our civil rights and liberties in the face of persistent attacks upon them; and who look upon the law as an instrument for the protection of the people, rather than for their repression."
----

They are cutting edge. For example, to really understand what happened at the WTO demonstrations in Seattle, read the NLG extensive report where they conclude it was a "police riot".
http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/nlg070700.html

I try to post some of their important press releases here, sometimes to zero interest.
You are right, most of the good researchers have left DU. Luckily there are still a few stubborn apples, bless them!
Not many would deny there are at least questions about how the hell 9/11 could have happened. I think we should acknowledge that the term CT is a sound bite and not always helpful to critical thinking. Try to keep posting when you can here, maybe slow down the brain drain a bit.

[BelgianMadCow]

136. Phew. I hadn't come of age really at the time of Seattle,

but that looks like a pretty typical example of the official versus real world.

I dunno about posting, this was discouraging. I don't think I ever made more effort for an OP. That goes to show you I wouldn't be such a loss but thanks for the encouragement anyway.

[Agony]

146. The criminal "justice" system as punishment...

"Occupy Boston activists, though glad to see their charges dropped, were outraged that the D.A.’s office could confirm their harshest critiques—which held that the criminal justice process is itself a punishment enacted by the state to deter continued activism—and keep a straight face. "


at what point do cops who fabricate charges lose their job?

America! Fuck Yeah! i guess...

this country is a mess

[G_j]

147. it would appear fabricating charges

is part of their job.

[Newest Reality]

95. If people want to debate the issue,

there are some sources available to confirm or dispute. Is it too "left" or too extreme to consider this? I'm just presenting some information rather than making a particular point. This information goes deeper than the original post and is, I think, worthy of being either shot down, point-by-point, or confirmed.

http://current.com/1bf92kc

As the occupation movement grew, PERF began circulating a publication titled Managing Major Events: Best Practices from the Field. The manual – a copy of which we downloaded -- amounts to a how-to guide for policing political events, and gives special attention to policing “Anarchists” and “Eco Terrrorists” at political events.

The guide encourages the use of undercover officers and snatch squads to “grab the bad guys and remove them from the crowd.” It urges local law enforcement to use social media to map the Occupy movement.

An earlier PERF guide Police Management of Mass Demonstrations advocates the use of embedded media to control police messages, the use of undercover cops to infiltrate protest groups, the use and pitfalls of preemptive mass arrest, an examination of the use of less-than-lethal crowd control weapons, and general discussion weighing the use of force in crowd control.

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/30/1174775/-FBI-Domestic-Security-Alliance-Coordinated-Occupy-Crackdown

The Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, in a groundbreaking scoop that should once more shame major US media outlets (why are nonprofits now some of the only entities in America left breaking major civil liberties news?), filed this request. The document – reproduced here in an easily searchable format – shows a terrifying network of coordinated DHS, FBI, police, regional fusion center, and private-sector activity so completely merged into one another that the monstrous whole is, in fact, one entity: in some cases, bearing a single name, the Domestic Security Alliance Council. And it reveals this merged entity to have one centrally planned, locally executed mission. The documents, in short, show the cops and DHS working for and with banks to target, arrest, and politically disable peaceful American citizens.

Etc.

As has been posted:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/29/fbi-coordinated-crackdown-occupy

It was more sophisticated than we had imagined: new documents show that the violent crackdown on Occupy last fall – so mystifying at the time – was not just coordinated at the level of the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and local police. The crackdown, which involved, as you may recall, violent arrests, group disruption, canister missiles to the skulls of protesters, people held in handcuffs so tight they were injured, people held in bondage till they were forced to wet or soil themselves –was coordinated with the big banks themselves.

[brooklynite]

101. How do you explain the May Day parade in Manhattan today?

Nobody beaten up, nobody arrested.

[socialist_n_TN]

122. Maybe because it was a "one of" type of event......

and didn't start to get into the national consciousness like Occupy did. The owners allow certain types of events, rallies, marches, and even strikes without coming down on them as long as they ARE "one of" types of things. It lets the proles blow off steam without threatening them. When they get nervous and start thinking oppression is when they are continuing and growing. Like Occupy was.

That's some basic counterrevolutionary strategy and tactics. Trotsky didn't even consider a general strike as a "revolutionary" situation. It had to be a CONTINUING general strike with concurrent demos.

[brooklynite]

138. The OP opined that "NO DISSENT" was allowed.

Personally, I think that they didn't get into trouble with the Police because they didn't interfere with the rights of others in the City, as the Occupy folks periodically did.

[socialist_n_TN]

149. Well you just go ahead and think that.......

I guess the civil rights marchers and the labor activists of the 30s should have just not interfered with the rights of the racists and the bosses. Segregation was legal and unions and strikes were illegal at those times. When it comes to the capitalist system, ANY pushback will be illegal sooner or later. That's history.

