Occupy Oakland Raids

[Johnfromokc]

I'm sorry, but that's a completely fucking bullshit argument or accusation... you're implying that someone's opinion means more or less based on whether or not they served in the military. I wanted to, but I was medically disqualified due to knee problems... does that mean that I'm somehow less of a person? Give me a fucking break, I may not get along with you, but I honestly thought better of you than to throwing bullshit like that out there.

Here's your fucking break right here retro :fing27

Speaking of throwing bullshit around...........You have not a fucking clue as to my intent in asking AA that question. And I never asked you if you served and didn't give a fuck to know.

You assume much, but know little.

 

[Johnfromokc]

Oh man, that's fucking rich. Nothing to do with you... just other people that resort to homophobic slurs and attacks when people upset them.

Retro - every single time you attacked me first with your smart ass attitude, name calling and slurs of your own. I gave you a dose of your own treatment and you didn't like it. Don't dish it out if you can't take whats coming back to you.

Don't even act like you did not deserve every verbal bitch-slap you have received - because you did. We can discuss and debate civilly if you wish - that is what I'd prefer to do. But I can play games if you want to play that route - know that I won't take any shit off you or anyone else.


What say we knock off all the bullshit and have a conversation?

 

[CityGirl]

If you think the OWS movement is getting harsh criticism I think that is an opinion that could be a bit subjective. Like any movement there will be criticism. Did you make such an assertion or do you believe the Tea Party was treated any better or worse? If anything the media seems to be more on the side of OWS right now so other than the pundits where is this criticism and again the pundits on the other side have been skewering the Tea Party.

Since I'm referring to the OWS movement, I'm referring to it's harsh criticism. Had I been talking about the Tea Party, I'd have acknowledged the harsh criticism it has received. I'm of the opinion that the Tea Party should join OWS or vice versa and address the core issues that affect us all. I'm not of the opinion that the OWS movement is about the left gaining power any more than I perceived the beginnings of the Tea Party to be about the right gaining power. I attended several Tea Party rallies in it's infancy and I recognized the power of the people to bring about justice in the wake of the 2008 financial implosion and I saw that power diverted so that it was hardly a topic in the 2010 campaign. The 2010 campaign focused on tax cuts, keeping taxes low, and repealing the healthcare law. The tea party candidates didn't ride into DC with the purpose of correcting the DC corruption, hamstringing the financial oligarchy and demanding criminal investigations into governmental, banking and corporate crimes contributing to the 2008 financial collapse. If my local Tea Party is a reflection of the movement as a whole, I would say they deserve a skewering since they have not held an active event since October 2010 which only reinforces the accusation that they are politically hijacked. They should be in constant motion with a "We have not yet begun to fight" mentality. My Tea Party signs are as welcome at our local OWS event as any OWS sign.

If you think the OWS is not all about the left gaining power then you must thing Adbusters is just a figment of imagination. The people asebehind this movement are all about far left socialism and that is their end game. They sucked in a lot of people into this movement.

Has the movement done any of this? Nope.

Having watched the evolution of the OWS movement since Feb, I disagree with the premise that it is a far left socialist movement but I can see the same mechanism in play now that went into play against the Tea Party. If far left socialism means returning corporations to their former confines, I'm all for it.

There was a time when legislatures limited the lifespan of a corporation,the amount of property they could own, acceptable business activities, and set a maximum profit allowed before the business would revert to public ownership. Many states forbade businesses from lobbying, influencing elections, or even attempting to sway public opinion! Corporations violating these limits risked dissolution -- a corporate death penalty. State legislatures explicitly defined corporations as entities subordinate to democracy, possessing limited privileges and no inherent rights.

