#OccupyWallstreet

[Bowfinger]

Yes, yes, all the negative reports are just nutter sources and "isolated incidents".

That just so happen to be happening at the majority of these protests...hmm...

Interesting allegation. Can you prove it? There have been literally hundreds of OWS protests. I'd like to see you evidence there's been violence at the majority of them.

I won't hold my breath.

Careful who you bed with liberal, you may get shit on you.

Not worried about it. I like thinking for myself. I'm not a brain-dead automaton that marches in lockstep with anyone. I speak up about OWS issues I support and I denounce the things I don't.

[ Pointless stupidity clipped ]

Why did such behavior and people not occur/be at tea party protests?

Really? You sure about that? I suspect this is yet another example of you hiding in your nutter bubble: Google search for Tea Party violence examples.

I'll confess I didn't care enough about the Tea Party to stalk their every move like you do OWS. It looks to me like they had their own issues with violence, however. I suspect if hid in a fringe left bubble the way you do the fringe right, I'd probably believe "the majority" of Tea Party protests were violent.

 

[fskimospy]

Interesting allegation. Can you prove it? There have been literally hundreds of OWS protests. I'd like to see you evidence there's been violence at the majority of them.

I won't hold my breath.


Not worried about it. I like thinking for myself. I'm not a brain-dead automaton that marches in lockstep with anyone. I speak up about OWS issues I support and I denounce the things I don't.


Really? You sure about that? I suspect this is yet another example of you hiding in your nutter bubble: Google search for Tea Party violence examples.

I'll confess I didn't care enough about the Tea Party to stalk their every move like you do OWS. It looks to me like they had their own issues with violence, however. I suspect if hid in a fringe left bubble the way you do the fringe right, I'd probably believe "the majority" of Tea Party protests were violent.

You realize you're arguing with Spidey, right? The guy is mentally ill, you aren't going to get anywhere.

 

[palehorse]

In your opinion, presumably based on the stories you're fed from nutter news sources. I just did a quick check of the mainstream media sites. The fringe is not their focus.

In that way it appears you and Spidey are much alike. You hide in an echo chamber of sources that cherry pick and often outright fabricate stories to tell you what you want to hear (and what they want you to hear). Then you cite such biased sources as proof your alternate reality somehow trumps "real" reality. If you want to know what the vast majority of Americans are seeing about OWS, you need to go to the sources they rely on.

False. The pro-corruption right wing propaganda machine loves that banner I'm sure. It helps get people like you all worked up. I didn't see it on the three major media sites I just checked.

Nutter sources? Once again, I get my news from the Google News aggregator, I do not listen to talk radio (other than NPR, on occasion), and I do not watch Fox News.

Not everyone fits into your us vs. them world of partisan absolutes...

They did show pictures of the fires in Oakland, however, which is a much greater threat to the OWS image. The OWS core, for lack of a better word, needs to be loud and consistent in denouncing such actions or they will start losing support.

exactly.

(According to a new poll reported on CNN, OWS support is still rising.)

Sorry, I don't pay attention or give much credence to CNN, Fox News, or any other major media outlet...

For the record, being anti-capitalism is not the same as being anti-American, no matter what your corporate masters tell you. That said, it's not a position OWS should be associated with. It is not capitalism per se that's the problem, it's capitalism without effective checks and balances.

I disagree with you that anti-Capitalism is not anti-American.

The two go hand-in-hand -- always have, always will -- just ask any former citizen of the old Soviet Union.

You are correct, however, that OWS must try to distance itself from such filth. I just don't see that happening right now...

 

[palehorse]

No, I'm against corruption, and I'm also against people breaking the law. As far as I'm concerned they can peacefully protest until the end of times, but if they break the law and impact other law abiding citizens they need to be dealt with as criminals. These idiots protesting and causing trouble does nothing to fix any of the real problems. To affect real change, you need to change DC. OWS should really be ODC, that's where the house cleaning needs to be.

This is the absolute truth.

:thumbsup:

 

[Bowfinger]

Bull fucking shit.

What part of "occupy" don't you understand? They intend to occupy private property. Me thinks

Yeah, you really don't (think, that is). You just parrot the propaganda they feed you and ignore all the facts and truth that contradict you.

you don't pay attention to reality or facts. Do you know what the word occupy means? Have you not heard their chants of "this is OURS!"