[brooklynite]

151. The interference targets were not the "bosses"

They were ordinary people who were trying to get to work / home / school, and found the streets blocked or who also anted to use the public parkland which was being "occupied".

That being said, I don't object to civil disobedience to make a policy point, BUT that brings with it an expectation of arrest and trial or citation. The response here seemed to be "how dare they prevent us from marching wherever we want".

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

106. No... i'm pretty sure if the Tea Party setup vagrant encampments on major thoroughfares

They would be cracked down on too,

[BelgianMadCow]

119. And the reaction of DU to this Occupy thread proves how far DU has drifted

from what it was when I signed up. I find it both sad and surprising.

Chris Hedges lists Occupy as having given him hope. He sees it as a kind of general repetition for a revolution.
Naomi Klein, same.
Richard Wolff says OWS has made his speeches from shunned into more demanded than he can follow. For the first time in decades, the system was challenged and as a result, debating about the system still is on the table. Blog posts here in the EU have neoliberal dogma denounced every other post. That was so NOT the case before.

The Occupy I'm in has changed into a give-it-away shop. But the network is there and as stated, it changed all those involved.
I now know that instead of protesting for a solution, waiting for some leader or saviour, I can BE the solution. I'm now active for a cooperative bank in formation in Belgium, NewB. It had 20.000 people sign up for 20 euros in two days, without any advertising except on social media.

Occupy is the best thing the US has "made" in decades. Since there has been only economic can-kicking since then, it's all every bit as relevant now as it was then. A majority of people had sympathy for OWS. It was Time's person of the year.

This isn't over, it has only just begun. Demos in Spain called for by 15-M (the indignados) and the PAH, platform against evictions, bring hundreds of thousands into the streets on a regular basis.

[Tarheel_Dem]

127. There's a whole forum for Occupy b.s. You come into General, and you're gonna get dissent.

Deal with it. Not everyone on the left is enthralled, nor indeed fooled by Occupy.

[BelgianMadCow]

129. That's okay

I don't mind the dissent. Dissent is always good. I just made an observation.

How could one be fooled by Occupy, though? I mean of course it can disintegrate and all that (it hasn't), or be of no use anymore (after radically changing the debate), but fooled by Occupy, how so? Do you know of people that feel like that - who actually participated?

[Tarheel_Dem]

133. Kinda like the American people were fooled by the teabaggers, for a while. Their popularity now....

hovers somewhere between ingrown hairs & anal cysts. Some of us thought, intially, that OWS would be a powerful political tool for good, turns out they were just tools.

[DLevine]

121. K&R. nt

[woo me with science]

139. K&R

[Phillip McCleod]

141. i like many of you was truly inspired..

..the first few months, and did my best to be involved in my local occupy branch, but it wasn't working. the organizational structure.. the general assembly.. was fine for on-the-spot decision making like which street to turn down next, but was not actually democratic, as 'advertised'. more like a brawl.

that was the biggest weakness i saw..

..but like i said OWS stirred the pot but good, and revisiting those events still puts a little extra steel in my spine for the day.

OWS is dead.

LONG LIVE OWS!!

[damnedifIknow]

148. Brutal supression is the new 40

[WillyT]

150. K & R !!!

[Egalitarian Thug]

153. Well, you really got one of the authoritarian's attention. K&R.

[TheMastersNemesis]

154. There Were A Lot Of Flaws With OWS That Pretty Much Doomed It.

I understand that OWS had no official leadership so individuals could not come under attack. That alone caused a lack of focus. They also did not seem to talk about solutions or remedies to the situation as they saw it. It would have made a lot of sense to bring up FDR's Second Economic Bill Of Rights as revealed in one of his last speeches.

Sure an economic bill of rights would have been attacked as too communistic, socialist and antibusiness. But it is a conversation we must have to counter this "free for all free market" mantra we face today. We can sure see how that works out. FDR believed and preached that a man or woman is not free unless they are economically free and secure. Today even asking for your pay check is too socialistic for Republicans. I think they believe you should be paying the employer they are so extreme.

What surprised me the most is that Democrats ran away from OWS. Now I can understand why you would run away from what it became. However, you could support the idea of fairness in the economy without endorsing OWS itself. Yet I found a lot of Dems terrified to support a fair economy because they feared being labeled socialists or communists or antibusiness in the next election cycle.

What is most puzzling was hearing dirt poor people particularly Republicans defending big business, CEO's and repressive working conditions. Propaganda aside you have to be completely stupid to accept the GOP swill no matter how strond the kool aid.

The GOP agenda becomes more clear every day. They are all about iron fisted rule by them. And this country would be a miserable place to live and the next generation would have a dismal future not to speak present ones. .