The states also imposed conditions (some of which remain on the books, though unused) like these:
* Corporate charters (licenses to exist) were granted for a limited time and could be revoked promptly for violating laws.
* Corporations could engage only in activities necessary to fulfill their chartered purpose.
* Corporations could not own stock in other corporations nor own any property that was not essential to fulfilling their chartered purpose.
* Corporations were terminated if they exceeded their authority or caused public harm.
* Owners and managers were responsible for criminal acts committed on the job.
* Corporations could not make any political or charitable contributions nor spend money to influence law-making http://reclaimdemocracy.org/personhood/history_corporations_us.html

With regards to Adbusters, I'm not inclined to vilify them for their anticonsumerism, antimaterialism proenvironment message. According to Wikipedia,

"The foundation was born out of their realization that citizens do not have the same access to the information flows as corporations. One of the foundation's key campaigns continues to be the Media Carta, a "movement to enshrine The Right to Communicate in the constitutions of all free nations, and in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.For the foundation, concern over the flow of information goes beyond the desire to protect democratic transparency, freedom of speech or the public’s access to the airwaves. Although it supports these causes, the foundation instead situates the battle of the mind at the center of its political agenda. Fighting to counter pro-consumerist advertising is done not as a means to an end, but as the end in itself.

Adbusters is anti-advertising: it blames advertising for playing a central role in creating, and maintaining, consumer culture. This argument is based on the fact that the advertising industry goes to great effort and expense to associate desire and identity with commodities. Adbusters believes that advertising has unjustly "colonized" public, discursive and psychic spaces, by appearing in movies, sports and even schools, so as to permeate modern cultures.[SUP][14][/SUP] Adbusters' goals include combating the negative effects of advertising and empowering its readers to regain control of culture, encouraging them to ask "Are we consumers and citizens?."[SUP][17][/SUP]To counter the belief that advertising focuses on looking toward external rewards for a sense of self, Adbusters recognizes a “natural and authentic self apart from the consumer society”.

On the whole, what is promoted by Adbusters seems to be a pleasant course for society in the wake of decades of consumerism and the message is timely since we are facing austerity measures whether we want them or not.

 

[CityGirl]

I have linked to this article in a prior post. It is written by a young man who has been actively involved in the OWS movement from it's inception and I would encourage you all to read it in order to gain a better understanding and perhaps to make you more cognizant of the apparatus of the machine as it tries to invalidate this movement as it has attempted to do with the Tea Party. http://ampedstatus.org/a-report-from-the-frontlines-the-long-road-to-occupywallstreet-and-the-origins-of-the-99-movement/

Also, this same young man David DeGraw addressed the accusations of Soros/democratic party front group, etc with Alex Jones who leveled the same accusations.

Alex,
There are several things that I strongly disagree with you on, but I have always considered you a true patriot to the American people. That is, until you came out and dismissed #OccupyWallStreet as some Soros, Democratic Party front group. You came on air and claimed that you extensively researched the history of #OccupyWallStreet and concluded that it was an Astro-turf non-legit movement.
I take deep personal offense to your comments.
As someone whose reporting has been featured on your site and Prison Planets, I know that you did not really “extensively research” the origins of this movement. If you did, you would be familiar with my extensive reports on the origins of the movement, such as the most recent: “A Report from the Frontlines: The Long Road to #OccupyWallStreet and the Origins of the 99% Movement.”
If you actually do your homework, you will see that this movement partially grew out of Anonymous led Federal Reserve protests. In fact, this movement was given a major boost from my work with a regular guest on your show, Max Keiser. Have you heard of the Global Insurrection Against Banker Occupation? Have you heard of the Empire State Rebellion?
Yes! You have!
I have worked my ass off for over 3 years to make #OccupyWallStreet happen. In fact, over the past 3 years I have repeatedly tried to contact you to collaborate on Federal Reserve protest actions. Despite millions of online views on my reports, and being repeatedly featured on your site, not ONCE, have you acknowledged our efforts.
To demonstrate how little you understand what’s happening on the ground at #OccupyWallStreet. Let me make a few things clear to you.