Aside from last night and a lot of public parks (which in many cases, at least, they obtained permits for), what exactly have they occupied? There are tens of thousands of people who've joined OWS at different places and times. Unless you pulled your allegation straight out of your ass (my theory), you should be able to produce copious examples of them occupying private property. (No, sending ten people into a bank lobby is not occupying it. No, holding a protest for a few hours anywhere is not occupying.)

According to Oakland police, the problems last night came NOT from the main OWS group of thousands, but from a group of "about 100" that roamed around after the main group left. Unless you have FACT to counter this, you're just spouting more of your usual nutter propaganda.

Sadly I think you know it's a communist movement but you don't want to be associated with the negative connotation of being a communist.

Sadly, I think you honestly believe your delusions. That's why you sincerely need to seek professional mental help.

 

[palehorse]

Spidey, you're an idiot. It wasn't the main OWS movement that did those things. According to the Oakland PD, there were thousands of protestors in Oakland yesterday, and it was peaceful. (In part that's because the mayor told the PD to behave themselves. That was a big part of the story yesterday you undoubtedly missed because your nutter sources prefer you ignorant and outraged -- the mayor of Oakland expressed her support for OWS, essentially sanctioned peaceful protests, and told her police department to support their peaceful and lawful activities.)

Most (all?) of the violence was later that night, when a band of "about 100" started causing problems after the main group went home (or to their camp, whatever) for the night. That is certainly a problem OWS needs to condemn, and prevent as best they can. It is coming from the OWS fringe, however, and is not something the OWS core supports.

That may true for the vast majority of the OWS participants. However, I can tell you with absolute certainty that the anarchist Kelle Lasn had exactly this in mind when he first created the OWS movement.

Granted, the core membership has shifted away from the anarchy, but that doesn't take away from the fact that riots, looting, and out of control mobs are Lasn's ultimate anarchist fantasy come true...

 

[halik]

Yeah, you really don't (think, that is). You just parrot the propaganda they feed you and ignore all the facts and truth that contradict you.



Aside from last night and a lot of public parks (which in many cases, at least, they obtained permits for), what exactly have they occupied? There are tens of thousands of people who've joined OWS at different places and times. Unless you pulled your allegation straight out of your ass (my theory), you should be able to produce copious examples of them occupying private property. (No, sending ten people into a bank lobby is not occupying it. No, holding a protest for a few hours anywhere is not occupying.)

According to Oakland police, the problems last night came NOT from the main OWS group of thousands, but from a group of "about 100" that roamed around after the main group left. Unless you have FACT to counter this, you're just spouting more of your usual nutter propaganda.



Sadly, I think you honestly believe your delusions. That's why you sincerely need to seek professional mental help.

There were definitely more than 100 people on the streets when the cops rolled with the riot gear, I would peg it at like 500+ or so around the building that got broken into and another maybe 200 making barricades from dumpesters at 16th and san pablo. I took some screen caps from the live heli feed yesterday.

There was also a sizeable group by the "Death to Capitalism" sign couple blocks away, but they might've been just chilling.

 

[spidey07]

*sigh* nutter sources mean associated press? I think you're just refusing to read. Read the whole article. Are you trying to tell me this didn't happen? You're delusional and are simply ignoring or dismissing reality.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57317465/occupy-protests-go-from-peace-to-chaos/

Several thousands of people converged on the Port of Oakland, the nation's fifth-busiest harbor, in a nearly five-hour protest Wednesday, swarming the area and blocking exits and streets with illegally parked vehicles and hastily erected, chain-link fences afterward.

Port spokesman Isaac Kos-Read said evening operations had been "effectively shut down."

Port officials resumed maritime operations Thursday after about a dozen protesters manning a chain link fence blocked the port entrance earlier in the morning, backing up big trucks and prompting arguments between drivers and demonstrators. The protesters said they planned to stay until at least 9 a.m. and finally dispersed around that time

His comments came before a group of protesters broke into the former Travelers Aid building in order to, as some shouting protesters put it, "reclaim the building for the people."

 

[Bowfinger]

Nutter sources? Once again, I get my news from the Google News aggregator, I do not listen to talk radio (other than NPR, on occasion), and I do not watch Fox News.

Not everyone fits into your us vs. them world of partisan absolutes...

Fair enough, yet the stories and examples you cite almost invariably come from the right-wing fringe. At a minimum, you seem to self-select the same kinds of crap Spidey wallows in.

My point is your statements about what average Americans are seeing and thinking simply do not match the message coming from the mainstream media. You ignore this in favor of a highly biased viewpoint generally associated with the fringe right.

[ ... ]Sorry, I don't pay attention or give much credence to CNN, Fox News, or any other major media outlet...

Which is why you cannot speak for typical Americans. They do.

I disagree with you that anti-Capitalism is not anti-American.

The two go hand-in-hand -- always have, always will -- just ask any former citizen of the old Soviet Union.

I think one can pretty objectively state as fact that the two are different. Where is Capitalism mentioned in the Constitution, for example? Nonetheless, we can just agree to disagree. It's a moot point. I am not anti-Capitalism, nor is OWS as a whole.

You are correct, however, that OWS must try to distance itself from such filth. I just don't see that happening right now...

I don't either yet, and that's a problem. I hope they speak up today, or they will be allowing the fringe to undermine their message and their broad support.

 

[Bowfinger]

There were definitely more than 100 people on the streets when the cops rolled with the riot gear, I would peg it at like 500+ or so around the building that got broken into and another maybe 200 making barricades from dumpesters at 16th and san pablo. I took some screen caps from the live heli feed yesterday

OK. The Oakland PD said it was "about 100" in one of the articles I read. I have no first-hand knowledge one way or another. They made the point that the main protest was thousands of people, that the main protest was peaceful, and that it was just a small fringe that remained late to cause problems.

 

[halik]

OK. The Oakland PD said it was "about 100" in one of the articles I read. I have no first-hand knowledge one way or another. They made the point that the main protest was thousands of people, that the main protest was peaceful, and that it was just a small fringe that remained late to cause problems.

Yeah I think they were referring to the anarchists that were breaking shit during the actual protest in broad daylight (bank windows, whole foods etc). It got far more out of hand later on.

 

[spidey07]

OK. The Oakland PD said it was "about 100" in one of the articles I read. I have no first-hand knowledge one way or another. They made the point that the main protest was thousands of people, that the main protest was peaceful, and that it was just a small fringe that remained late to cause problems.

What about blocking and shutting down the port? That was planned you know and not an "isolated incident" or "a few bad apples".

How about the occupation of other private property?

Are you ignoring all this and saying it didn't happen?

From the article I last listed. Are you still trying to say this isn't an anti-capitalism movement? What the hell is wrong with you that you would blatently dismiss reality?

Boots Riley, a protest organizer, touted the day as a success, saying "we put together an ideological principle that the mainstream media wouldn't talk about two months ago."

His comments came before a group of protesters broke into the former Travelers Aid building in order to, as some shouting protesters put it, "reclaim the building for the people."

Riley, whose anti-capitalist views are well documented, considered the port shutdown particularly significant for organizers who targeted it in an effort to stop the "flow of capital."

More occupying Private Property. Still going to deny that they intend to occupy private property?

In Philadelphia, protesters were arrested earlier Wednesday as they held a sit-in at the headquarters of cable giant Comcast.

 

[Bowfinger]

*sigh* nutter sources mean associated press? I think you're just refusing to read. Read the whole article. Are you trying to tell me this didn't happen? You're delusional and are simply ignoring or dismissing reality.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57317465/occupy-protests-go-from-peace-to-chaos/

More of Spidey's signature dishonesty. Who would have guessed?

I assume the reason you didn't actually quote me is because it would be so much easier to see your response was dishonest (plus I poked a bunch of holes in your other nutter fantasies). I didn't suggest for a minute those things didn't occur last night. On the contrary, I acknowledged them. The question you're hiding from -- as usual -- is any evidence of "occupation of private property" being a common part of OWS-sanctioned activities. (And holding a protest for a few hours and dispersing is not occupying, period.)

You continue to make these sweeping, bullshit allegations based on one or two examples taken out of context. You then run away when challenged to support your delusional rants.

Get help.

 

[Bowfinger]

What about blocking and shutting down the port? That was planned you know and not an "isolated incident" or "a few bad apples".

Very good. You got one fact right. Bravo!

Yes, that was part of the Occupy Oakland agenda for the day. And? That's not what we were talking about.

How about the occupation of other private property?

What about it? Is there any point in me addressing this again. You just ran away last time. If you can support this allegation, go back and respond -- in context and with real facts, not nutter pretend-facts -- to my reply to you a few messages up.