1) Have you noticed that Liberty Park is closer to the NY Fed than the stock exchange? We purposely picked that park because of how close it was to the NY Fed.
2) Have you also failed to notice that we are occupying Federal Reserve banks. We’ve had people at the Chicago Fed since the start and have occupations in the works at ALL Fed locations.
3) Have you talked to the many listeners of your show that are at the #OccupyWallStreet protests. The “End The Fed” crowd is a significant part of the action.
​

Perhaps that’s just it. Perhaps you can’t accept that YOU were not the person to start this movement. Is that it? Is this all about vanity and ego? I don’t want to get too deep into personal attacks here. After you admit that you made a mistake, or perhaps a rush to judgment, I would gladly embrace you as an ally. After all, we are fighting against the same global financial oligarchy. At least that’s what I thought. Now I think you may be a divide and conquer pawn, or perhaps an ego-maniac. I’m still hoping you’re a legit patriot, it would be great if you support our fight against the global financial elite, but we will soon see.
I invite you to a public debate on these issues. Max Keiser can moderate.
Let’s do it on the Keiser Report. I’ll even come on your show so you can have full editing capabilities. I just went into the belly of the beast on GE’s NBC’s Nightly News and represented hardcore, so hardcore that they only aired one sentence of what I said in 15 minutes worth of footage.
Are you the real deal Alex, or are you a divide and conquer pawn? I’m hoping you’re for real. I would love to have you as an ally. We need all the help we can get. http://ampedstatus.org/open-letter-to-alex-jones-re-occupywallstreet/

 

[Johnfromokc]

I love it when those who were in the military think they are so high and mighty that they believe others who did not are lesser people and should not have an opinion.

Why is it you presume I think less of non-vets? I'm the first veteran in my family since my father served during World War 2. Guess what? I don't think less of my family, inlaws or friends who chose not to enlist. As a matter of fact, I'm encouraging my children NOT to join.

That wasn't the reply you expected was it?

For the record I was not in the military. My number did not come up high enough in the last Nam draft and then the draft was cancelled.

Thank you for answering my question Allen.

Now that we have that out of the way what the fuck does that have to do with these Occupy movements anyway.

It's called perspective AA. It helps me understand, to some extent, the paradigm from which you think.

I'd also like to know what business and industry you are in. That lends perspective also. Mine is in my profile.

I suggest you put me on ignore John. Because I will continue to post comments that you do not agree with. Ignore works quite well.

No thanks. I think the "ignore" feature is a silly concept. I can handle anything anyone says on this public forum. Debate of this nature has entertainment value and is fun for me.

You just keep on posting things I disagree with and I'll keep doing the same and reply in kind.

 

[retro]

Here's your fucking break right here retro :fing27

Speaking of throwing bullshit around...........You have not a fucking clue as to my intent in asking AA that question. And I never asked you if you served and didn't give a fuck to know.

You assume much, but know little.

Your intent is thoroughly irrelevant and my point stands. Using military service (or lack thereof) in order to make ones opinion seem less, for lack of a better word, important is complete bullshit and I would think you'd know that.

 

[retro]

Retro - every single time you attacked me first with your smart ass attitude, name calling and slurs of your own. I gave you a dose of your own treatment and you didn't like it. Don't dish it out if you can't take whats coming back to you.

Don't even act like you did not deserve every verbal bitch-slap you have received - because you did. We can discuss and debate civilly if you wish - that is what I'd prefer to do. But I can play games if you want to play that route - know that I won't take any shit off you or anyone else.


What say we knock off all the bullshit and have a conversation?

Now who is assuming much and knowing little? But, that being said... the last time I checked, being a smart ass wasn't an attack, nor does it directly involve name calling. Furthermore, the only thing even close to a "slur" that I've ever said to you is to call you "Johnnyboy", to which you responded with your homophobic slur.

For the record, I wasn't actually thinking of you when I said that, but now that you mention it... what I said completely fits you as well. As far as having a conversation goes... it'd be a helluva lot easier for anyone to try and have a conversation with you if you didn't consistently talk down to them like they're children when they say something you take issue with.

 

[Johnfromokc]

Your intent is thoroughly irrelevant and my point stands. Using military service (or lack thereof) in order to make ones opinion seem less, for lack of a better word, important is complete bullshit and I would think you'd know that.

My intent is irrelevant? Are you that fucking dense retro?

Now who is assuming much and knowing little? But, that being said... the last time I checked, being a smart ass wasn't an attack, nor does it directly involve name calling. Furthermore, the only thing even close to a "slur" that I've ever said to you is to call you "Johnnyboy", to which you responded with your homophobic slur.