Are you ignoring all this and saying it didn't happen?

From the article I last listed. Are you still trying to say this isn't an anti-capitalism movement? What the hell is wrong with you that you would blatently dismiss reality?

ROFL. That's hilarious coming from you, the denial queen. Same old lies, over and over. I suppose that's much easier for you than responding to anything I actually said. It's so much easier for you than facing reality.

 

[spidey07]

More of Spidey's signature dishonesty. Who would have guessed?

I assume the reason you didn't actually quote me is because it would be so much easier to see your response was dishonest (plus I poked a bunch of holes in your other nutter fantasies). I didn't suggest for a minute those things didn't occur last night. On the contrary, I acknowledged them. The question you're hiding from -- as usual -- is any evidence of "occupation of private property" being a common part of OWS-sanctioned activities. (And holding a protest for a few hours and dispersing is not occupying, period.)

You continue to make these sweeping, bullshit allegations based on one or two examples taken out of context. You then run away when challenged to support your delusional rants.

Get help.

You idiot. Are you IGNORING the protest organizer blocking the port? You have got to have serious filter in your head, I keep spoon feeding you the articles. and then you say it didn't happen or "that wasn't part of occupy movement"

But it's the freaking protest organizer that planned it!!!!

 

[spidey07]

Very good. You got one fact right. Bravo!

Yes, that was part of the Occupy Oakland agenda for the day. And? That's not what we were talking about.


What about it? Is there any point in me addressing this again. You just ran away last time. If you can support this allegation, go back and respond -- in context and with real facts, not nutter pretend-facts -- to my reply to you a few messages up.


ROFL. That's hilarious coming from you, the denial queen. Same old lies, over and over. I suppose that's much easier for you than responding to anything I actually said. It's so much easier for you than facing reality.

I have provided plenty of examples of them occupying private property. Go back and read.

 

[Bowfinger]

You realize you're arguing with Spidey, right? The guy is mentally ill, you aren't going to get anywhere.

I know, sorry. I'm on a long, pointless conference call, and I'm bored.

 

[Bowfinger]

I have provided plenty of examples of them occupying private property. Go back and read.

You're lying again.

 

[Bowfinger]

You idiot. Are you IGNORING the protest organizer blocking the port? You have got to have serious filter in your head, I keep spoon feeding you the articles. and then you say it didn't happen or "that wasn't part of occupy movement"

But it's the freaking protest organizer that planned it!!!!

You're lying again.

 

[spidey07]

You're lying again.

So getting arrested for occupying comcast in philly is a lie? Or are you going to say "that didn't happen" or "that's not what the movement is about" or "that's not occupying, that's peaceful protesting on private property lawfully, even though they got arrested"

I know how to think like a liberal, so that's all the answers you have when presented with reality.

 

[OrByte]

I am certainly a moderate, or centrist, by any measure; and I'm an independent who has never voted along party lines. Hell, I even voted for our current President!

I represent exactly the type of person you need to convince to join your efforts. Without folks like me -- those who certainly agree that something is broken in our Goverment, but do not identify with the current "faces" of OWS, or agree with the direction the protests are aimed -- the movement is screwed...

the "movement" has already been radically successful.

the national conversation has changed...to the benefit of the 99%.

 

[Patranus]

the "movement" has already been radically successful.

the national conversation has changed...to the benefit of the 99%.

You think that anyone is actually taking OWS seriously?

 

[Londo_Jowo]

You think that anyone is actually taking OWS seriously?

If it's like Occupy Houston no one is taking it serious. Most Houstonians have no clue a protest is taking place as it's not being reported by the local media and unless you go to the small area they're occupying downtown you wouldn't know they exist.

 

[OrByte]

You think that anyone is actually taking OWS seriously?

If our elected representatives are talking about wage/income disparities instead of budget deficits then yes I do think people are taking OWS seriously. No one wants to talk about wage/income disparities...thats always been the big elephant in the room come election time.

I think the City of Oakland is taking it seriously.

I think the only people that aren't taking it seriously are people that hope and pray that if OWS is ignored, it will go away.

you are welcome to try and be dismissive all you want.

 

[fskimospy]

You think that anyone is actually taking OWS seriously?

They already have taken it seriously. Even if everyone packed up and went home today they have already been enormously successful as they changed the national conversation. It's too late, they already won. The only question now is how big a victory will it be?