And when you call me "Johnnyboy" I'll call you "twinkyboy". Keep on fucking around retro. I can handle it...can you? And I keep telling you "twinky" is not homophobic - a "twinky" according to the Urban Dictionary, is a whiney little bitch. Here is the link I post for you every time you start that "homophobic slur" nonsense. See definition #2:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=twinky

For the record, I wasn't actually thinking of you when I said that, but now that you mention it... what I said completely fits you as well. As far as having a conversation goes... it'd be a helluva lot easier for anyone to try and have a conversation with you if you didn't consistently talk down to them like they're children when they say something you take issue with.

Not thinking of me? Yeah, I believe ya retro. :clap :24:

Look in the mirror retro. I and everyone else here has witnessed you talking down to people repeatedly. I've lost count of the times you have compared members on here to your 4 year old. Do you have short term memory issues?

You keep a reasonable respectful tone and I'll do the same. So are we going to converse or continue playing fuck-fuck?

 

[retro]

My intent is irrelevant? Are you that fucking dense retro?

No, but you might be.

And when you call me "Johnnyboy" I'll call you "twinkyboy". Keep on fucking around retro. I can handle it...can you? And I keep telling you "twinky" is not homophobic - a "twinky" according to the Urban Dictionary, is a whiney little bitch. Here is the link I post for you every time you start that "homophobic slur" nonsense. See definition #2:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=twinky

One definition. The one I've grown up with is something entirely different.

Not thinking of me? Yeah, I believe ya retro. :clap :24:

You have an incredibly high sense of self worth. The world doesn't revolve around you, nor do people always think about you.

Look in the mirror retro. I and everyone else here has witnessed you talking down to people repeatedly. I've lost count of the times you have compared members on here to your 4 year old. Do you have short term memory issues?

You keep a reasonable respectful tone and I'll do the same. So are we going to converse or continue playing fuck-fuck?

There's a difference, but apparently subtleties aren't your specialty. You, on the other hand, immediately launch into a diatribe treating people like a child because their beliefs differ from yours. On the other hand, I tell The Doc that he's acting like my four year old after him proving it repeatedly. Like I said, there are differences.

But anyway, now that we've cleared that all up. The conversation is over as far as I'm concerned, especially since it had nothing to do with you to begin with. So moving right along.

 

[Johnfromokc]

No, but you might be.

nanny nanny poo poo!:24:

One definition. The one I've grown up with is something entirely different.

You know exactly the definition I intended.

You have an incredibly high sense of self worth. The world doesn't revolve around you, nor do people always think about you.

You got one partially right finally. My self worth is indeed high, and I don't give a fuck if your little world likes my opinion or not.

And you were conversing with me, so I was the one you were thinking of. :smiley31:

There's a difference, but apparently subtleties aren't your specialty. You, on the other hand, immediately launch into a diatribe treating people like a child because their beliefs differ from yours. On the other hand, I tell The Doc that he's acting like my four year old after him proving it repeatedly. Like I said, there are differences.

You told a whole lot more people than Doc they act like your 4 year old - and why exactly does your 4 year old act like that? If I told people they were acting like my kids, it would be a compliment.

I'm sorry you apparently feel like a child when I disagree with one of your posts. I have no control over how you choose to feel......or do I?.....Hmmmmm........

But anyway, now that we've cleared that all up. The conversation is over as far as I'm concerned, especially since it had nothing to do with you to begin with. So moving right along.

Whatever you say retro. It's all a game for me. Play it as you wish.

 

[CityGirl]

Meanwhile, back at the farm....

The news regarding former marine Scott Olsen who sustained a head injury in the melee on Tuesday is that he sustained brain damage to the rt side of his brain and his speech center is impaired. He is expected to make a full recovery. However, he is not out of the woods, yet. Let's keep him in our thoughts and prayers.

 

[Johnfromokc]

Lets get back on topic shall we? Here is an update on Scott Olsen:

Doctors: Scott Olsen suffered brain damage and is unable to speak

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/10/...suffered-brain-damage-and-is-unable-to-speak/

 

[Accountable]

So where's Accountable and his thoughts on Freedom & Liberty now?

What do you mean? You don't honestly expect that I would defend the police actions, do you? Or are you saying that freedom and liberty are not worth the risk of encountering such action?

 

[Accountable]

I have not paid real close attention but was it in Oakland where the cops were shot with paintballs?

Not saying that justifies an extreme response. Just trying to get a perspective on what triggered this.

Wasn't it you that predicted that someone would plant someone to instigate violence? You had no problem believing someone did it to the Tea Paritiers, why not in this situation?

 

[Alien Allen]

Wasn't it you that predicted that someone would plant someone to instigate violence? You had no problem believing someone did it to the Tea Paritiers, why not in this situation?

Yes I did say both the right and left may send in plants. Also one might think I condone police brutality which is not true. I am just making the point that bad things can happen when you have a large group against a small group. It does not take a lot for things to get out of hand. Four dead in Ohio proved that point back in the day.

 

[Accountable]

So it's plausible that the repubs were more successful than the dems in wrecking a grass roots movement, this time.

 

[Johnfromokc]

http://www.businessinsider.com/mari...-used-methods-prohibited-in-war-zones-2011-10

Marine Says Oakland Used Crowd Control Methods That Are Prohibited In War Zones​

40mm tear gas launcher As the events that led to Oakland protester Scott Olsen's head injury continue to unfold and investigations begin, we thought it important to offer some perspective. This comment is from a former Marine with special operations in crowd control. He points out that shooting canisters such as those that likely hit Scott Olsen is prohibited under rules of engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan. Regardless of any political position on the Occupy protests, these are some Interesting insights: Before gas goes into a crowd shield bearers have to be making no progress moving a crowd or crowd must be assaulting the line. Not with sticks and stones but a no bullshit assault. 3 warnings must be given to the crowd in a manner they can hear that force is about to be used. Shield bearers take a knee and CS gas is released in grenade form first to fog out your lines because you have gas masks. You then kick the canisters along in front of your lines. Projectile gas is not used except for longer ranged engagement or trying to steer the crowd ( by steering a crowd I mean firing gas to block a street off ). You also have shotguns with beanbags and various less than lethal rounds for your launchers. These are the rules for a WARZONE!! How did a cop who is supposed to have training on his weapon system accidentally SHOOT someone in the head with a 40mm gas canister? Simple. He was aiming at him. I'll be the first to admit a 40mm round is tricky to aim if you are inexperienced but anyone can tell the difference between aiming at head level and going for range. The person that pulled that trigger has no business being a cop. He sent that round out with the intention of doing some serious damage to the protestors. I don't care what the protestors were doing. I never broke my rules of engagement in Iraq or Afghanistan. So I can't imagine what a protester in the states did to deserve a headshot with a 40mm. He's damn lucky to be alive and that cop knows he was using lethal force against a protester he is supposed to be protecting. Additionally: Jesse Davis mentions "The methods prohibited in war, and actions after the fact are also against war zone policy." Check out his infographic here. Specifically these two transcribed directly from US Army Law of War/Law of Armed Conflict training. The Military manual states: …have a duty to collect and care for the wounded. Prioritize treatment according to injuries. Make NO treatment distinction based on nationality. All soldiers, enemy or friendly, must be treated the same. Second, the officer threw a flash-bang directly into a group of people trying to carry him away for medicaltreatment. Here's the Military guidance on that decision: Medical Personnel Considered out of combat if they exclusively engaged in medical duties. (GWS, art. 24.) Doctors, surgeons, nurses, chemists, stretcher-bearers, medics, corpsman, and orderlies, etc..., who are “exclusively engaged” in the direct care of the wounded and sick. Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/mari...prohibited-in-war-zones-2011-10#ixzz1cBjhYUBM​

​

 

[Alien Allen]

So it's plausible that the repubs were more successful than the dems in wrecking a grass roots movement, this time.

anything is possible. both parties have shown in the past they can not be trusted and will do damn near anything to gain or maintain power.

 

[Johnfromokc]

 

[Guyzerr]

As Accountable would say.... " there is no better land to live in. Liberty & Freedom for all. " HoooooRaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa