OCCUPY WALL STREET

[persiphone]

Robert Fisk: Bankers are the dictators of the West

Writing from the very region that produces more clichés per square foot than any other "story" – the Middle East – I should perhaps pause before I say I have never read so much garbage, so much utter drivel, as I have about the world financial crisis.

But I will not hold my fire. It seems to me that the reporting of the collapse of capitalism has reached a new low which even the Middle East cannot surpass for sheer unadulterated obedience to the very institutions and Harvard "experts" who have helped to bring about the whole criminal disaster.

Let's kick off with the "Arab Spring" – in itself a grotesque verbal distortion of the great Arab/Muslim awakening which is shaking the Middle East – and the trashy parallels with the social protests in Western capitals. We've been deluged with reports of how the poor or the disadvantaged in the West have "taken a leaf" out of the "Arab spring" book, how demonstrators in America, Canada, Britain, Spain and Greece have been "inspired" by the huge demonstrations that brought down the regimes in Egypt, Tunisia and – up to a point – Libya. But this is nonsense.

The real comparison, needless to say, has been dodged by Western reporters, so keen to extol the anti-dictator rebellions of the Arabs, so anxious to ignore protests against "democratic" Western governments, so desperate to disparage these demonstrations, to suggest that they are merely picking up on the latest fad in the Arab world. The truth is somewhat different. What drove the Arabs in their tens of thousands and then their millions on to the streets of Middle East capitals was a demand for dignity and a refusal to accept that the local family-ruled dictators actually owned their countries. The Mubaraks and the Ben Alis and the Gaddafis and the kings and emirs of the Gulf (and Jordan) and the Assads all believed that they had property rights to their entire nations. Egypt belonged to Mubarak Inc, Tunisia to Ben Ali Inc (and the Traboulsi family), Libya to Gaddafi Inc. And so on. The Arab martyrs against dictatorship died to prove that their countries belonged to their own people.

And that is the true parallel in the West. The protest movements are indeed against Big Business – a perfectly justified cause – and against "governments". What they have really divined, however, albeit a bit late in the day, is that they have for decades bought into a fraudulent democracy: they dutifully vote for political parties – which then hand their democratic mandate and people's power to the banks and the derivative traders and the rating agencies, all three backed up by the slovenly and dishonest coterie of "experts" from America's top universities and "think tanks", who maintain the fiction that this is a crisis of globalisation rather than a massive financial con trick foisted on the voters.

The banks and the rating agencies have become the dictators of the West. Like the Mubaraks and Ben Alis, the banks believed – and still believe – they are owners of their countries. The elections which give them power have – through the gutlessness and collusion of governments – become as false as the polls to which the Arabs were forced to troop decade after decade to anoint their own national property owners. Goldman Sachs and the Royal Bank of Scotland became the Mubaraks and Ben Alis of the US and the UK, each gobbling up the people's wealth in bogus rewards and bonuses for their vicious bosses on a scale infinitely more rapacious than their greedy Arab dictator-brothers could imagine.

I didn't need Charles Ferguson's Inside Job on BBC2 this week – though it helped – to teach me that the ratings agencies and the US banks are interchangeable, that their personnel move seamlessly between agency, bank and US government. The ratings lads (almost always lads, of course) who AAA-rated sub-prime loans and derivatives in America are now – via their poisonous influence on the markets – clawing down the people of Europe by threatening to lower or withdraw the very same ratings from European nations which they lavished upon criminals before the financial crash in the US. I believe that understatement tends to win arguments. But, forgive me, who are these creatures whose ratings agencies now put more fear into the French than Rommel did in 1940?

Why don't my journalist mates in Wall Street tell me? How come the BBC and CNN and – oh, dear, even al-Jazeera – treat these criminal communities as unquestionable institutions of power? Why no investigations

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-bankers-are-the-dictators-of-the-west-6275084.html



i've said many times that FICA is complete and utter bullshit. the same goes for other ratings agencies.

[persiphone]

Published on Saturday, December 24, 2011 by The Irish Times
In the Year of the Protester, Bradley Manning is the Great Dissenter
by Davin O'Dwyer

PRESENT TENSE : IT HAS BEEN an extraordinary year, full of tragedy and tumult: there’s every chance that 2011 will rank with 1968 and 1945 as an era-defining 12 months.

Time magazine has nominated the “protester” as its person of the year, a decision that has generated plenty of ink, but, among the tsunamis and financial crises, it’s true that the act of protest has marked the year out as particularly noteworthy.

From Tahrir Square to Puerta del Sol to Zuccotti Park, people have gathered out of a desire for fairness and democracy, giving shape to world events in a way that few could have predicted on Christmas Eve 2010.

But there is one protester who has been somewhat omitted from the narrative of 2011’s protests, a protester who has been behind bars since May 2010, and whose act of dissent stands equal to all those who sprung the Arab Spring: Bradley Manning, the alleged leaker of US military and diplomatic secrets to WikiLeaks.

Manning’s military hearing began eight days ago at Fort Meade, in Maryland, and the sense of inevitability around the charges of aiding the enemy and violating the Espionage Act makes this trial more about the rights and wrongs of whistleblowing than about determining whether he actually leaked that huge trove of classified information.
Full Article here:
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/12/24-6

More on Manning
http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/11/29/European_Leaders_Worry_Bradley_Manning_Is_Being_To rtured/


Bradley Manning came to mind when the first stirring of the National Defense Act thingy that encompasses all US citizens into the anti-terror threat started. i thought....hell hasn't it already happened to Bradley? christ.

[persiphone]

Thud of the Jackboot
by ALEXANDER COCKBURN

Too bad Kim Jong-il kicked the bucket last weekend. If the divine hand that laid low the North Korean leader had held off for a week or so, Kim would have been sustained by the news that President Obama is signing into law a bill that puts the United States not immeasurably far from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in contempt of constitutional protections for its citizens, or constitutional restraints upon criminal behavior sanctioned by the state.

At least the DPRK doesn’t trumpet its status as the last best sanctuary of liberty. American politicians, starting with the president, do little else.

A couple of months ago came a mile marker in America’s steady slide downhill towards the status of a Banana Republic, with Obama’s assertion that he has the right as president to order secretly the assassination, without trial, of a US citizen he deems to be working with terrorists. This followed his betrayal in 2009 of his pledge to end the indefinite imprisonment without charges or trial of prisoners in Guantanamo.

Now, after months of declaring that he would veto such legislation, Obama has now crumbled and will soon sign a monstrosity called the Levin/McCain detention bill, named for its two senatorial sponsors, Carl Levin and John McCain. It’s snugged into the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act.

The detention bill mandates – don’t glide too easily past that word - that all accused terrorists be indefinitely imprisoned by the military rather than in the civilian court system; this includes US citizens within the borders of the United States. Obama supporters have made strenuous efforts to suggest that US citizens are excluded from the bill’s provisions. Not so. “It is not unfair to make an American citizen account for the fact that they decided to help Al Qaeda to kill us all and hold them as long as it takes to find intelligence about what may be coming next,” says Senator Lindsay Graham, a big backer of the bill. “And when they say, ‘I want my lawyer,’ you tell them, ‘Shut up. You don’t get a lawyer.’” The bill’s co-sponsor, Democratic senator, cosponsor of the bill, Carl Levin says it was the White House itself that demanded that the infamous Section 1031 apply to American citizens.

Anyone familiar with this sort of “emergency” legislation knows that those drafting the statutes like to cast as wide a net as possible. In this instance the detention bill authorizes use of military force against anyone who “substantially supports” al-Qaeda, the Taliban or “associated forces”. Of course “associated forces” can mean anything. The bill’s language mentions “associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or who has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.”
 
This is exactly the sort of language that can be bent at will by any prosecutor. Protest too vigorously the assassination of US citizen Anwar al Awlaki by American forces in Yemen in October and one day it’s not fanciful to expect the thud of the military jackboot on your front step, or on that of any anti-war organizer, or any journalist whom some zealous military intelligence officer deems to be giving objective support to the forces of Evil and Darkness.

Since 1878 here in the US, the Posse Comitatus Act has limited the powers of local governments and law enforcement agencies from using federal military personnel to enforce the laws of the land. The detention bill renders the Posse Comitatus Act a dead letter.

Governments, particularly those engaged in a Great War on Terror, like to make long lists of troublesome people to be sent to internment camps or dungeons in case of national emergency. Back in Reagan’s time, in the 1980s, Lt Col Oliver North, working out of the White House, was caught preparing just such a list. Reagan speedily distanced himself from North. Obama, the former lecturer on the US constitution, is brazenly signing this authorization for military internment camps.

There’s been quite a commotion over the detention bill. Civil liberties groups such as the ACLU have raised a stink. The New York Times has denounced it editorially as “a complete political cave-in”. Mindful that the votes of liberals can be useful, even vital in presidential elections, pro-Obama supporters of the bill claim that it doesn’t codify “indefinite detention.” But indeed it does. The bill explicitly authorizes “detention under the law of war until the end of hostilities.”

Will the bill hurt Obama? Probably not too much, if at all. Liberals are never very energetic in protecting constitutional rights. That’s more the province of libertarians and other wackos like Ron Paul actually prepared to draw lines in the sand in matters of principle.

Simultaneous to the looming shadow of indefinite internment by the military for naysayers, we have what appears to be immunity from prosecution for private military contractors retained by the US government, another extremely sinister development. Last Wednesday we ran here an important article on the matter from Laura Raymond of the Center for Constitutional Rights.

The US military has been outsourcing war at a staggering rate. Even as the US military quits Iraq, thousands of private military contractors remain. Suppose they are accused of torture and other abuses including murder?

The Centre for Constitutional Rights is currently representing Iraqi civilians tortured in Abu Ghraib and other detention centers in Iraq, seeking to hold accountable two private contractors for their violations of international, federal and state law. In Raymond’s words, “By the military’s own internal investigations, private military contractors from the US-based corporations L-3 Services and CACI International were involved in the war crimes and acts of torture that took place, which included rape, being forced to watch family members and others be raped, severe beatings, being hung in stress positions, being pulled across the floor by genitals, mock executions, and other incidents, many of which were documented by photographs. The cases – Al Shimari v. CACI and Al-Quraishi v. Nakhla and L-3 – aim to secure a day in court for the plaintiffs, none of whom were ever charged with any crimes.”

But the corporations involved are now arguing in court that they should be exempt from any investigation into the allegations against them because, among other reasons, the US government’s interests in executing wars would be at stake if corporate contractors can be sued. And Raymond reports that “they are also invoking a new, sweeping defense. The new rule is termed ‘battlefield preemption’ and aims to eliminate any civil lawsuits against contractors that take place on any ‘battlefield’.”

You’ve guessed it. As with “associated forces”, an elastic concept discussed above, in the Great War on Terror the entire world is a “battlefield”. So unless the CCR’s suit prevails, a ruling of a Fourth Circuit federal court panel will stand and private military contractors could be immune from any type of civil liability, even for war crimes, as long as it takes place on a “battlefield”.

Suppose now we take the new powers of the military in domestic law enforcement, as defined in the detention act, and anticipate the inevitable, that the military delegates these powers to private military contractors. CACI International or a company owned by, say Goldman Sachs, could enjoy delegated powers to arrest any US citizen here within the borders of the USA, “who has committed a belligerent act or who has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces,” torture them to death and then claim “battlefield preemption”.

Don’t laugh.

On this issue of the “privatization” T.P.Wilkinson has a brilliant essay in our latest newsletter on “corporate nihilism and the roots of war”. Wilkinson starts with a critique of the familiar argument that a return to the draft would bring America’s wars home to the citizenry and the prospect of their children being sent off to possible mutilation by IEDs or death would spark resistance. Wilkinson suggests that this underestimates the saturation of our society by militarism. He goes on:

“But does the new warfare even need the large battalions of expendable troops? Just as financial “engineering” has replaced industrial production as a means of wealth extraction, remote-control weapons deployment and mercenary subcontracting have largely replaced the mass armies that characterized U.S. and U.K. warfare in Korea and Vietnam. In this sense, warfare has become even more “corporate.” The fiction that wars of invasion and conquest are the result of state action is obsolete. The entire “national security” process has been fully depoliticized; in other words, the state is more clearly than ever a mere conduit for policies and practices whose origin and essential characteristics are those of boardroom strategic planning and marketing. The difference between global business and global warfare has, in fact, dissolved.

“This presents a serious cognitive problem for anyone trying to find the root of this poisonous plant in order to tear it from the ground that nurtures it. The military sustained by the draft was mimetic of the steel mill in Gary, Indiana, or the cotton plantation in the south? Today’s military operates like the headquarters of Microsoft or USX – the actual physical violence has been outsourced.”
Article: http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/12/23/thud-of-the-jackboot/


and what happens when these are the jobs that are available?

[SoNotHer]

http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s320x320/381970_10150364470169006_275545919005_8584243_1018 35922_n.jpg

[persiphone]

yep. i skipped walmart. i only got ONE thing at target.

[SoNotHer]

Is Target selling adult videos and sex kits now? ;-)

yep. i skipped walmart. i only got ONE thing at target.

[AtLast]

http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s320x320/381970_10150364470169006_275545919005_8584243_1018 35922_n.jpg

Absolutely!

I have thought a lot about the fact that we all are going to have change some things in order to really support the working and middle classes economically. As long as we buy like crazy from big box and large chains that import from countries like China, we contribute to large, publically traded corporations.

Then, there are the arguments about stores like WalMart bringing jobs into locales. And major Japanese auto producers do now have plants in the US and employ US workers.

It is a very complex balance, I think. I buy at independent businesses, but I live in a place near a major urban center, so I have choices. And I have made choices about this due to political ideology. I do pay a little more for things due to choosing the Mom & Pop businesses, but I am not raising a child any longer and only financially responsible for myself.

I hate it that solar panels were designed and developed in the US and now are only produced in other countries and sold back to us. Even if you want these made in the USA, forget it.

We do live in a global economy and do some of our own exporting. But, at the helm of trade, multi-national corporations hold the power. Yet, we don't want to give up less expensive products that frankly are most likely made by people in other countries paid very low wages and work in conditions that are inhumane. But, we keep buying these goods because they cost us less.

Now, with the wage disparity in the US, I don't see us changing this much. People look for bargains, or at least a lower price because the 98% does not have much disposible income and it has been shrinking.

There are many variables to look at about how we consume goods and how we can actually change things without harm to one or more segments of the kinds of work we do and where we do it. Just not simple.

[persiphone]

Is Target selling adult videos and sex kits now? ;-)

i dunno but i'll call them and ask ;) i'll have them send the reply to your PM addy :P

[persiphone]

Absolutely!

I have thought a lot about the fact that we all are going to have change some things in order to really support the working and middle classes economically. As long as we buy like crazy from big box and large chains that import from countries like China, we contribute to large, publically traded corporations.

Then, there are the arguments about stores like WalMart bringing jobs into locales. And major Japanese auto producers do now have plants in the US and employ US workers.

It is a very complex balance, I think. I buy at independent businesses, but I live in a place near a major urban center, so I have choices. And I have made choices about this due to political ideology. I do pay a little more for things due to choosing the Mom & Pop businesses, but I am not raising a child any longer and only financially responsible for myself.

I hate it that solar panels were designed and developed in the US and now are only produced in other countries and sold back to us. Even if you want these made in the USA, forget it.

We do live in a global economy and do some of our own exporting. But, at the helm of trade, multi-national corporations hold the power. Yet, we don't want to give up less expensive products that frankly are most likely made by people in other countries paid very low wages and work in conditions that are inhumane. But, we keep buying these goods because they cost us less.

Now, with the wage disparity in the US, I don't see us changing this much. People look for bargains, or at least a lower price because the 98% does not have much disposible income and it has been shrinking.

There are many variables to look at about how we consume goods and how we can actually change things without harm to one or more segments of the kinds of work we do and where we do it. Just not simple.


i've never had personal experience with this...BUT....i've known a few people who work in large companies where the old non chinese boss gets replaced with a new chinese boss and then the non chinese people under him/her get laid off and chinese workers are hired in their place. i've seen this happen quite a few times to friends of mine. i'm not sure what relevance this has if any i just thought it was interesting.

as for consumerism and chinese products....people have been ranting about buying American for decades now. but try actually doing it. it's near impossible. and the products on store shelves aren't the only things coming from China. for every one retail item there is ten times as many hidden products coming from China than the public is even aware of. Chinese honey (springs to mind from a different convo) comes here by the barrel full and it's not even legal. and we unwittingly buy it in plastic bears, cereals, and any processed food that claims to have honey in it because the labeling is all bullshit. we are drowning in much more Chinese imports than even we are aware of on the retail end.

[SoNotHer]

How 2011 became the year of compassion: OWS didn't just reject unfair aspects of our economic system. It reclaimed the idea of communal solidarity
By Rebecca Solnit

http://media.salon.com/2011/12/RTR2U4YE-460x307.jpg

Usually at year’s end, we’re supposed to look back at events just passed — and forward, in prediction mode, to the year to come. But just look around you! This moment is so extraordinary that it has hardly registered. People in thousands of communities across the United States and elsewhere are living in public, experimenting with direct democracy, calling things by their true names and obliging the media and politicians to do the same.

The breadth of this movement is one thing, its depth another. It has rejected not just the particulars of our economic system, but the whole set of moral and emotional assumptions on which it’s based. Take the pair shown in a photograph from Occupy Austin in Texas. The amiable-looking elderly woman is holding a sign whose computer-printed words say, “Money has stolen our vote.” The older man next to her with the baseball cap is holding a sign handwritten on cardboard that states, “We are our brothers’ keeper.”

The photo of the two of them offers just a peek into a single moment in the remarkable period we’re living through and the astonishing movement that’s drawn in… well, if not 99 percent of us, then a striking enough percentage: everyone from teen pop superstar Miley Cyrus with her Occupy-homage video to Alaska Yup’ik elder Esther Green ice-fishing and holding a sign that says “Yirqa Kuik” in big letters, with the translation — “occupy the river” — in little ones below.

The woman with the stolen-votes sign is referring to them. Her companion is talking about us, all of us, and our fundamental principles. His sign comes straight out of Genesis, a denial of what that competitive entrepreneur Cain said to God after foreclosing on his brother Abel’s life. He was not, he claimed, his brother’s keeper; we are not, he insisted, beholden to each other, but separate, isolated, each of us for ourselves.

Think of Cain as the first Social Darwinist and this Occupier in Austin as his opposite, claiming, no, our operating system should be love; we are all connected; we must take care of each other. And this movement, he’s saying, is about what the Argentinian uprising that began a decade ago, on December 19, 2001, called politica afectiva, the politics of affection.

If it’s a movement about love, it’s also about the money they so unjustly took, and continue to take, from us — and about the fact that, right now, money and love are at war with each other. After all, in the American heartland, people are beginning to be imprisoned for debt, while the Occupy movement is arguing for debt forgiveness, renegotiation and debt jubilees.

Sometimes love, or at least decency, wins. One morning late last month, 75-year-old Josephine Tolbert, who ran a daycare center from her modest San Francisco home, returned after dropping a child off at school only to find that she and the other children were locked out because she was behind in her mortgage payments. True Compass LLC, who bought her place in a short sale while she thought she was still negotiating with Bank of America, would not allow her back into her home of almost four decades, even to get her medicines or diapers for the children.

We demonstrated at her home and at True Compass’s shabby offices while they hid within, and students from Occupy San Francisco State University demonstrated outside a True Compass-owned restaurant on behalf of this African-American grandmother. Thanks to this solidarity and the media attention it garnered, Tolbert has collected her keys, moved back in and is renegotiating the terms of her mortgage.

Hundreds of other foreclosure victims are now being defended by local branches of the Occupy movement, from West Oakland to North Minneapolis. As New York writer, filmmaker and Occupier Astra Taylor puts it,

Not only does the occupation of abandoned foreclosed homes connect the dots between Wall Street and Main Street, it can also lead to swift and tangible victories, something movements desperately need for momentum to be maintained. The banks, it seems, are softer targets than one might expect because so many cases are rife with legal irregularities and outright criminality. With one in five homes facing foreclosure and filings showing no sign of slowing down in the next few years, the number of people touched by the mortgage crisis — whether because they have lost their homes or because their homes are now underwater — truly boggles the mind.”

If what’s been happening locally and globally has some of the characteristics of an uprising, then there has never been one quite so pervasive — from the scientists holding an Occupy sign in Antarctica to Occupy presences in places as far-flung as New Zealand and Australia, São Paulo, Frankfurt, London, Toronto, Los Angeles and Reykjavik. And don’t forget the tiniest places, either. The other morning at the Oakland docks for the West Coast port shutdown demonstrations, I met three members of Occupy Amador County, a small rural area in California’s Sierra Nevada. Its largest town, Jackson, has a little over 4,000 inhabitants, which hasn’t stopped it from having regular outdoor Friday evening Occupy meetings.


More at -

http://www.salon.com/2011/12/22/how_2011_became_the_year_of_compassion/singleton/

[AtLast]

http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2011/12/occupy_the_rose_parade_given_p.php

Occupy L.A.
"Occupy The Rose Parade" Given Permission To March At The End With The Crazies

Article makes a good point- thinking about the mega-buck floats in this parade yearly sponsored by big corporations.

Any thoughts?

[SoNotHer]

While I understand the operatic appeal of this, I don't know that I believe that most parade watchers are really interested in reevaluating their political ideologies. I think they just want to see a parade. It also occurs to me that at some point I would like to see an America more focused on substance than fluff. I'm not sure that making your presence known and shown at the latter is very effective.

Occupying homes about to be foreclosed and small stores on the brink of bankruptcy and frankly small farms that are struggling to survive makes more sense to me. Two things I would like to see OWS be more prominently -

1) The best of America through volunteerism, activism and civil change.

2) The next of America through exactly the same.

I volunteered in DC with a queer group called Burgundy Crescent which matched queer-identified volunteers with a wide variety of volunteer projects within and outside our community. I never regretted a single experience, and I thought we do more good work and fostered more goodwill than anything I had ever participated in.

I think OWS could do the same and create goodwill and effect real change by ensuring that people stay in their homes, their businesses and on their farms. This kind of action is immediate, positive and effective. What do you think?

http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2011/12/occupy_the_rose_parade_given_p.php

Occupy L.A.
"Occupy The Rose Parade" Given Permission To March At The End With The Crazies

Article makes a good point- thinking about the mega-buck floats in this parade yearly sponsored by big corporations.

Any thoughts?

[dykeumentary]

While I understand the operatic appeal of this, I don't know that I believe that most parade watchers are really interested in reevaluating their political ideologies. I think they just want to see a parade. It also occurs to me that at some point I would like to see an America more focused on substance than fluff. I'm not sure that making your presence known and shown at the latter is very effective.

Occupying homes about to be foreclosed and small stores on the brink of bankruptcy and frankly small farms that are struggling to survive makes more sense to me. Two things I would like to see OWS be more prominently -

1) The best of America through volunteerism, activism and civil change.

2) The next of America through exactly the same.

I volunteered in DC with a queer group called Burgundy Crescent which matched queer-identified volunteers with a wide variety of volunteer projects within and outside our community. I never regretted a single experience, and I thought we do more good work and fostered more goodwill than anything I had ever participated in.

I think OWS could do the same and create goodwill and effect real change by ensuring that people stay in their homes, their businesses and on their farms. This kind of action is immediate, positive and effective. What do you think?

I agree with you!
I am glad that the actions of the autumn got the public's attention, but I believe that the changes we all need will only come from a MOVEMENT, and that takes a lot of community relationships. I think these modern times are being propelled by sound bite and spectacle, but I have been part of successful community organizing, and it took a lot of time, long conversations, and visible and invisible commitment to the long term.
Kind of like any healthy relationship.

I am happy to see the actions against foreclosures and in support of small businesses and farms. I think they will prove successful tactics.

[Slater]

I’ve been mulling over the discussion of 3rd party candidates but haven’t had time to comment until now. I certainly think we would benefit from having more than just two parties/candidates to choose from. I do, however, think that most 3rd party Presidential undertakings are largely vanity campaigns (e.g. Nader in 2000) that effect very little positive change and can be damaging in a bunch of ways. They are damaging in that they help perpetuate the notion that 3rd party candidates are not (and by extension, never will be) viable candidates. But they are also damaging because, you know what, the lesser of two evils can still be a hell of a lot better than the greater of two evils.

I know a lot of other factors contributed to the results in 2000 (suspect counting in Florida, the archaic Electoral College system by which a candidate can get more votes and still lose, etc), but none of that would have mattered had Nader not been on the ticket. Gore would have won the state conclusively, even with only a portion of Nader’s 97,000+ Florida votes.

With Gore in the White House, we don’t go to war in Iraq, and those thousands of lives and trillions of dollars would not have been needlessly squandered. With Gore in the White House maybe 9/11 is averted (the outgoing Clinton administration warned the incoming Bushies that Al-Qaeda was where they needed to focus their attention, the Bushies said, basically, "Fuck off.") but even if it isn't, do we honestly think Gore would have torched the subsequent global goodwill as quickly and thoroughly as Bush did? Or that Gore would have so shamelessly exploited the tragedy to militarize law enforcement, justify torture, etc? And those are just a few things off the top. Would the EPA have been defanged, or the response to Hurricane Katrina been so anemic, or the home loan mess/stock market crisis been handled the way it was?

I think 3rd party Presidential candidates can play a valuable role even if they are not viable, as pot-stirrers. They can put questions on the table, or in some debates put them directly to the other candidates, that the two major parties would prefer to avoid and that the corporate media is uninterested in asking. But once that role has played itself out, they need to step out of the race unless there truly is so little difference between the two major party candidates that it literally does not matter which one wins (and when has that been true??). To remain in the race for the hell of it strikes me as ego and/or as a way to pad the future book deals and appearance fees.

As I said, I think we would benefit from have viable 3rd (and 4th) party Presidential candidates. But we are far from that being realistic, and we are moving further from it, not closer. Campaign finance has always been a monumental hurdle for candidates outside the 2 parties, at least for those who are not billionaires, and that situation has only worsened with the easing of restrictions on corporate donations to campaigns. The Electoral College structure itself bolsters up the two party system and if no one candidate receives a majority of Electoral College votes (a plurality is not sufficient) then the House of Representatives choose a President. So a 3rd party candidate would have to win the EC outright, not just get more votes than any of the other candidates, because realistically the House is going to choose based on party affiliations rather than who received the most votes. That doesn't even address the fact that if an outsider somehow managed to win the Presidency, they would have few if any allies in the House and Senate and their ability to get things done with be severely compromised.

So before we start getting too excited about the possibility of 3rd party Presidential candidates, I think we need to look at some serious, far-reaching campaign and election reform, and we need to focus on getting 3rd, 4th, and 5th party candidates into the House and Senate in noticeable numbers. That would yield immediate results because then neither of the two parties could count on gaining clear control of the House and Senate and they might be forced to engage in actual governing. Once those pieces are in place, I think we can start talking about a real 3rd party Presidency.

[Corkey]

Dylan, MSNBC had one guy on, wish I could remember his name, independent and supported all the things I am for, like gmo lgbtqi rights and environmental regulations. But for the life of me I can't remember his name or his party. It's CRS folks, don't get old...

[Corkey]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/12/rocky-anderson-radical-third-way

Found it! Rockey Anderson.

[SoNotHer]

Good article and info, Corkey. Thank you!

"In the next year, he'll have to harness both that experience and savvy for the task he has now set himself: launching a new political party, the Justice party, and running for president in 2012.

His agenda is a familiar one on the left. Broadly speaking, he wants to break the hold of corrupting corporate influence on the two main parties and give a voice to ordinary working people. It also chimes with the general thrust of the Occupy movement, even though the latter has steered clear of engagement with electoral politics."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/12/rocky-anderson-radical-third-way

Found it! Rockey Anderson.

[AtLast]

I’ve been mulling over the discussion of 3rd party candidates but haven’t had time to comment until now. I certainly think we would benefit from having more than just two parties/candidates to choose from. I do, however, think that most 3rd party Presidential undertakings are largely vanity campaigns (e.g. Nader in 2000) that effect very little positive change and can be damaging in a bunch of ways. They are damaging in that they help perpetuate the notion that 3rd party candidates are not (and by extension, never will be) viable candidates. But they are also damaging because, you know what, the lesser of two evils can still be a hell of a lot better than the greater of two evils.

I know a lot of other factors contributed to the results in 2000 (suspect counting in Florida, the archaic Electoral College system by which a candidate can get more votes and still lose, etc), but none of that would have mattered had Nader not been on the ticket. Gore would have won the state conclusively, even with only a portion of Nader’s 97,000+ Florida votes.

With Gore in the White House, we don’t go to war in Iraq, and those thousands of lives and trillions of dollars would not have been needlessly squandered. With Gore in the White House maybe 9/11 is averted (the outgoing Clinton administration warned the incoming Bushies that Al-Qaeda was where they needed to focus their attention, the Bushies said, basically, "Fuck off.") but even if it isn't, do we honestly think Gore would have torched the subsequent global goodwill as quickly and thoroughly as Bush did? Or that Gore would have so shamelessly exploited the tragedy to militarize law enforcement, justify torture, etc? And those are just a few things off the top. Would the EPA have been defanged, or the response to Hurricane Katrina been so anemic, or the home loan mess/stock market crisis been handled the way it was?

I think 3rd party Presidential candidates can play a valuable role even if they are not viable, as pot-stirrers. They can put questions on the table, or in some debates put them directly to the other candidates, that the two major parties would prefer to avoid and that the corporate media is uninterested in asking. But once that role has played itself out, they need to step out of the race unless there truly is so little difference between the two major party candidates that it literally does not matter which one wins (and when has that been true??). To remain in the race for the hell of it strikes me as ego and/or as a way to pad the future book deals and appearance fees.

As I said, I think we would benefit from have viable 3rd (and 4th) party Presidential candidates. But we are far from that being realistic, and we are moving further from it, not closer. Campaign finance has always been a monumental hurdle for candidates outside the 2 parties, at least for those who are not billionaires, and that situation has only worsened with the easing of restrictions on corporate donations to campaigns. The Electoral College structure itself bolsters up the two party system and if no one candidate receives a majority of Electoral College votes (a plurality is not sufficient) then the House of Representatives choose a President. So a 3rd party candidate would have to win the EC outright, not just get more votes than any of the other candidates, because realistically the House is going to choose based on party affiliations rather than who received the most votes. That doesn't even address the fact that if an outsider somehow managed to win the Presidency, they would have few if any allies in the House and Senate and their ability to get things done with be severely compromised.

So before we start getting too excited about the possibility of 3rd party Presidential candidates, I think we need to look at some serious, far-reaching campaign and election reform, and we need to focus on getting 3rd, 4th, and 5th party candidates into the House and Senate in noticeable numbers. That would yield immediate results because then neither of the two parties could count on gaining clear control of the House and Senate and they might be forced to engage in actual governing. Once those pieces are in place, I think we can start talking about a real 3rd party Presidency.

I have often thought about if Gore had won, we would not have gone into Iraq. Imagine....

But what you say about serious election reform is the number one thing that has to happen for any 3rd (or 4th, etc.) party to emerge and become viable. Our campaign funding as it is, especially post the Citizens United decision, must be changed in order for this to happen. It can only change with an amendment to the Constitution and that is a long haul plus, think of the lobbying that would go on to stop such an amendment. The 1 & 2% do not want such reform because they would lose the strong hold they have on politics. Bought and paid for.

You get right to what really hinders our being able to assemble a 3rd party that could actually build momentum. Thanks.

[Truly Scrumptious]

75 Years Ago Today, the First Occupy ...a note from Michael Moore

Friday, December 30th, 2011

Friends,

On this day, December 30th, in 1936 -- 75 years ago today -- hundreds of workers at the General Motors factories in Flint, Michigan, took over the facilities and occupied them for 44 days. My uncle was one of them.

The workers couldn't take the abuse from the corporation any longer. Their working conditions, the slave wages, no vacation, no health care, no overtime -- it was do as you're told or get tossed onto the curb.

So on the day before New Year's Eve, emboldened by the recent re-election of Franklin Roosevelt, they sat down on the job and refused to leave.

They began their Occupation in the dead of winter. GM cut off the heat and water to the buildings. The police tried to raid the factories several times, to no avail. Even the National Guard was called in.

But the workers held their ground, and after 44 days, the corporation gave in and recognized the UAW as the representative of the workers. It was a monumental historical moment as no other major company had ever been brought to its knees by their employees. Workers were given a raise to a dollar an hour -- and successful strikes and occupations spread like wildfire across the country. Finally, the working class would be able to do things like own their own homes, send their children to college, have time off and see a doctor without having to worry about paying. In Flint, Michigan, on this day in 1936, the middle class was born.

Full article here:
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/mike-friends-blog/75-years-ago-today-first-occupy

[AtLast]

Wondering about how important it might be to block as many GOP candidates from office on the way to building a viable 3rd Party? That way, at least less damage will be done to many of the core issues for the OWS movement.

Also involvement in local politics as a building block toward this aim.

Just thinking about this- one for actual ways to see an actual path created that will speak to Occupy issues and solutions.

There has to be a way to bring this movement to a place that effects real change.

[Cin]

http://www.alternet.org/news/153613/occupiers_from_around_the_country_descend_on_iowa_ caucuses

Occupiers from Around the Country Descend on Iowa Caucuses
The "people's caucus" is also going on in Des Moines.

A good friend of mine, Aaron Jorgensen-Briggs, gave the opening welcome for the People's Caucus on Tuesday night. The following was his statement (as seen on C-Span):

Friends, neighbors, members of the press, visiting Occupy delegates, honored guests, welcome. I’d like to begin with some words from a great American leader of the past. He wrote:

'I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money-power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.'

These words of President Abraham Lincoln, in 1864, resonate loud and clear tonight, in Des Moines, Iowa, in 2011.
We have gathered here tonight because the political system in the United States no longer represents the values of the American public. Just as President Lincoln predicted, the money-power of the country now resides in the hands of a tiny portion of the population, the 1%.

We are here tonight to overthrow money-power with people power. We are here tonight as citizens and patriots to preserve our democracy from the corrupting influence of Wall Street and big corporations. We are here tonight to raise our voices in defense of the American dream. We are here tonight to restore the American political system and American society, to make it human-centered, not profit-centered. We are here tonight to follow through on the vision of our founders and the vision of the great American social movements of the past, the movements that ended slavery, gave women the right to vote, ended racial segregation in our communities, established safe working conditions and good wages for hard-working Americans and their families. We are here tonight, because our political leaders are no longer able to lead us.

Now is the time for us to lead, for the people of the United States, the 99%, to rise up, and restore America, to recreate it, truly, as a nation of opportunity, equality, and justice. Honored guests, members of the 99%, we are here tonight because of you. 'Join Us!' we cried, and you have answered. And for that, we thank you, and we bid you welcome to the first-in-the-nation People's Caucus!

[Cin]

Occupying the Conventions? How Protests Will Change Politics-as-Usual in 2012

Four years after the moment of "hope and change," the 99% is set to alter the dynamics of presidential elections.

http://www.alternet.org/story/153575/occupying_the_conventions_how_protests_will_change _politics-
as-usual_in_2012

Occupy the Caucus: 12 Arrested (Including 14-Year-Old Girl), Demonstrators Say They Will Participate, Not 'Disrupt'
http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews/article/756166/occupy_the_caucus%3A_12_arrested_%28including_14-year-old_girl%29%2C_demonstrators_say_they_will_partici pate%2C_not_%27disrupt%27/

[SoNotHer]

U.S. (Hearts) Progressives

http://www.commondreams.org/sites/commondreams.org/files/imce-images/greed.jpg

Americans remain ambivalent about both socialism and capitalism - roughly split, with each end of the political spectrum leaning the way you'd expect - but more approve of the term “progressive” than any other political label, according to a new poll from the Pew Center. That's a hopeful 67%-22%.

http://www.commondreams.org/sites/commondreams.org/files/imce-images/labels_12-28-11-11.png

Taken from - http://www.commondreams.org/further/2011/12/29-0

[Cin]

U.S. (Hearts) Progressives

http://www.commondreams.org/sites/commondreams.org/files/imce-images/greed.jpg

Americans remain ambivalent about both socialism and capitalism - roughly split, with each end of the political spectrum leaning the way you'd expect - but more approve of the term “progressive” than any other political label, according to a new poll from the Pew Center. That's a hopeful 67%-22%.

http://www.commondreams.org/sites/commondreams.org/files/imce-images/labels_12-28-11-11.png

Taken from - http://www.commondreams.org/further/2011/12/29-0
I'm having trouble seeing the hopeful part when more than twice as many people in the U.S. see as positive conservative politics over socialist ones. I have nothing against conservative and liberal or any other persuasion mentioned in the poll as an ideology. However, it is clear to me that there is a connection between the conservative politics of smaller government and the privatization of prisons, public education, foster care, the military, etc. which has led to a country (dare I say world) owned and run by corporations.

Corporations don't have allegiances to countries. They own governments; governments don't control them. Corporations are against America. They are against freedom. They are destroying the infrastructure of the United States, the middle class, education and the economy as well as our environment. Why don't I hear people say stuff like that when they talk about what is anti american? Because truly I believe that the behavior of corporations run by socially conservative minded people is destroying our country. Socialism isn't anti American. Conservative/liberal politics that renders government for the people, by the people and of the people impotent is anti American.

So called liberal politicians are liberal in name only. They are all owned by corporate America. It is safe to say that most people involved in the corporate world are social conservatives. Their financial actions, the ones that have pretty much destroyed the world economy and made the government pick up the tab, make it difficult to see them as fiscally conservative. The humongous and grossly unfair tax breaks they take that leave our government floundering make it even harder to call them fiscally conservative. They are, however, quite fiscally conservative when it comes to giving anything back to their government. And they like the idea of fiscal conservatism by the government toward the 99%. And they love, love, love, even adore, social conservatism. Which translates into mucho austerity measures for the 99%

But according to this poll most Americans still don't get it. That doesn't feel very hopeful. But then there have been some hopeful things this past year. I guess I'll focus on those.

One more thing comes to mind when looking at this poll. The percentages are very confusing to me. Ideologically speaking, progressivism is generally believed to be in direct opposition to conservatism, so how can 62% of Americans view conservatism positively while 67% view progressivism positively? That would mean a percentage of people view both conservative and progressive ideology in a positive light. That's like saying that a percentage of people believe in both a woman's right to choose and criminalizing abortion. Odd.

[SoNotHer]

A constitutional amendment and petition. Signed and now shared.

http://sanders.senate.gov/petition/?uid=f1c2660f-54b9-4193-86a4-ec2c39342c6c

Sen. Bernie Sanders has proposed a constitutional amendment that would overturn the Supreme Court decision in a case called Citizens United vs. FEC.

G9qZZVqSQdo

The Saving American Democracy Amendment states that:

- Corporations are not persons with constitutional rights equal to real people.

- Corporations are subject to regulation by the people.

- Corporations may not make campaign contributions or any election expenditures.

- Congress and states have the power to regulate campaign finances.

[atomiczombie]

Occupy Wall Street 2011: A Year in Revolt

http://occupywallst.org/article/2011-year-revolt/

Great article recapping the birth of the movement! :)

[AtLast]

A constitutional amendment and petition. Signed and now shared.

http://sanders.senate.gov/petition/?uid=f1c2660f-54b9-4193-86a4-ec2c39342c6c

Sen. Bernie Sanders has proposed a constitutional amendment that would overturn the Supreme Court decision in a case called Citizens United vs. FEC.

G9qZZVqSQdo

The Saving American Democracy Amendment states that:

- Corporations are not persons with constitutional rights equal to real people.

- Corporations are subject to regulation by the people.

- Corporations may not make campaign contributions or any election expenditures.

- Congress and states have the power to regulate campaign finances.

This is critical to ever getting our election processes "for the people and by the people." We have to get private $ out of our elections!

[Cin]

7 Places the 99% Will Fight Back Hard in 2012

With a new year comes new chances for change--and we have some guesses as to where we'll see some exciting actions in 2012.
January 2, 2012

2011 was the year of activism, of uprising, of the protester. But the new year is coming, and with it a chance to write a new narrative.

The demands of working people in the US and around the world haven't yet been met, and there's still a need for the same energy and outrage on the issues of jobs, income and wealth inequality, home foreclosures, working people's rights to organize, and of course, Wall Street's crimes.

So, while we hesitate to make predictions for victories and political outcomes, we do have some guesses as to where we'll see some exciting activism in 2012.

In some cases, the plans are already being laid for big spring and summer actions (and even fall, with the presidential election fast approaching). In other realms, we haven't heard anything definitive, but the conditions are certainly ripe for a big move by the 99%.

After all, social movements aren't built in a few months. They take years of planning, new and escalating tactics, and the occasional great leap forward. We saw that leap in 2011—now it's time to take the next step in 2012.

Read on for seven places where working people's fight for justice should erupt over the next year.

1. Iowa Caucuses

The first major political event of 2012 will be the Iowa caucuses, where residents of the chilly rural state will meet to decide which Republican candidate should represent their party in the national election.

But according to Mother Jones' Gavin Aronsen, Occupy Iowa supporters have already held their own People's Caucus. They broke out into groups similar to the preference groups that occur at the real Iowa caucuses—but rather than choosing the candidate they want to win, they chose a candidate most deserving of having their headquarters occupied.

The winner? Barack Obama, with Mitt Romney and Ron Paul in close second and third.

So far, the only disruption of the caucus itself is a possible plan for people to vote “no preference” as a protest, but actions like mic-checking candidates (Newt Gingrich and Michele Bachmann have already been recipients of this action) and peacefully taking over headquarters and events are in the works, and protesters have already been going through direct action trainings. In just a few days, we'll see the results.

2. Wisconsin

Wisconsin union members and their supporters kicked off the U.S.'s year of action last February with an occupation of their capitol building after Gov. Scott Walker pushed a bill taking public workers' right to collective bargaining away. Fourteen State Senate Democrats left the state to avoid voting on the bill, and Wisconsinites slept outdoors in the cold when locked out of the building, and showed up day after day until Walker found a way to force the bill through anyway.

One of the big stories of 2011 then became the recall campaign against the State Senate Republicans who voted for the bill. Though Democrats didn't succeed in taking back the Senate, they did oust two Republicans—and created enough momentum to start a recall campaign against Walker himself, which gathered 507,000 signatures on recall petitions in four weeks. (540,208 are required to move the recall forward).

So recalling Walker seems very likely to be on the agenda this year. In addition, on February 17, the anniversary of the occupation of the capitol, United Students Against Sweatshops is holding a conference in Madison celebrating 15 years of organizing—and planning a big action to celebrate Wisconsinites' fight for workers' rights.

3. University of California

Tuition hikes and student debt have been touchstones for the Occupy movement, and while campus-based activism is not new in the U.S., the way the occupiers have linked their complaints with the larger issue of growing Wall Street and corporate power may be a new chapter for student organizing.

Nowhere has the new wave of student activism been more prominent than the University of California system, where students have long been fighting tuition hikes and privatization. UC-Berkeley students were beaten and UC-Davis students pepper-sprayed during peaceful campus protests, but they stood firm and continued their fight.

“What’s at the heart of the privatization,” UC-Berkeley graduate student Megan Wachpress told Josh Eidelson at The Nation recently, “is a bringing in of the market logic, and the kind of exploitations and the inequalities associated with the market…into parts of life and relationships that we used to see as parts of our responsibility as co-citizens.”

The universities are quiet for now during winter break, but student activists are planning weeks of action across the California public university system, and thinking of ways to make their fight a national one—perhaps by connecting to the burgeoning movement against student debt.

4. Charlotte, North Carolina

The Democratic National Convention's selection of Charlotte has already angered some party supporters—the party that relies on union support chose for its gathering the state with the smallest union density in the country, and the city that is the headquarters of Bank of America (and, until it was bought out by Wells Fargo, Wachovia Bank as well).

Like campuses, party national conventions are always sites of activism, often in the post 9/11 years, skilfully contained by protest pens and “free speech zones”. What might make this year different?

Obviously, the answer is Occupy.

Occupy groups are present not just in Charlotte, but in Raleigh, Asheville, Greensboro and Chapel Hill, and now it looks as if the city is moving preemptively to boot the protesters out before the estimated 50,000 visitors come in for the conference. The Huffington Post reported:

“On Oct. 27, the Charlotte city manager released a draft ordinance that makes camping on public property a 'public nuisance' and would prohibit 'noxious substances,' padlocks and other camping equipment that city officials fear could impede traffic and create public safety issues.”

Lawyers are already vowing to challenge the constitutionality of such an ordinance, saying it may violate the First Amendment. In any case, it's clear that Charlotte's government is expecting clashes with activists. The question will be whether they can successfully make protest stand out from the actions of years past (and avoid the endless Chicago '68 comparisons).

5. G-8 Summit in Chicago

Speaking of Chicago, that city's officials announced this week that Daley Plaza would be open to protesters who want to gather there and speak out against the G-8 and NATO summits this May. That's after announcements of increased fines and crackdowns against protesters drew criticism, and the city's police superintendent, according to NPR, called the Occupy protests (and busts thereof) a “dry run” for what they expect during the summits.

A Facebook page is already calling for the summits to be Occupied, with 858 “Likes,” and according to the Chicago Tribune, tens of thousands of protesters are expected. It's the first time since 1977 that the NATO and G-8 summits will be held at the same time, and they're expected to discuss Afghanistan war policy as well as the global economic issues that are the usual focus of the G-8.

No permits have been granted yet for those who are seeking official permission to march and rally, but Occupy protesters at least haven't been stopped in the past by the lack of permits. But a beefed up police presence—including deputized officers from other agencies—will be looking out for Occupy-style tactics.

6. New York

Wall Street saw several marches in 2011, before the occupiers took over Zuccotti Park. It's not a stretch to predict that the financial district hasn't seen the last of raucous protest, civil disobedience, or dance parties.

But New York City is also the site of one of the most-watched home occupations, the house at 702 Vermont St. in East New York, where organizers from community groups and Occupy Wall Street liberated a home that had been foreclosed upon by Bank of America and moved a homeless family in. So far, they have succeeded in holding that house, and the next step will be putting more families in foreclosed homes, as well as defending families against foreclosure.

And finally, the City University of New York has seen battles second only to University of California's over tuition hikes, student debt, and the privatization of public education. New York is also home to the working group that founded the Student Debt Refusal Pledge.

The loss of the encampment was a blow to Occupy Wall Street, but the test in 2012 will be whether they can successfully maintain momentum on multiple levels, through multiple types of action.

7. Ohio

Possibly the biggest win for the working class in the US this year was Ohio's overturning of SB5, the anti-union bill that Governor John Kasich pushed through last year. The bill, stripping collective bargaining rights from 360,000 public sector employees, so angered working Ohioans that more people actually came out in an off-year election to vote for a “Citizens' Veto” of SB5 than voted to make Kasich governor in 2010.

The coalition, We Are Ohio, that gathered 1.3 million petition signatures to get the repeal on the ballot, isn't ready to quit yet, either. As Henry Gomez at the Cleveland Plain Dealer noted, “Without question the results will be viewed as a momentum-builder for Democrats nationwide and should encourage President Barack Obama.”

“As appealing as the other states might appear on paper, none offers the head start Democrats have here,” he continued.

And Ohio, being one of the largest swing states, has the power to shift an election. It also has a working population still struggling, with high unemployment that dates back before the financial crisis to the predations of deindustrialization and offshoring.

Senator Sherrod Brown, up for reelection in 2012 as well, is a vocal advocate for his state's working people. He too might benefit from the backlash against Kasich and his policies, and from the solid organizing work of We Are Ohio. Asked about the implications of the SB5 vote for 2012, Brown told a conference call, "What it means for 2012 is that the public wants to know, 'Whose side are you on?'"

[Cin]

Interesting and very informative article. Especially since tax season is upon us, (not that there's any tax help here, just clarity regarding the ways we get screwed.) It's from 2011 but still apropos.

http://wweek.com/portland/article-17350-9_things_the_rich_dont_want_you_to_know_about_taxe s.html

[Cin]

esJ4Up1qyiU

[Cin]

‘Wild Old Women’ Close San Francisco Bank Of America Branch
January 5, 2012 3:24 PM

http://cbssanfran.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/occupy-women.jpg?w=300

SAN FRANCISCO (KCBS) – It was a slow-moving Occupy Wall Street protest, but it was an effective one. A dozen senior citizens calling themselves “the wild old women” succeeded in closing a Bank of America branch in Bernal Heights Thursday.

The women, aged 69 to 82, who live at the senior home up Mission street from the Bernal Heights Bank of America branch, decided to hold their own protest by doing what they called a “run on the bank.”

Tita Caldwell, 80, who led the charge of women with walkers and wheelchairs, said that they’re demanding the bank lower fees, pay higher taxes, and stop foreclosing on, and evicting, homeowners.

”We’re upset about what the banks are doing, particularly in our neighborhood and neighboring areas, in evicting people and foreclosing on their homes,” said Caldwell. “We’re upset because the banks are raising their rates because it really affects seniors who are on a fixed income.”

As they arrived, Bank of America closed and locked its doors, to the surprise and delight of the elderly protestors, who said that they had no intention of storming the bank.

The women waved signs, but didn’t march or chant, with one woman on supplemental oxygen adding that the group was too old for that.

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/01/05/wild-old-women-close-san-francisco-bank-of-america-branch/

[MsMerrick]

Occupy by the Elders.. (http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2012/01/occupy_geriatrics_seniors_in_w.php)
Ok Miss Tick beat me to it but.. another take, same story

[AtLast]

‘Wild Old Women’ Close San Francisco Bank Of America Branch
January 5, 2012 3:24 PM

http://cbssanfran.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/occupy-women.jpg?w=300

SAN FRANCISCO (KCBS) – It was a slow-moving Occupy Wall Street protest, but it was an effective one. A dozen senior citizens calling themselves “the wild old women” succeeded in closing a Bank of America branch in Bernal Heights Thursday.

The women, aged 69 to 82, who live at the senior home up Mission street from the Bernal Heights Bank of America branch, decided to hold their own protest by doing what they called a “run on the bank.”

Tita Caldwell, 80, who led the charge of women with walkers and wheelchairs, said that they’re demanding the bank lower fees, pay higher taxes, and stop foreclosing on, and evicting, homeowners.

”We’re upset about what the banks are doing, particularly in our neighborhood and neighboring areas, in evicting people and foreclosing on their homes,” said Caldwell. “We’re upset because the banks are raising their rates because it really affects seniors who are on a fixed income.”

As they arrived, Bank of America closed and locked its doors, to the surprise and delight of the elderly protestors, who said that they had no intention of storming the bank.

The women waved signs, but didn’t march or chant, with one woman on supplemental oxygen adding that the group was too old for that.

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/01/05/wild-old-women-close-san-francisco-bank-of-america-branch/

LOVE IT!!!

[ruffryder]

Word of the year for 2011 - OCCUPY

[AtLast]

Damn, I wish my Mom was still alive for the B of A take over- she would have been right in there. Also, I'm thinking about how this is probably a very personal thing for that group of elders- they went through the Great Depression. Their generation sure has a lot to say about what is going on today!

[SoNotHer]

Signed and shared -

http://pol.moveon.org/bankfraud/?rc=homepage

Investigate Wall Street Bank Fraud

The greed and fraud of Wall Street banks caused the loss of millions of homes and billions of dollars in the housing crash.

Now we need President Obama to take a strong stance for homeowners, and for accountability, by opening a federal investigation into big bank fraud.

This is something the president can do on his own right now, without fighting Congress. And millions of Americans can be helped if banks are held responsible and forced to compensate homeowners for their wrongdoing.

A compiled petition with your individual comment will be presented to President Obama.

[Cin]

Why Now? What's Next? Naomi Klein and Yotam Marom in Conversation About Occupy Wall Street

http://www.thenation.com/article/165530/why-now-whats-next-naomi-klein-and-yotam-marom-conversation-about-occupy-wall-street

[atomiczombie]

The barricades are down and tents are back up in Zuccotti.

[SoNotHer]

Great video, message and petition worth a couple minutes of your time. Signed and shared.

http://googlequitthechamber.org/video/

ORPUdRL6AiA

[SoNotHer]

Tell Congress to support The United States Call Center Worker and Consumer Protection Bill

With American families struggling, it's time for companies to bring good jobs home. Foreign call centers not only ship jobs abroad, but they endanger our confidential personal information because they operate without US data regulation. You can tell lawmakers to support the US Call Center Bill. The Bill would build jobs in America by:

Creating a customers' right to know - Ending the secrecy about call center locations, so outsourcers and offshorers can't hide anymore. Forcing companies that outsource abroad to return federal funding - Because our hard earned tax-dollars shouldn't go to support corporations that ship American jobs to foreign countries. Giving you the right to be transferred to a US-based operator.

But we need your support. Members of Congress will only sign on if they hear our voices loud and clear. Use our simple tool to send a message to your US Representative. In order to address your message to the appropriate recipient, we need to identify where you are.

http://action.cwa-union.org/c/1314/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=3349&tag=20120113taf

[AtLast]

As I follow the election year politics- it is clear to me that even within the GOP, the Occupy message concerning income disparity is getting through. Social movements do make a difference! Takes more time than most of us care for, but seeds get planted and do begin to grow.

[Cin]

As I follow the election year politics- it is clear to me that even within the GOP, the Occupy message concerning income disparity is getting through. Social movements do make a difference! Takes more time than most of us care for, but seeds get planted and do begin to grow.

I do agree. Social movements can make a difference. It's just that until it is fiscally feasible as well as prudent and not just professional suicide for any politician to go against the super rich, I don't see us getting anything but lip service. It's not like they just noticed the income disparity. It's not an accident.

[SoNotHer]

List of Food Lion and other stores to be shuttered
By The Associated Press | Associated Press – Thu, Jan 12, 2012

Belgian supermarket chain Delhaize Group said Thursday it will close 113 Food Lion stores as it struggles with tight consumer spending and increased competition. It is also shuttering its Bloom brand, closing seven stores and converting 42 others to Food Lions. Six Bottom Dollar Food stores will be closed and 22 others turned into Food Lions. A distribution center in Tennessee also will close.

About 4,900 jobs will be lost.

— Florida: Food Lion stores in Alachua, Gainesville, Fernandina Beach, Fruit Cove, Jacksonville (12), Macclenny, Middleburg, Orange Park, Saint Augustine (3), New Smyrna Beach, Ormond Beach and Port Orange.

— Georgia: Food Lion stores in College Park, Conyers, Dallas, Douglasville, Fayetteville, Gainesville, Jefferson, Jonesboro, Lawrenceville, Marietta, Newnan (2), Evans, Martinez (2), Chatsworth, Fort Oglethorpe, Rossville, Trenton, Waycross, Macon (2), Warner Robins (2), Garden City, Rincon, Savannah (2) and Carrollton.

— Kentucky: Food Lion stores in Dry Ridge, Cynthiana, Danville, Morehead, Paris, Stanford and Radcliff.

— Maryland: A Bloom store in Walkersville.

— North Carolina: A Bottom Dollar store in Mooresville; Food Lion stores in Hendersonville, Weaverville and Cary.

— Pennsylvania: Food Lion stores in Shippensburg and Sinking Spring.

— South Carolina: Food Lion stores in Moncks Corner, Mount Pleasant (2), Fort Mill, Newberry, Winnsboro, Anderson, Greenville, Greer, Inman, Laurens, Spartanburg (2) and Hilton Head Island.

— Tennessee: Food Lion stores in Athens, Chattanooga (6), Cleveland, Hixson, Clinton, Crossville, Knoxville, Maryville, Morristown, Sevierville, Clarksville, Hendersonville, Lewisburg, Murfreesboro (2), Old Hickory, Smyrna, Sparta, Greeneville and Johnson City.

— Virginia: Bloom stores in Annandale, Ashburn, Fairfax, Herndon, Leesburg, Woodbridge; Bottom Dollar Food stores in Alexandria, Newport News (2), Portsmouth and Virginia Beach; Food Lion stores in Richmond (2), Appomattox, Lynchburg, Radford, Roanoke and Bristol.

— West Virginia: A Food Lion store in Elkins.


Here the announcement of the stores to be closed -

http://d1pmybhtyfsbgv.cloudfront.net/Assets/Docs/corporate/Delhaize_America_Store_Closings.v-2-1-2948-0.pdf :

[Cin]

The Movement to Overturn Citizens United Takes Form
Wednesday 18 January 2012
by: Mike Ludwig, Truthout | Report

As the 2012 elections heat up, Occupiers and activists across the country are embracing the growing public outrage over attack ads, super PACs and limitless corporate campaign spending. Now, with the help of reform groups, a national movement to challenge the corporate influence on American democracy could be coming to a courthouse, city hall or ballot box near you.

The action begins this weekend. About 150 protests and occupations are planned across the country on Friday and Saturday to mark the two-year anniversary of the Supreme Court's ruling on Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission that unleashed a flood of corporate spending in recent elections.

The historic Citizens United case and subsequent lower court rulings opened the doors for corporations and unions to spend unlimited sums supporting or opposing political candidates, paving the way for nonprofit groups and so-called super PACs to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on influencing public debate.

On Friday, a national day of action dubbed Occupy the Courts will see 111 actions and occupations at courthouses from coast to coast, including the Supreme Court in Washington, DC. Activists are also planning protests at corporate buildings on Saturday under the banner Occupy the Corporations.

The national days of protest are inspired by Occupy Wall Street (OWS), but spearheaded by a coalition of groups organizing a growing grassroots movement to amend the Constitution and overturn Citizens United.

Their local victories have already made headlines. City councils in Portland; New York City; Los Angeles;, Boulder, Colorado; and more than a dozen other cities have already passed resolutions opposing "corporate personhood" or calling on lawmakers to work toward overturning Citizens United. (Corporate personhood refers to corporations obtaining the same rights as individuals, such as free speech. Many say the Citizens United ruling has established corporate personhood, but click here for a new perspective from Truthout.)

Common Cause announced on Tuesday its own grassroots effort to place "voter instruction" ballot initiatives during the 2012 elections in all 50 states that would allow voters to ask their lawmakers to support a constitutional amendment.

Organizers from the amendment campaigns say they are hoping to feed off momentum the Occupy movement has already established on the ground.

"The protest momentum is part of this," said Robert Reich, former US labor secretary and Common Cause chair. "I've personally spoken at a number of occupy rallies, and what I hear over and over again is that we've got to take back democracy and money coming from the increasingly concentrated income at the top is overwhelming our institutions."

David Cobb, a spokesperson for Move to Amend, a coalition group organizing Occupy the Courts, said activists from local Occupies have been instrumental in organizing January 20 Occupy the Courts actions.

Occupiers are organizing their own actions as well. In San Francisco, OWS West has called for a mass occupation of the city's financial district on Friday to protest Citizens United, home foreclosures and corporate greed.

In New York, OWS suffered a setback last week when a permit to rally outside a US district court in Manhattan was denied. OWS appealed the decision, but has so far changed the location march and rally at Zuccotti Park, aka Liberty Plaza.

[SoNotHer]

A lot of groups and folks coming together to protest the SC decision to recognize corporations as citizens and money as speech -

dTS2o8WQIKQ&feature=youtu.be

LdyYaBJ2AOQ&feature=related

[Cin]

http://www.truth-out.org/problem-citizens-united-not-corporate-personhood/1326497162

I thought this was a really interesting article. It talks about how the Supreme Court did not base it's decision regarding Citizens United on corporate personhood or the 14th amendment at all. Instead it went for a bizarre interpretation of the 1st amendment and free speech needing to be protected for those who have the right to listen. I guess to listen to campaign speeches and such. I guess that means its protecting me and my right to hear the crap these politicians have to say. Nobody seemed that interested in free speech when the angle is talking instead of listening as witnessed by the treatement of Occupy protestors. But I digress. The article also talks about a simpler way to overturn the Supreme Courts decisions surrounding Citizens United and earlier rulings regarding money in politics, than trying to get an amendment to the constitution. It's a long article but I found it worth the read.

[Cin]

Prosecutors aim new weapon at Occupy activists: lynching allegation

By Kari Huus, msnbc.com

Sergio Ballesteros, 30, has been involved in Occupy LA since the movement had its California launch in October. But this week, his activism took an abrupt turn when he was arrested on a felony charge — lynching.

Under the California penal code, lynching is “taking by means of a riot of any person from the lawful custody of any peace officer," where "riot" is defined as two or more people threatening violence or disturbing the peace. The original purpose of the legal code section 405(a) was to protect defendants in police custody from vigilante mobs — especially black defendants from racist groups.
advertisement

Whether the police allegation in this case will be pursued by by California’s courts is uncertain. But the felony charge — which carries a potential four-year prison sentence — is the kind of accusation that can change the landscape for would-be demonstrators.

"Felonies really heighten the stakes for the protesters," said Baher Azmy, legal director at Center for Constitutional Rights in New York. "I think in situations where there are mass demonstrations and a confrontation between protesters and police, one always has to be on the lookout for exaggerated interpretations of legal rules that attempt to punish or squelch the protesters."

Ballesteros, a teacher-turned-social-activist, was one of two people arrested during an "art walk" in downtown Los Angeles on Thursday. He and other Occupy LA activists — maybe 200, he said — had joined the procession to bring their message about social injustice to the thousands of gallery-goers.

Adam Alders, a protester who was playing a drum was arrested after stepping off the curb into the street. Ballesteros said that in doing so, the drummer was joining hundreds of other people who could not fit on the crowded sidewalk.

Ballesteros said he was across the street when he saw the arrest — which he said looked excessively rough -- and it was “startling.” Under legal advice, Ballesteros is not providing additional detail, but apparently he objected — in some fashion — to the arrest. A video of the crowded scene posted on YouTube shows Ballesteros on the ground, being handcuffed.

The police report says officers called for backup when Ballesteros pulled Alders out into the crowd, which was "hostile."

A video of the event shows the crowd chanting "let him go!"

He was booked into jail on a felony charge, the Los Angeles Police department confirmed, and released on $50,000 bail early Tuesday morning.

Ballesteros is not the first protester to face this 1933 California law.

Occupy Oakland activist Tiffany Tran, 23, was arrested Dec. 30 and charged with "lynching." At an arraignment four days later, prosecutors opted not to file the charges, the San Francisco Bay Guardian reported. They could change their decision until the one-year statute of limitations expires.

"Now I feel I can’t go out and express myself as I should be able to," Tran told the paper.

In the handful of protest cases in which lynching has been used as a charge in the past, it later has been dropped. However, in one case, a court concluded that “lynching” could include “a person who takes part in a riot leading to his escape from custody."

Many states have laws against lynching — largely drafted to prevent white supremacists and other vigilante groups from using violence against African Americans and white people who supported them. Hundreds of lynchings of this sort took place in the late 1800s through the mid-1900s.

Ballesteros' lawyer said use of this law was perhaps less appealing to the District Attorney than to the police.

Ballesteros is an activist outside the Occupy movement -- building homes through Habitat for Humanity during his spring breaks, aiding at a children's camp for the poorest kids in the Appalachians during the summer, and acting as mentor for disadvantaged kids in the Los Angeles area.

"Whether the District Attorney has the stomach to charge this model young man with a felony is questionable," saidd Mieke ter Poorten, an LA criminal defense attorney who is handling this case pro bono.

Ballesteros, who spoke to msnbc.com on Tuesday, said that he does not believe he will be convicted of lynching.

“They don’t have much,” he said of the case against him.

He also faces a misdemeanor charge for his arrest Nov. 30, when he was among more than 200 people who defied eviction from an encampment on the grounds of Los Angeles' City Hall. There was an arraignment for protesters arrested that day, but they were told no charges yet had been filed.

“They have a year to do so,” said Ballesteros. "Now they certainly will. It’s obvious. It’s all political.”

[Cin]

Lynching the Dream
Thursday 19 January 2012
by: William Rivers Pitt, Truthout | Op-Ed

This past Monday, this nation celebrated the memory of one of our greatest minds, one of our tallest souls, one of our lost children. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day celebrates the memory of our American Gandhi, a man who dedicated his life - and, in Memphis, gave his life - to the idea that is America: all are created equal.

To be sure, the "Negro" was counted only as 3/5ths of a man in the document that first established the ridiculous experiment that became America, and women were counted not at all, but more than two hundred years have passed since that original ink was put to paper. Ours is a self-improving republic, thanks to the genius of those founding documents. A "Negro" now sits in the highest office of the land, and a woman (who lost the chance to sit in that exalted seat by only an eyelash or two) now commands the most important and influential position in the Federal government, save the one enjoyed by her immediate superior.

Ours is a nation of genius, and of assassins, in equal measure. We reached the moon, cracked the genome code, we feed millions, liberated Europe and Asia from horrific tyranny sixty years ago, and daily export the idea that one should be able to speak their mind without fear of the gulag or the work camp or the executioner's bullet...and yet we do this even as the souls of slaughtered Native Americans, enslaved Africans, and ten times ten thousand Iraqis shriek their condemnation from the blood this nation has spilled in its pursuit of "greatness."

I have been preaching this gospel, in word and deed, for almost twenty years: America is an idea. You can take our cities, our roads, whatever is left of our manufacturing base, our crops, our armies, our weapons, you can take the land itself from Portland, Maine, to Portland, Oregon...you can take it all, and the idea that is America will still remain, as robust and vital as the day it was first conceived. It is the idea that sustains me, the brilliant simplicity of actual equality, and it is the offenses to the idea that I have pledged my life against.

Some will argue that I and those who believe as I do are doomed to failure. Perhaps this is true; the forces arrayed against what I and others of like mind hold true and dear are stupendous, overwhelming, and well-placed in money and in media. Even the "Hope and Change" president of the present maintains and extends the elaborate shame of our past, apparently deaf to the howls of those of us who would have him, and us, do right at long last.

It is what it is, as someone once said. You look for a toehold, a place to grab on to, a front - no matter how meager - from which to wage your own siege, against all that has gone so catastrophically wrong with this old experiment, in trying to do right.

We define ourselves through comparison to that which we oppose. In this, we are seldom lacking in inspiration. Take, for example, this report about the newest way the Powers That Be have chosen to crush and prosecute the Occupy movement. It isn't enough for a prosecutor to charge a protester who has been beaten and Maced by police with assault. No, we're going here:

Sergio Ballesteros, 30, has been involved in Occupy LA since the movement had its California launch in October. But this week, his activism took an abrupt turn when he was arrested on a felony charge - lynching.

Whether the police allegation in this case will be pursued by by California's courts is uncertain. But the felony charge - which carries a potential four-year prison sentence - is the kind of accusation that can change the landscape for would-be demonstrators.

"Felonies really heighten the stakes for the protesters," said Baher Azmy, legal director at Center for Constitutional Rights in New York. "I think in situations where there are mass demonstrations and a confrontation between protesters and police, one always has to be on the lookout for exaggerated interpretations of legal rules that attempt to punish or squelch the protesters."

Lynching: "For many African Americans growing up in the South in the 19th and 20th centuries, the threat of lynching was commonplace. The popular image of an angry white mob stringing a black man up to a tree is only half the story. Lynching, an act of terror meant to spread fear among blacks, served the broad social purpose of maintaining white supremacy in the economic, social and political spheres."

Once upon a time, the (lily-white) power structure used lynching as a means of maintaining control. Now, in the shadow of the holiday celebrating Dr. King's life and work, they are deploying this accusation in order to punish and prosecute people who have exercised the right gifted by this idea, this country, this place of alleged freedom: the right to speak your piece, "to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

The idea remains intact, even after so prolonged an assault from so determined a foe.

It is, as ever, worth fighting for. As Dr. King said, "An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity."

Dig in, people.

Dig in deep.

The Promised Land is far and wee, and all we have in the meantime is ourselves, our hopes, our dreams, each other, and the promise of an idea that - with our blood, sweat, and toil - may yet be fulfilled.

[SoNotHer]

Two Ladies Followed Obama To The Apollo Last Night And This Is What They Said

gBiGEXjVoIM#t=138s

Please sign the petition calling for an investigation of Wall Street Bank Fraud

http://pol.moveon.org/bankfraud/?rc=homepage


__________________________________________________ ______

[Sachita]

I do agree. Social movements can make a difference. It's just that until it is fiscally feasible as well as prudent and not just professional suicide for any politician to go against the super rich, I don't see us getting anything but lip service. It's not like they just noticed the income disparity. It's not an accident.

I see them responding to all the request but I am skeptical because everything the government does contradicts itself. I see countless petitions, millions of people fighting against the same issues and then I see Obama and government doing what they want. Perfect case is appointing the VP of Monsanto as a head adviser to the FDA. This is not a new issue. The fear of GMO and the BS they are getting away with has been news for years. No matter how hard people fight, the facts presented, blah blah blah, all unheard and his still makes a fucked up move like that. Clearly there is an agenda.

There are so many issues of control right now. I see the government pacifying and with elections looming they'll do just about anything. I have no faith in our government or its direction. I don't give a fuck who wins and it doesnt matter any more. They are all crooks.

My best defense is to become fully independent and sustainable. To learn how to grow my own food, use less power (if any one day) because right now they are controlling it all and its going to get worse. I've never seen such a group of idiots in my entire life.

[Cin]

Occupy San Francisco Takes the Fight to Local Banks in Ambitious Next Step for Movement
After a brief hibernation, a refocused movement takes aim at corporate America--specifically, Wells Fargo and Bank of America on "Wall Street West."
http://www.alternet.org/story/153849/occupy_san_francisco_takes_the_fight_to_local_bank s_in_ambitious_next_step_for_movement/?page=entire

[Cin]

The Corporate State Will Be Broken
Monday 23 January 2012
by: Chris Hedges

I spent Friday morning sitting on a wooden bench in a fourth-floor courtroom in the New York Criminal Court in Manhattan. I was waiting to be sentenced for “disturbing the peace” and “refusing to obey a lawful order” during an Occupy demonstration in front of Goldman Sachs in November.

Those sentenced before me constituted the usual fare of the court. They were poor people of color accused of mostly petty crimes—drug possession, thefts, shoplifting, trespassing because they were homeless and needed a place to sleep, inappropriate touching, grand larceny and violation of probation. They were escorted out of a backroom by a police officer, stood meekly before the judge with their hands cuffed behind them, were hastily defended by a lawyer clutching a few folders, and were sentenced. Ten days in jail. Sixty days in jail. Six months in jail. A steady stream of convictions. My sentence, by comparison, was slight. I was given an ACD, or “adjournment in contemplation of dismissal,” which means that if I am not arrested in the next six months my case is dismissed. If I am arrested during this period of informal probation the old charge will be added to the new one before I am sentenced.

The country’s most egregious criminals, the ones who had stripped some of those being sentenced of their homes, their right to a decent education and health care, their jobs, their dignity and their hope, those wallowing in tens and hundreds of millions of dollars, those who had gamed the system to enrich themselves at our expense, were doing the dirty business of speculation in the tall office towers a few blocks away. They were making money. A few of these wealthy plutocrats were with the president, who was in New York that day to attend four fundraisers that took in an estimated $3 million. For $15,000 you could have joined Barack Obama at Daniel, an exclusive Upper East Side restaurant. For $35,000 you could have been at a gathering hosted by movie director Spike Lee. Most of those sentenced in that courtroom do not make that much in a year. It was a good day in New York for Barack Obama. It was a bad day for us.

Our electoral system, already hostage to corporate money and corporate lobbyists, gasped its last two years ago. It died on Jan. 21, 2010, when the Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission granted to corporations the right to spend unlimited amounts on independent political campaigns. The ruling turned politicians into corporate employees. If any politician steps out of line, dares to defy corporate demands, this ruling hands to our corporate overlords the ability to pump massive amounts of anonymous money into campaigns to make sure the wayward are defeated and silenced. Politicians like Obama are hostages. They jump when corporations say jump. They beg when corporations say beg. They hand corporations exemptions, subsidies, trillions in taxpayer money, no-bid contracts and massive loans with virtually no interest, and they abolish any regulations that impede profits and protect the citizen. Corporations like Goldman Sachs, because they own the system, are bailed out by federal dollars and given essentially free government loans to gamble. I am not sure what to call our economic system, but it is not capitalism. And if any elected official so much as murmurs anything that sounds like dissent, the Supreme Court ruling permits corporations to destroy him or her. And they do.

Turn off your televisions. Ignore the Newt-Mitt-Rick-Barack reality show. It is as relevant to your life as the gossip on “Jersey Shore.” The real debate, the debate raised by the Occupy movement about inequality, corporate malfeasance, the destruction of the ecosystem, and the security and surveillance state, is the only debate that matters. You won’t hear it on the corporate-owned airwaves and cable networks, including MSNBC, which has become to the Democratic Party what Fox News is to the lunatic fringe of the Republican Party. You won’t hear it on NPR or PBS. You won’t read about it in our major newspapers. The issues that matter are being debated, however, on “Democracy Now!,” Link TV, The Real News, Occupy websites and Revolution Truth. They are being raised by journalists such as Glenn Greenwald and Matt Taibbi. You can find genuine ideas in corners of the Internet or in books by political philosophers such as Sheldon Wolin. But you have to go looking for them.

Voting will not alter the corporate systems of power. Voting is an act of political theater. Voting in the United States is as futile and sterile as in the elections I covered as a reporter in dictatorships like Syria, Iran and Iraq. There were always opposition candidates offered up by these dictatorships. Give the people the illusion of choice. Throw up the pretense of debate. Let the power elite hold public celebrations to exalt the triumph of popular will. We can vote for Romney or Obama, but Goldman Sachs and ExxonMobil and Bank of America and the defense contractors always win. There is little difference between our electoral charade and the ones endured by the Syrians and Iranians. Do we really believe that Obama has, or ever had, any intention to change the culture in Washington?

In this year’s presidential election I will vote for a third-party candidate, either the Green Party candidate or Rocky Anderson, assuming one of them makes it onto the ballot in New Jersey, but voting is nothing more than a brief chance to register our disgust with the corporate state. It will not alter the configurations of power. The campaign is not worth our emotional, physical or intellectual energy.

Our efforts must be directed toward acts of civil disobedience, to chipping away, through nonviolent protest, at the pillars of established, corporate power. The corporate state is so unfair, so corrupt and so rotten that the institutions tasked with holding it up—the police, the press, the banking system, the civil service and the judiciary—have become vulnerable. It is becoming harder and harder for the corporations to convince its foot soldiers to hold the system in place.

I sat a few days ago in a small Middle Eastern restaurant in Washington, D.C., with Kevin Zeese, one of the activists who first called for the Occupy movements. Zeese and others, including public health care advocate Dr. Margaret Flowers, set up the Occupy encampment on Freedom Plaza in Washington, D.C. They got a four-day permit last fall and used the time to create an infrastructure—a medic tent, a kitchen, a legal station and a press center—that would be there if the permit was not extended. The National Park Service did grant them an extended permit, and Freedom Plaza is one of the encampments that has not been shut down.

“We do have a grand strategy,” he said. “Nonviolent movements shift power by attacking the columns that hold the power structure in place. Those columns are the military, police, media, business, workers, youth, faith groups, NGOs and civil servants. Every time we deal with the police, we have that in mind. The goal is not to hit them, hit them, hit them and weaken them. The goal is to pull people from those columns to our side. We want the police to know that we understand they’re not the 1 percent. The goal is not to get every police officer, but to get enough police so that you have a division.”

“We do this with civil servants,” he went on. “We do whistle-blower events. We go to different federal agencies with protesters blowing whistles and usually with an actual whistle-blower. We hand out literature to the civil servants about how to blow the whistle safely, where they can get help if they do, why they should do it. We also try to get civil servants by pulling them to our side.”

“One of the beautiful things about this security state is that they always know we’re coming,” he said. “It’s never a secret. We don’t do anything as a secret. The EPA, for example, sent out a security notice to all of its employees—advertising for us [by warning employees about a coming protest]. So you get the word out.”

“Individuals become the media,” he said. “An iPhone becomes a live-stream TV. The social network becomes a media outlet. If a hundred of us work together and use our social networks for the same message we can reach as many people as the second-largest newspapers in town, The Washington Examiner or The Washington Times. If a thousand of us do, we can meet the circulation of The Washington Post. We can certainly reach the circulation of most cable news TV shows. The key is to recognize this power and weaken the media structure.”

“We started an Occupy house in Mount Rainier in Maryland,” Zeese said. “Its focus is Occupy the Economy. This is the U.N.’s year of the co-op. We want to build on that. We want to start worker-owned co-ops and occupy our own co-ops. These co-ops will allow Occupiers to have resources so that they can continue occupying. It will allow them to get resources for the community. It will be an example to the public, a public where a high percentage of people are underemployed and unemployed although they have a lot of skills. People can band together in their community and solve a problem in the community. They can create a worker-owned collaborative of some kind. They can develop models of collective living.”

“We looked at polling on seven key issues and found supermajorities of Americans—60-plus percent—were with us on issues including health care, retirement, energy, money in politics,” he said. “We are more mainstream than Congress. We aren’t crazy radicals. We are trying to do what the people want. This is participatory democracy versus oligarchy. It’s the elites versus the people. We stand with the majority.”

The Washington encampment, like many Occupy encampments, has had to deal with those the wider society has discarded—the homeless, the mentally ill, the destitute and those whose lives have been devastated by substance abuse. This created a huge burden for the organizers, who decided that they were not equipped or able to deal with these wider, societal problems. The encampment in Washington’s Freedom Plaza enforces strict rules of behavior, including an insistence on sobriety, in order to endure through the winter and ensure its own survival. Other Occupy movements will have to do the same.

“We don’t want to become a soup kitchen or a homeless shelter,” Zeese said. “We’re a political movement. These are problems beyond our ability. How do we deal with this? Let’s feed the Occupiers first, and those who are just squatting here for free get food last, so if we have enough food, we feed them. If we don’t, we can’t. We always fed people, of course. We usually have enough peanut butter and jelly sandwiches for everyone. But as we debated this issue, we stated talking about things like ‘how about a Freedom Plaza badge, or a Freedom Plaza wristband, or a Freedom Plaza card.’ None of those ideas were passed. What we ended up developing was a set of principles. Those principles included in them participation. You can’t be there because you want a [tent] or free food. You have to be there to build the community and the movement. You have to participate in the general assemblies.”

“The first principles, of course, were nonviolence and non-property destruction,” he said. “We don’t accept violent language. When you’re violent you undermine everything. If the protesters in [Manhattan’s] Union Square, who were pepper-sprayed, had been throwing something at the police, you would not have had the movement. It was because they were nonviolent and didn’t react when they were being pepper-sprayed that the movement grew. At UC Davis, when those cops just walked down the line and sprayed, the nonviolent reaction by those kids was fantastic.”

“We constantly kept hearing in the beginning what are our demands, what are our demands, is our demand to meet with Obama?” Zeese said. “We said: ‘Oh no, that would just be a waste. If we meet with Obama he’ll just get a picture opportunity out of that. We won’t get anything.’ You don’t make demands until you have power. If you make demands too soon, you don’t demand enough and you can’t enforce the demand that you get. So if you get promised an election, you can’t enforce that the ballots are counted right, for example. We realized late into our discussions—we had six months of planning, so four months into it—‘we don’t have the power to make a demand.’ That was very hard for a lot of our people to accept.”

“Instead of making demands, we put up what we stood for, what principles we wanted to see,” he said. “The overarching demand was end corporate rule, shift power to the people. Once you make that as your demand, as your pinnacle, you can pick any issue—energy, health care, elections—and the solution becomes evident. For health care it’s get the insurance companies out from between doctors and patients; on finance it’s break up the big banks so that six banks don’t control 60 percent of the economy and break them up into community banks so that the money stays at home rather than going to Wall Street; energy is to diversify energy sources so people can build and have their own energy on their roof and become energy producers. The overarching goal was: End corporate rule, shift power to the people. We developed a slogan: ‘Human needs before corporate greed.’ After that, everything fell into place for us.”

When the congressional super committee was meeting, the Occupy Washington movement formed its own super committee. The Occupy Super Committee, which managed get its hearing aired on CSPAN, included experts on the wealth divide, fair taxation, the military budget, job creation, health care and democratizing the economy as well as giving voice to the 99 percent. “The 99%’s Deficit Proposal: How to create jobs, reduce the wealth divide and control spending” resulted from the Occupy hearing. The report made evidence-based recommendations Zeese knew would not be considered by the Congress, but he saw it as foundational for the movement.

“History shows the demands made by those in revolt are never initially considered by government,” he said. “Our job is to make the politically impossible the politically inevitable.”

I do not know how long it will take to dethrone the corporate state, but I do know it is a dead and terminal system of power. As the global economy deteriorates and climate change causes greater disruptions, these corporations will be increasingly discredited. I know the iron grip of corporations over our lives will, eventually, be broken. The corporate state will, like all wounded animals, lash out with a blind fury, which is why I suspect we have been given the National Defense Authorization Act, which permits the military to arrest and hold U.S. citizens without due process. It will increase pressure to become crueler and more callous at the base of the columns it depends on for survival. And eventually it will break. No one knows how long this will take. It could be months, years, maybe even a decade, although the massive assault by the fossil fuel industry on the ecosystem will probably force a popular response sooner than we expect. The only question is how much damage these corporations will be permitted to inflict.

I attended a rally Friday night in Foley Square, a few blocks from the criminal court where I had spent the morning. It was part of the Occupy the Courts event held across the nation to protest America’s corporate coup and the Supreme Court ruling in the Citizens United case. It was cold and blustery. Snow was on the way. Many in the crowd of a couple of hundred were visibly chilled. I spoke about the movement. I spoke about the lawsuit I have brought against Barack Obama and the secretary of defense to challenge the National Defense Authorization Act. I spoke about the inevitability of the Occupy movement.

I realized, afterward, I had forgotten to say what was most important. I forgot to say thank you. Thank you for standing up to corporate power on a cold winter’s night. Thank you for making hope visible. You must never underestimate your power. I was sentenced in the day. I was exonerated in the night.

http://www.truth-out.org/chris-hedges-corporate-state-will-be-broken/1327331237

[SoNotHer]

Dear MoveOn Member,

Did you watch the State of the Union tonight? President Obama did exactly what hundreds of thousands of us have been calling on him to do—he announced a federal investigation into Wall Street. Here's what he said:

"I am asking my Attorney General to create a special unit of federal prosecutors and leading state attorneys general to expand our investigations into the abusive lending and packaging of risky mortgages that led to the housing crisis. This new unit will hold accountable those who broke the law, speed assistance to homeowners, and help turn the page on an era of recklessness that hurt so many Americans."

The best part is, progressive champion New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is co-chairing the investigation and will make sure it stays on track. Just weeks ago, this investigation wasn't even on the table, and the big banks were pushing for a broad settlement that would have made it impossible. Your work changed all that.

This is truly a huge victory for the 99% movement. Hundreds of thousands of us signed petitions, made calls, and held signs outside in the cold to make this issue something that President Obama couldn't ignore. Here's some of what MoveOn members and our allies did to bring about this victory:

- Over 360,000 of us signed a petition calling on President Obama to fully investigate the banks.
- We delivered that petition at over 150 events last Thursday around the country at Obama for America campaign offices.
- Our pressure on state attorneys general stopped the rush to a sweetheart deal that would have precluded this investigation.
- And we've called, Facebooked, and tweeted at the White House repeatedly to ask the president to launch this investigation.

Can you take a few minutes and thank President Obama for holding Wall Street accountable?

Click here to post a message of thanks on the White House Facebook wall.

Without an investigation, real accountability for the banks wouldn't be possible. But while this is a big win, it isn't enough all by itself. We still need to keep a close eye on the investigation, make sure top bankers don't escape prosecution, and keep fighting for real solutions for the 11 million underwater homeowners who are still struggling to keep their homes.

[SoNotHer]

Obama’s Late Payment to Mortgage-Fraud Victims.

By Amy Goodman with Denis Moynihan


In his State of the Union address, many heard echoes of the Barack Obama of old, the presidential aspirant of 2007 and 2008. Among the populist pledges rolled out in the speech was tough talk against the too-big-to-fail banks that have funded his campaigns and for whom many of his key advisers have worked: “The rest of us are not bailing you out ever again,” he promised.

President Obama also made a striking announcement, one that could have been written by the Occupy Wall Street General Assembly: “I’m asking my attorney general to create a special unit of federal prosecutors and leading state attorneys general to expand our investigations into the abusive lending and packaging of risky mortgages that led to the housing crisis. This new unit will hold accountable those who broke the law, speed assistance to homeowners and help turn the page on an era of recklessness that hurt so many Americans.”

Remarkably, President Obama named New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman as co-chairperson of the Unit on Mortgage Origination and Securitization Abuses. Schneiderman was on a team of state attorneys general negotiating a settlement with the nation’s five largest banks. He opposed the settlement as being too limited and offering overly generous immunity from future prosecution for financial fraud. For his outspoken consumer advocacy, he was kicked off the negotiating team. He withdrew his support of the settlement talks, along with several other key attorneys general, including California’s Kamala Harris, an Obama supporter, and Delaware’s Beau Biden, the vice president’s son.

In an op-ed penned last November, Schneiderman and Biden wrote, “We recognized early this year that, though many public officials—including state attorneys general, members of Congress and the Obama administration—have delved into aspects of the bubble and crash, we needed a more comprehensive investigation before the financial institutions at the heart of the crisis are granted broad releases from liability.”

When news of Schneiderman’s appointment surfaced, MoveOn.org sent an email to its members declaring: “Just weeks ago, this investigation wasn’t even on the table, and the big banks were pushing for a broad settlement that would have made it impossible. ... This is truly a huge victory for the 99 percent movement.”


The stakes are very high for the public, and for President Obama. He relied heavily on Wall Street backers to fund his massive campaign war chest in 2008. Now, in this post-Citizens United era, with expected billion-dollar campaign budgets, Obama could find himself out of favor with Wall Street. For the public, as noted by the Center for Responsible Lending: “More than 20,000 new families face foreclosure each month, including a disproportionate percentage of African-American and Latino households. CRL research indicates that we are only about halfway through the crisis.”

From http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2012/1/26/obamas_late_payment_to_mortgage_fraud_victims_by_a my_goodman

[SoNotHer]

Police clash with Oakland protesters, 100 held
By Laird Harrison | Reuters

OAKLAND (Reuters) - Riot police arrested more than 100 anti-Wall Street protesters during a series of clashes in the streets of Oakland on Saturday that saw officers in riot gear firing tear gas at activists who tried to take over a shuttered convention center.

Three officers were injured during the running confrontations, which police said first erupted when the crowd began destroying construction equipment and tearing down fencing at the Henry J. Kaiser Convention Center in downtown Oakland in the early afternoon.

"Officers were pelted with bottles, metal pipe, rocks, spray cans, improvised explosive devices and burning flares," the Oakland Police Department said in a statement. "Oakland Police Department deployed smoke and tear gas."

The scuffles marked the latest confrontation between police and Occupy activists seeking to regain lost momentum in their movement against economic inequality after authorities cleared protest camps across the country late last year. Occupy Oakland organizers had vowed to take over the fenced-off building to establish a new headquarters for their movement and draw attention to homelessness in a move seen as a challenge to authorities who have blocked similar efforts before.

Police said 19 people were arrested near the convention center and another 100 taken into custody after they were corralled by officers outside a YMCA in downtown Oakland. "The one percent have all these empty buildings, and meanwhile there are all these homeless people," protester Omar Yassin told Reuters at the scene.

Near the convention center, several dozen police officers declared an unlawful assembly and confronted the demonstrators at a fence, firing smoke and tear gas canisters into the crowd after telling protesters to disperse through loudspeakers.

AMERICAN FLAG BURNS

Some activists, carrying shields made of plastic garbage cans and corrugated metal, tried to circumvent the police line, and surged toward police on another side of the building as more smoke canisters were fired. "The City of Oakland welcomes peaceful forms of assembly and freedom of speech, but acts of violence, property destruction and overnight lodging will not be tolerated," police said in a statement.

Later, hundreds of demonstrators regrouped and marched through downtown Oakland, where they were repeatedly confronted by police in riot gear. Police at several points fired flash-bang grenades into the crowd and swung batons at protesters. Later a group of demonstrators made their way to City Hall, where they brought out a U.S. flag and set it on fire before scattering ahead of advancing officers.

Protesters in Oakland loosely affiliated with the Occupy Wall Street movement that began in New York last year have repeatedly clashed with police during a series of marches and demonstrations. In October, former U.S. Marine Scott Olsen was left in critical condition with a head injury following a confrontation with police on the streets of Oakland in which tear gas was deployed.

Organizers said Olsen was struck in the head by a tear gas canister. Authorities opened an investigation into that incident but have not said how they believe he was hurt. Elsewhere, the National Park Service said on Friday it would bar Occupy protesters in the nation's capital, one of the few big cities where Occupy encampments survive, from camping in two parks where they have been living since October.

That order, which takes effect on Monday, was seen as a blow to one of the highest-profile chapters of the movement.

[SoNotHer]

300 arrested in daylong Occupy Oakland protests
By TERRY COLLINS | Associated Press – 4 hrs ago

OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) — Dozens of police maintained a late-night guard around City Hall following daylong protests that resulted in 300 arrests. Occupy Oakland demonstrators broke into the historic building and burned a U.S. flag, as officers earlier fired tear gas to disperse people throwing rocks and tearing down fencing at a convention center. Saturday's protests — the most turbulent since Oakland police forcefully dismantled an Occupy encampment in November — came just days after the group said it planned to use a vacant building as a social center and political hub and threatened to try to shut down the port, occupy the airport and take over City Hall.

An exasperated Mayor Jean Quan, who faced heavy criticism for the police action last fall, called on the Occupy movement to "stop using Oakland as its playground." "People in the community and people in the Occupy movement have to stop making excuses for this behavior," Quan said. Protesters clashed with police throughout the day, at times throwing rocks, bottles and other objects at officers. And police responded by deploying smoke, tear gas and bean bag rounds, City Administrator Deanna Santanta said.

Interim Police Chief Howard Jordan said about 300 arrests were made. "These demonstrators stated their intention was to provoke officers and engage in illegal activity and that's exactly what has occurred today," Santana said.
The group assembled outside City Hall late Saturday morning and marched through the streets, disrupting traffic as they threatened to take over the vacant Henry Kaiser Convention Center.

The protesters walked to the vacant convention center, where some started tearing down perimeter fencing and "destroying construction equipment" shortly before 3 p.m., police said. Police said they issued a dispersal order and used smoke and tear gas after some protesters pelted them with bottles, rocks, burning flares and other objects.

The number of demonstrators swelled as the day wore on, with afternoon estimates ranging from about 1,000 to 2,000 people. A majority of the arrests came after police took scores of protesters into custody as they marched through the city's downtown, with some entering a YMCA building, said Sgt. Jeff Thomason, a police spokesman.

Quan said that at one point, many protesters forced their way into City Hall, where they burned flags, broke an electrical box and damaged several art structures, including a recycled art exhibit created by children.

She blamed the destruction on a small "very radical, violent" splinter group within Occupy Oakland. "This is not a situation where we had a 1,000 peaceful people and a few violent people. If you look at what's happening today in terms of destructing property, throwing at and charging the police, it's almost like they are begging for attention and hoping that the police will make an error."

Dozens of officers surrounded City Hall, while others swept the inside of the building looking for protesters who had broken into the building, then ran out of the building with American flags before officers arrived. The protest group issued an email criticizing police, saying "Occupy Oakland's building occupation, an act of constitutionally protected civil disobedience was disrupted by a brutal police response today."

Michael Davis, 32, who is originally from Ohio and was in the Occupy movement in Cincinnati, said Saturday was a very hectic day that originally started off calm but escalated when police began using "flash bangs, tear gas, smoke grenades and bean bags." "What could've been handled differently is the way the Oakland police came at us," Davis said. "We were peaceful."

City leaders joined Quan in criticizing the protesters.

"City Hall is closed for the weekend. There is no excuse for behavior we've witnessed this evening," City Council President Larry Reid said during a news briefing Saturday. Oakland Councilman Ignacio De La Fuente, echoed Reid's sentiments and said that what was going on amounts to "domestic terrorism."

The national Occupy Wall Street movement, which denounces corporate excess and economic inequality, began in New York City in the fall but has been largely dormant lately. Oakland, New York and Los Angeles were among the cities with the largest and most vocal Occupy protests early on. The demonstrations ebbed after those cities used force to move out hundreds of demonstrators who had set up tent cities.

In Oakland, the police department received heavy criticism for using force to break up earlier protests. Quan was among the critics, but on Saturday, she seemed to have changed her tune. "Our officers have been very measured," Quan said. "Were there some mistakes made? There may be. I would say the Oakland police and our allies, so far a small percentage of mistakes. "But quite frankly, a majority of protesters who were charging the police were clearly not being peaceful. Earlier this month, a court-appointed monitor submitted a report to a federal judge that included "serious concerns" about the department's handling of the Occupy protests.

Jordan said late Saturday that he was in "close contact" with the federal monitor during the protests. Quan added, "If the demonstrators think that because we are working more closely with the monitor now that we won't do what we have to do to uphold the law and try keep people safe in this city, they're wrong."

http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/E.63Bxx.PlG8xZteWKmcGw--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9aW5zZXQ7aD00MjA7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/ap_webfeeds/6875a6edebafa402050f6a706700fba6.jpg

[Cin]

300 Arrested at Occupy Oakland -- Corporate Media Dutifully Report City Officials' Version of Events
Police once again ratcheted up the tension by using force against an entire crowd of protesters.
January 29, 2012

http://images.alternet.org/images/managed/storyimages_1327864128_67828466350db00887c0.jpg_64 0x425_310x220

Downtown Oakland turned ugly once again on Saturday, as Occupy activists attempting to squat in a long-abandoned city building were met by lines of heavily-armored riot police. Police officials said that 300 arrests followed – a number that may represent as much as 30 percent of everyone who participated in the day's actions, according to police estimates of the crowd's size.

Occupy Oakland organizers said some protesters were hospitalized, but the exact number of injuries is unknown as if this writing. According to organizers, four journalists were swept up by police, including AlterNet contributor Susie Cagle and Mother Jones correspondent Gavin Aronsen. Cagle was reportedly cited and released; organizers say Aronsen was jailed overnight (update: Aronsen tells us that he was released last night).

It was, once again, a tale of two protests. Accounts in the corporate media relied primarily on police statements to paint protesters as wild animals running amok in the city, while those following the day's events via a small group of “citizen-journalists” broadcasting raw, unedited footage from their cell-phones and flip-cams got a wildly divergent view of exactly how things escalated.

A livestream offered by Occupy Oakland's Mark Mason and Chris Krakauer showed protesters approaching the Henry Kaiser Convention Center in the early afternoon, where they were greeted by skirmish lines of police clad in riot gear. At one point, Mason, narrating as he moved through the crowd, could be heard saying, “uh-oh, some people are throwing things at the cops,” before moving away from the front-lines. Later, an Occupier visiting from Los Angeles told Mason of confronting one of the protesters who had thrown an object at police. “That's just stupid, you know,” said the young woman. “And she threw it from the middle of the crowd, which just puts people in the front in danger.”

Police declared the protest an unlawful assembly, and soon afterward, a series of explosions could be heard on the livestream as police deployed either teargas canisters or “flash-bang” grenades to disperse the crowd. This appears to be a violation of the Oakland Police Department's (OPD) own crowd-control guidelines, which were drawn up as part of a settlement of a 2003 suit filed by the National Lawyers Guild and the ACLU of Northern California after a case in which OPD used an abundance of violence against peaceful protesters demonstrating against the invasion of Iraq.

The guidelines state that less-lethal munitions “may never be used indiscriminately against a crowd or group of persons, even if some members of the crowd or group are violent or disruptive.”

“Bean-bag” shotgun rounds and/or rubber-coated steel bullets were also used by police, according to official reports. But OPD may only use less-lethal projectiles against an individual who poses an imminent threat and, even then, the guidelines prohibit their use except when such an “individual can be targeted without endangering other crowd members or bystanders.”

The Associated Press quoted City Administrator Deanna Santana saying that police “responded” to object being thrown “by deploying smoke, tear gas and bean bag rounds.” “These demonstrators stated their intention was to provoke officers and engage in illegal activity and that's exactly what has occurred today."

But OPD's large-scale use of force against the mostly peaceful crowd visibly escalated the tension. “There are fucking kids here!” one activist could be heard shouting on Mark Mason's livestream. “What's wrong with you fucking people?” It was soon after the explosions that protesters began chanting “fuck the pigs!”

Soon after this initial confrontation, the Occupiers retreated back to Frank Ogawa Plaza, which served as the location for their encampment – a tent city that Oakland officials cleared twice last fall. One organizer complimented the majority of activists for remaining peaceful throughout the clash. “Today was the most disciplined I've ever seen Occupy Oakland,” he said.

The Occupiers, after regrouping, then set off for a second march. Their intended destination was unclear, as police immediately began “herding” protesters – in Mason's words – towards a small plaza at the intersection of 19th and Rashida Muhammad Street, where they attempted to “kettle” several hundred protesters. It's unclear why the attempt failed, but protesters evaded the trap and continued on until they reached Broadway and 23rd street, where OPD succeeded in boxing them in. Several protesters ran through the Downtown YMCA building seeking to escape arrest, according to live-streamer Spencer Mills. It was here that the majority of arrests took place.

Mills said that no dispersal order was given at the location; police told him that several had been issued along the route. But the OPD manual states that, “If after a crowd disperses pursuant to a declaration of unlawful assembly and subsequently participants assemble at a different geographic location where the participants are engaged in non-violent and lawful First Amendment activity, such an assembly cannot be dispersed unless it has been determined that it is an unlawful assembly and the required official declaration has been adequately given.”

Protesters, including peaceful protesters, weren't given an opportunity to disperse. OPD's crowd control manual states that an order to disperse, “shall also specify adequate egress or escape routes. Whenever possible, a minimum of two escape/egress routes shall be identified and announced.”

While the main body of protesters were being “herded” by OPD and eventually kettled at 23rd street, a smaller group broke into City Hall, where “they burned flags, broke an electrical box and damaged several art structures,” according to Oakland Mayor Jean Quan speaking at a press conference. Quan, blaming a small "very radical, violent" splinter group for the mayhem, called on the Occupy movement to "stop using Oakland as its playground."

"People in the community and people in the Occupy movement have to stop making excuses for this behavior," she said.

But Michael Davis, a visitor from Occupy Cincinnati, told the Associated Press that a day of action which began peacefully escalated when police began using "flash bangs, tear gas, smoke grenades and bean bags," in apparent violation of OPD policy.

The chronology is important to get right. By definition, protesters feel angry and aggrieved, and when force is applied indiscriminately on a crowd – and not directed at a handful of people seeking confrontation – it ratchets up the tension to a point where more confrontations become almost inevitable.

We've seen that sequence of events unfold repeatedly in Oakland. In November, AlterNet spoke with Linda Lye, staff attorney with the ACLU of Northern California, about a suit the group had filed attempting to compel OPD to follow its own crowd control policies. “Crowds of protesters are heterogenous,” she said. “They simply cannot deploy these weapons against a whole group of people because a few of them throw some objects.”

“The crowd control policy represents OPD's view of best practices,” Lye continued. “Generally, the issue with excessive force cases is whether the force applied was reasonable under the circumstances, and law enforcement will often argue, 'well, we needed to apply the force in a given circumstance because it was necessary to achieve our legitimate law enforcement goals.' Here, when OPD is systematically violating specific provisions in its own crowd control policy, there can be no argument that they need to do this, because the guidelines already represent what OPD thinks is reasonable in these circumstances.”

The lawsuit filed by ACLU and the National Lawyers Guild is pending. In the meantime, relations between the community, police and city officials, and the Occupiers continue to be strained by the police violence and protester vandalism that have plagued so many actions over the past six months in Oakland.

[Gráinne]

Has Occupy Oakland, or the larger OWS, ever condemned burning the flag, destroying children's artwork, and causing mayhem around an art museum? Mayor Quan might well be right, that this is a splinter group, but I don't see a refutation by OO or OWS. The violence is going to mar the entire OWS movement, whether justified by the police, or not.

What about the businesses hurt because people are afraid to go to the area because of the crowds (I don't live in Oakland, but I would be afraid if the same happened here). Sooner or later, a protester is going to "throw an object" and someone is going to get killed.

I just don't see how breaking and entering and vandalism is justified.

[AtLast]

Has Occupy Oakland, or the larger OWS, ever condemned burning the flag, destroying children's artwork, and causing mayhem around an art museum? Mayor Quan might well be right, that this is a splinter group, but I don't see a refutation by OO or OWS. The violence is going to mar the entire OWS movement, whether justified by the police, or not.

What about the businesses hurt because people are afraid to go to the area because of the crowds (I don't live in Oakland, but I would be afraid if the same happened here). Sooner or later, a protester is going to "throw an object" and someone is going to get killed.

I just don't see how breaking and entering and vandalism is justified.

Actually, there are many of us here in this area and work in and around these areas in Oakland that support the Occupy Movement at large- but have had it with Occupy Oakland. More harm than good is going on that is quite different than in other areas of the country with protests.

It is sad, actually, as there is no longer a feeling that the concerns of ALL of the 99% is being represented in a manner that will lead to change.

[Toughy]

I'm not too impressed with breaking into vacant buildings and running through the YMCA to avoid arrest. I am also not too impressed with just marching around in the street.

Civil disobedience has to have a purpose or it's just mayhem in the streets. I have not been involved in any protests the last couple of months and I'm just not sure what is going on now has any purpose. I said along time ago that phase 2 needs to begin. Movements need a purpose and a goal to actually effect change.

As to flag burning. I will never condemn anyone for burning any flag, however it is their right to do so. My take on flag burning is this: Burning a flag is symbolic and indicates wanting destruction of what the flag represents. Back in my HIV/AIDS protest days I always tried to point out a couple of things. Don't burn the US flag. Our anger was not at the country, but at the President (Reagan at first). We should have been burning the Presidential Flag and the flags of the Senate and House.

[Cin]

I'm not too impressed with breaking into vacant buildings and running through the YMCA to avoid arrest. I am also not too impressed with just marching around in the street.

Civil disobedience has to have a purpose or it's just mayhem in the streets. I have not been involved in any protests the last couple of months and I'm just not sure what is going on now has any purpose. I said along time ago that phase 2 needs to begin. Movements need a purpose and a goal to actually effect change.


Well, unless I'm mistaken there was a purpose. I'm not in Oakland so I don't know. But Occupy Oakland seems to believe they had a purpose or at least their media is releasing this like it was their purpose to occupy just one vacant building and the purpose for the occupation seems logical and in keeping with the whole idea of occupying in general:


Occupy Oakland Media reacted to the use of force by Oakland police:

Yesterday, the Oakland Police deployed hundreds of officers in riot gear so as to prevent Occupy Oakland from putting a building, vacant for 6 years with no plans for use, from being occupied and “re-purposed” as a community center. The Occupy Oakland GA passed a proposal calling for the space to be turned into a social center, convergence center and headquarters of the Occupy Oakland movement.

The police actions tonight cost the city of Oakland hundreds of thousands of dollars, and they repeatedly violated their own crowd control guidelines and protesters civil rights.

With all the problems in our city, should preventing activists from putting a vacant building to better use be their highest priority? Was it worth the hundreds of thousands of dollars they spent?

[AtLast]

I'm not too impressed with breaking into vacant buildings and running through the YMCA to avoid arrest. I am also not too impressed with just marching around in the street.

Civil disobedience has to have a purpose or it's just mayhem in the streets. I have not been involved in any protests the last couple of months and I'm just not sure what is going on now has any purpose. I said along time ago that phase 2 needs to begin. Movements need a purpose and a goal to actually effect change.

As to flag burning. I will never condemn anyone for burning any flag, however it is their right to do so. My take on flag burning is this: Burning a flag is symbolic and indicates wanting destruction of what the flag represents. Back in my HIV/AIDS protest days I always tried to point out a couple of things. Don't burn the US flag. Our anger was not at the country, but at the President (Reagan at first). We should have been burning the Presidential Flag and the flags of the Senate and House.


Thank you! I know I am having some trouble being from this area and experiencing very contrasting Occupy protests around us (SF, our northern CA UC campuses including Cal Berkeley & UC Davis) and what is going on in Oakland- and judgements from outside of our geographical area. I also think there is a core Occupy group in Oakland that does represent what is positive about the movement. But many have left to join other cities in the movement due to how destructive and yes, dangerous, Oakland has become.

This bothers me a lot because as an East Bay Area resident, I have always felt that Oakland itself always gets demonized no matter what is going on. And it has some of the strongest grass roots/community organizing history in CA and the nation when we look at the history of social movements.

Occupy Oakland has hurt important segments of the 98% in ways I just can't get behind. It is taking away the very resources that so many people in Oakland need. And there is a very vibrant African American (that is quite young) business community in Oakland that have struggled and fought to re-vitalize areas of the city in order to build stronger foundations for their youth that I see being victimized by the antics of OO. It hurts to see this and their pain.

I agree with what you say about flag burning, too.

[Toughy]

Well, unless I'm mistaken there was a purpose. I'm not in Oakland so I don't know. But Occupy Oakland seems to believe they had a purpose or at least their media is releasing this like it was their purpose to occupy just one vacant building and the purpose for the occupation seems logical and in keeping with the whole idea of occupying in general:


Occupy Oakland Media reacted to the use of force by Oakland police:

Yesterday, the Oakland Police deployed hundreds of officers in riot gear so as to prevent Occupy Oakland from putting a building, vacant for 6 years with no plans for use, from being occupied and “re-purposed” as a community center. The Occupy Oakland GA passed a proposal calling for the space to be turned into a social center, convergence center and headquarters of the Occupy Oakland movement.

The police actions tonight cost the city of Oakland hundreds of thousands of dollars, and they repeatedly violated their own crowd control guidelines and protesters civil rights.

With all the problems in our city, should preventing activists from putting a vacant building to better use be their highest priority? Was it worth the hundreds of thousands of dollars they spent?


How about a conversation with City Hall about 're-purposing' the Convention Center? Mayor Quan (not my favorite mayor ever) was on the side of the Occupy folks in the beginning as were several members of the City Council. There was political capital that could have been used in negotiations to do something useful with the Convention Center. But then they just thought up this Convention Center Occupy. Why not talk when you have an advantage. The government IS the people and the people need to talk to our elected officials in order to effect change in the government.

This re-purposing the Convention Center is a brand new idea that has sprung up because folks have lost interest in the closing of the port (it's not a good idea to continue that action) as well as playing chase in the streets with the cops. Do you think it makes sense to break in and occupy a basically windowless building vacant for 6 years with no lights, no heat, no running water, no sanitation and make it a library for kids and feed folks? Please.........that makes as much sense as pissing into the wind......

The teachers and the unions and the everyday folks have grown very tired of property damage done by anarchists and idiots who are not being loudly denounced by the apparent general assemblies. The cops are not spray painting buildings, they are not breaking windows and other kinds of damage to small business all over downtown Oakland. There is NO reason to throw things at cops, break windows, make signs that say 'kill all pigs' and 'fuck the pigs' and general bullshit like that. Childish pointless bullshit. And please..........how chickenshit can you be to run into a YMCA to avoid arrest. When I was an activist the whole point was to get arrested peacefully and the more arrested the better the press. IF they would knock off all that bullshit, then the police would not behave the way they do. This IS a two way street with fault on both sides.

Occupy Oakland needs to get it's act together. They are failing and failing miserably at helping the 98-99% in Oakland. Unfortunately they are actually damaging the 98-99% because of property damage and clean up costs. Services WILL be cut and the public library is already under duress, as well as the teachers being laid off and small business having to pay their own clean up costs from spray paint and broken windows.

Way to go guys......big help to your fellow 98-99 percenters......and what have you done to effect change in money in politics and the influence of multi-national corporations and their continuing destruction of our democracy?

[Slowpurr]

[QUOTE=Toughy;516720]

This re-purposing the Convention Center is a brand new idea that has sprung up because folks have lost interest in the closing of the port (it's not a good idea to continue that action) as well as playing chase in the streets with the cops. Do you think it makes sense to break in and occupy a basically windowless building vacant for 6 years with no lights, no heat, no running water, no sanitation and make it a library for kids and feed folks? Please.........that makes as much sense as pissing into the wind......
Do you think it makes sense to respond to the occupation of "a basically windowless building vacant for 6 years with no lights, no heat, no running water, no sanitation" with teargas, stun grenades, and less-lethal shotgun projectiles?

excerpt from NY Times January 29, 2012
Fleeing teargas but still trapped, people pulled down chainlink fences and scurried out through underground parking garages in order to make an escape back to the streets. I waited as long as I could in the stinging air before crossing the previously fenced-in property; police held their lines, preventing people from leaving any other way. From kettle to boil was only seven minutes. This does not sound like anyone was "playing chase" to me.

I empathize with what it must be like to be living it like you are. I think you hit on something with your two way street comment too. Although, having watched footage of the Occupy New York conflict as well as a few others I would have to disagree with your assertion that the police would act mercifully given certain behavior on the part of the protesters.

[QUOTE=Toughy;516720]
When I was an activist the whole point was to get arrested peacefully and the more arrested the better the press.
I think the movement is working the press angle.

[SoNotHer]

Thank you for the other news version of this and your comments. I appreciate both.

Of some other comments, while I don't condone hurting the American worker or American small business, I define "violence" as something a little larger and more grave than what comes out of a protest like this weekend's.

Let's not forget that a greater violence in the form of a hierarchy at full tilt with more than two-thirds of us under water or barely treading water is being perpetrated. And this violence and lawlessness is clandestine, codified, sanctioned, glorified and as insidious as a cancer.

I assure you the chosen few circling the upright bow of the boat care little for those drowning at the ship's submerged stern. And in fact, their grasp of the air depends on the weight that anchors beneath them that which, given a different thrust and notion, would capsize them.


Well, unless I'm mistaken there was a purpose. I'm not in Oakland so I don't know. But Occupy Oakland seems to believe they had a purpose or at least their media is releasing this like it was their purpose to occupy just one vacant building and the purpose for the occupation seems logical and in keeping with the whole idea of occupying in general:


Occupy Oakland Media reacted to the use of force by Oakland police:

Yesterday, the Oakland Police deployed hundreds of officers in riot gear so as to prevent Occupy Oakland from putting a building, vacant for 6 years with no plans for use, from being occupied and “re-purposed” as a community center. The Occupy Oakland GA passed a proposal calling for the space to be turned into a social center, convergence center and headquarters of the Occupy Oakland movement.

The police actions tonight cost the city of Oakland hundreds of thousands of dollars, and they repeatedly violated their own crowd control guidelines and protesters civil rights.

With all the problems in our city, should preventing activists from putting a vacant building to better use be their highest priority? Was it worth the hundreds of thousands of dollars they spent?

[Toughy]

The Oakland Police Department is completely fucked up, has been for YEARS and Occupy Oakland and everyone else in Oakland knows that. Most of what they did was not necessary and a complete over-reaction. However that IS NOT the point and begs the bigger question of how OO moves forward.

I still say it is a two way street and communication between police/city officials and OO, has been completely lacking from the beginning. OO looks more and more like street thugs and less like a social justice movement every protest directly because of property damage to small business. Are folks condoning breaking windows and spray painting small businesses?

OO is NOT (in my opinion) working the local mainstream press angle or any other angle in any effective way. They are rapidily loosing the support of the 98-99%. I heard it today in 2 different local coffee shops/cafes known to be places you would find sympathetic folks.....ya know internet cafes with latte liberals and college kids and unemployed folks... The tactics they are using are not working.

It is the pinnacle of insanity to keep doing the same thing over and over again and expect a different result.

By the way...........I promise my social justice politics are far far to the left of most people on this website. I have been a staunch defender of the Occupy Movement from the beginning, however they are losing my support because of their own stupidity.

[Toughy]

One more thing about ALL of the protests in Oakland. The large majority of those arrested for vandalism and other charges do NOT live in Oakland. This situation was truly apparent in this last protest.

As a long time resident of Oakland, I do not want idiots who do not live in or contribute to my town to be reeking havoc in our streets and/or public buildings. Enough. I am glad Mayor Quan is requesting an injunction to stop those who do not live in Oakland and have repeated protest connected arrests from coming to Oakland. Go play in your own town's streets and public buildings.

Heard in my living room tonite from a person in their 20s who lives in the City (SF) and works at the Peets Coffee shop a door or two from the big Wells Fargo bank and offices: I work at Peets and the protesters came in and bought coffee before their last Occupy protest at the bank. Guess where Peet's banks....where my paycheck comes from? Wells Fargo............

[AtLast]

The Oakland Police Department is completely fucked up, has been for YEARS and Occupy Oakland and everyone else in Oakland knows that. Most of what they did was not necessary and a complete over-reaction. However that IS NOT the point and begs the bigger question of how OO moves forward.

I still say it is a two way street and communication between police/city officials and OO, has been completely lacking from the beginning. OO looks more and more like street thugs and less like a social justice movement every protest directly because of property damage to small business. Are folks condoning breaking windows and spray painting small businesses?

OO is NOT (in my opinion) working the local mainstream press angle or any other angle in any effective way. They are rapidily loosing the support of the 98-99%. I heard it today in 2 different local coffee shops/cafes known to be places you would find sympathetic folks.....ya know internet cafes with latte liberals and college kids and unemployed folks... The tactics they are using are not working.

It is the pinnacle of insanity to keep doing the same thing over and over again and expect a different result.

By the way...........I promise my social justice politics are far far to the left of most people on this website. I have been a staunch defender of the Occupy Movement from the beginning, however they are losing my support because of their own stupidity.

Toughy- anyone that knows you could not view as anything other than far left and a defender of the core ideas of the Occupy movement.

I personally find this a difficult situation because the Occupy movement has and is making a difference nationally across cultures, economic class, gender, etc. In fact, there are now some agreeing from Wall Street about key factors the movement is calling out.

Yes, the OO people that do not live and work or struggle in Oakland have been at the seat of OO problems and are turning off many of us here in the East Bay Area.

[SoNotHer]

5WEK6HgXBsQ&feature=related

1GvfRjimMT8&context=C31d7801ADOEgsToPDskLcVslLpDzgO_GLRpc0NBZH

[Toughy]

.....said in my most gentle tone..........

.....video/audio/talk of only police violence (or peaceful protest) serves neither side and does not one single thing to help change the inherent violence of unfettered capitalism as both an economic and political paradigm.....

capitalism is an economic system that values money/individual profit/the free market over democracy

Democracy is a political system that protects the people from the carpetbaggers and industrialists............democracy does it's best to create a socially and economically just society....

economic systems are egotistical and political systems are altruistic..

democracy is a political system with capitalism being the economic system......the political systems job is to protect and serve the people, not the corporations with a profit motive.


uhhhhh..........exactly what has the Occupy Oakland group done to dispel the violence of poverty? I have a friend who teaches in an elementary school in downtown Oakland. She has spent HOURS of her limited classroom time calming the fears of the kids just trying to go to school and learn to read and write................why are the protesters in downtown Oakland and not out in the affluent neighborhood terrorizing those children who are mostly white? Why are the OO protests scaring the shit out of mostly kids of color in downtown schools?

[Cin]

IF they would knock off all that bullshit, then the police would not behave the way they do.

I can barely fathom that people who witnessed the vicious and unprovoked attacks by para-military police forces across the country perpetrated on non-violent groups of citizens exercising their right to protest would have those kind of expectations of the police. But even those who can still manage that kind of faith could certainly understand that others, especially those others on the front lines of this protest movement, might have a different expectation.

Way to go guys......big help to your fellow 98-99 percenters......and what have you done to effect change in money in politics and the influence of multi-national corporations and their continuing destruction of our democracy?


It seems to me that the Occupy movement has made a major difference in how many people, those directly involved, those on the periphery, and even those who only had limited and slanted exposure through the corporate owned media, understand many issues that affect the poor, the working class and the middle class. People understand things much differently than they did before Occupy Wall Street. You can’t change something until you first understand what needs changing. The movement has given people the words to articulate what they knew in their hearts. They knew something is radically wrong. There is a much better understanding of what exactly that is thanks to the movement.


I have a friend who teaches in an elementary school in downtown Oakland. She has spent HOURS of her limited classroom time calming the fears of the kids just trying to go to school and learn to read and write

It would seem to me that this would be a perfect opportunity to open dialogue with students about the Occupy movement and the reasons why so many people feel the need to protest policies perpetrated on them by a corporate controlled government. It would be a great time to begin to educate them regarding some truly frightening things that are happening. Things that will affect their chances to have the life they might wish for themselves. Conversations about the cost of public university education for residents as well as the chances for enrollment might be beneficial. Perhaps a look at interesting educational choices that are being made in places such as Tucson Az and the long term effects of this type of censorship. Maybe even examining the very real possibility of public education going the way of the prison and foster care systems and becoming privatized and what that will mean for students and their futures. All valid and useful conversations for kids to engage in and infinitely more frightening than any Occupy protest I would imagine.

uhhhhh..........exactly what has the Occupy Oakland group done to dispel the violence of poverty? why are the protesters in downtown Oakland and not out in the affluent neighborhood terrorizing those children who are mostly white? Why are the OO protests scaring the shit out of mostly kids of color in downtown schools?

I don’t think the idea of the Occupy Movement is to terrorize children of any color. I think they are in downtown Oakland rather than affluent neighborhoods terrorizing white kids because terrorizing kids is not the focus of the movement. I don’t think I’m even capable of having this conversation…

While I was trying to respond to this last paragraph about the Occupy movement terrorizing children it came to me that I am really wasting my time here. I had missed something quite important. I had failed to realize that this thread had morphed into a place for people who do not support the Occupy movement, or who have issues with the direction the movement is taking or not taking as the case may be. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and should be able to have a place to discuss them with like-minded people. Since I am not like-minded I will now bow out of this thread.

[SoNotHer]

I agree with so much written here. Inasmuch as I think it's important for the queer community to examine its own internalized homophobia and isms on a regular basis, it's important for this any movement to analyze the ways in which we've stopped challenging and believing and have gone back to accepting the status quo because it is, after all, what we know so why not learn to love the bomb.

The protests will continue, whether we protest the protests, or not, and as long as inequality continues and in fact thrives. And whether or not we deflect and redirect the fight internally or we actually direct our energies toward change - well that's all up to us.

This is the threat to our lives. We all face it. We all operate in our society in relation to a system. Now is the system going to eat you up and relieve you of your humanity or are you going to be able to use the system to human purposes?

Joseph Campbell




I can barely fathom that people who witnessed the vicious and unprovoked attacks by para-military police forces across the country perpetrated on non-violent groups of citizens exercising their right to protest would have those kind of expectations of the police. But even those who can still manage that kind of faith could certainly understand that others, especially those others on the front lines of this protest movement, might have a different expectation.


It seems to me that the Occupy movement has made a major difference in how many people, those directly involved, those on the periphery, and even those who only had limited and slanted exposure through the corporate owned media, understand many issues that affect the poor, the working class and the middle class. People understand things much differently than they did before Occupy Wall Street. You can’t change something until you first understand what needs changing. The movement has given people the words to articulate what they knew in their hearts. They knew something is radically wrong. There is a much better understanding of what exactly that is thanks to the movement.


It would seem to me that this would be a perfect opportunity to open dialogue with students about the Occupy movement and the reasons why so many people feel the need to protest policies perpetrated on them by a corporate controlled government. It would be a great time to begin to educate them regarding some truly frightening things that are happening. Things that will affect their chances to have the life they might wish for themselves. Conversations about the cost of public university education for residents as well as the chances for enrollment might be beneficial. Perhaps a look at interesting educational choices that are being made in places such as Tucson Az and the long term effects of this type of censorship. Maybe even examining the very real possibility of public education going the way of the prison and foster care systems and becoming privatized and what that will mean for students and their futures. All valid and useful conversations for kids to engage in and infinitely more frightening than any Occupy protest I would imagine.


I don’t think the idea of the Occupy Movement is to terrorize children of any color. I think they are in downtown Oakland rather than affluent neighborhoods terrorizing white kids because terrorizing kids is not the focus of the movement. I don’t think I’m even capable of having this conversation…

While I was trying to respond to this last paragraph about the Occupy movement terrorizing children it came to me that I am really wasting my time here. I had missed something quite important. I had failed to realize that this thread had morphed into a place for people who do not support the Occupy movement, or who have issues with the direction the movement is taking or not taking as the case may be. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and should be able to have a place to discuss them with like-minded people. Since I am not like-minded I will now bow out of this thread.

[SoNotHer]

http://sumofus.org/campaigns/bofa/

"Dear Mr. Moynihan - I was disappointed to learn about Bank of America's sudden recall of credit lines for many of its small business customers. These small businesses are vital to our economy, and are particularly vulnerable at a time when our country is still coming out of the recession. Please take a stand for entrepreneurs and don't force these businesses into refinancing at punishing rates. Thank you."

Bank of America is squeezing the most vulnerable businesses in our economy, our small businesses that employ millions of Americans, by recalling, with no prior notice, the long-term loans they need to survive. The alternatives Bank of America offers are stark: if these mom and pop operations cannot repay their loans immediately, they face either bankruptcy or refinancing at punishingly high interest rates. This money grab by BoA is guaranteed to have two results: line Bank of America’s pockets with more cash, and force the surviving small businesses into even thinner profit margins and even more layoffs.

This is utterly unacceptable from a company that would not even exist today if it hadn’t been bailed out itself with our tax dollars. More than ever, we need our small businesses, and this is the wrong action at the wrong time. Tell Bank of America President Brian Moynihan to stop putting the squeeze on small business.

[Toughy]

Miss Tick please don't take your toys and go home. Why not look at ALL aspects of a social justice movement?

The Oakland PD will never change. It has a history going back to the 60s with federal consent decrees and legal monitors and it does not matter who is mayor or who is the police chief. They have not been able to change their culture. It does not make me happy, but I am a realist.

The best chance we have is to remember and adopt some old civil disobedience tactics and rules. AtLast pointed out the different tactics used by different Occupy folks in the greater Bay Area.

The college kids garnered HUGE support because of one asshole cop with a military grade can of pepper spray. The students were actually engaged in civil disobedience. They peacefully demonstrated, risked and were arrested, with their faces fully visible and the entire world saw that stupid cop spraying them. There is no better single picture of kids sitting down with locked arms being sprayed in the face. Peaceful protest with a message the world will hear.

Contrast that with pictures of folks with covered faces throwing rocks, bottles, ______ at police. Those same folks are also throwing rocks and breaking store windows, spray painting 'fuck the pigs' and 'occupy oakland' on businesses across downtown. They have their faces covered and tear down fences and run into buildings full of folks at the Y to avoid being arrested. All that, will be on the news and violence will be the topic and nothing will be said about the social justice movement.

I dunno..........which tactic makes more sense?

I don't believe anyone outside of Oakland actually understands what the children of the 'hood experience as part of their daily lives. I don't believe anyone has the right to suggest a 'teaching moment' should occur unless they are teaching in the schools that have the helicopters over head. Today the job of teachers is to spoon feed facts that will be on the tests the children have to take. Critical thinking is not part of any (inner) city public school system and under current policy that will not change. Let none of us who are not in the classrooms of inner city schools pretend we have any idea of what a 'teaching moment' should be.

[atomiczombie]

I think there might be some confusion about whether Toughy is criticizing just Occupy Oakland or the Occupy movement as a whole. I hear her talking specifically about Occupy Oakland and it's choice of tactics and not about the movement as a whole and the merits of it's existence/tactics. Toughy, am I correct?

[Toughy]

Drew you are correct......laughin...............but

If folks think the middle of the country is supportive of the occupy movement...........well maybe you should get out in the middle of the US. I simply said Occupy and my intelligent thoughtful brother-in-law went off like a frigging rocket and actually had to leave the house. Middle america see Oakland with masked folks breaking windows, tearing down fences, breaking into City Hall and basically destroying the first floor and the police trying to control the situation.

And that scene is repeated across the US.

We lost the national political capital (and Obama) when the cop with the pepper spray and the cause of the Occupy movement disappeared and was replaced by masked mostly men reeking havoc on a city somewhere in the US.

[Cin]

Miss Tick please don't take your toys and go home.

I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to sound so dramatic. And in hindsight I should have shut up about shutting up. This really isn’t about taking my toys and going home. I have participated in this thread pretty much since its inception and it feels bad to discover how it has changed. And that’s about ME, meaning it feels bad for ME, not necessarily for anyone else. I am not saying there is anything bad in differing opinions. It's just this thread had never been, for me, about a place to debate differing ideology. There are lots of threads to do that. It felt more like a convergence. A place to bear witness; to share something quite magical. But that time has past. It just isn’t going to work for me any longer. I don’t believe I have anything constructive to offer. I can’t even figure out how to engage in the conversation. I realized this while trying to address how Occupy Oakland is terrorizing school children. But I hope the thread continues to be a productive outlet for others.

[Slowpurr]

I am sorry that anyone has personally been affected by the situation in Chicago.

I have reason to believe that people have felt personally obligated and were brought to action because they have been affected by the political machine that is eating them and their families alive. I am compelled to urge thinking folk to remain alert to why the OWS movement began in the first place and to why it has taken on such momentum. There is an underlying problem with the current trends of the government. It is apparent in how we view our world. Money, power and control are not the answers and they become less attractive when they affect the way we treat our environment and disregard the basic needs of even our own citizens. The OWS movement has attracted and mobilized many people and these participants are not just students, ner'er- do-wells or anarchists. One only needs to read or watch information about the movement to illuminate this. Take the time to meet some of the people that have put themselves out there.

I do not judge a police force by the actions of one or two officers and I will extend the same courtesy to other groups of individuals. The consideration may not truly be worthy of the one or two officers but it is certainly worthy of the ideal behind the service and to those that respect it. I extend the same respect to those folk taking their time and energy in a cause that they believe in. The cause has merit, deserves my respect and has it.

Miss Tick, prepare for blatant manipulation. I would be extremely shocked and disappointed if you gave up sharing the insight and information that I know is held dear by you, I also know that you thrive on and deeply cherish the exchange of ideas. I would feel the same if anyone that posts here felt like they were no longer being heard. If the unpopular ideas and information that you have grown fat on and that sustain you today were no longer available how would you survive? It is a service to share. It is a duty. Will it be met with falsehoods, aggressive assaults or just plain indifference? You tell me. Isn't that what the fight is about? Make a difference. I, for one, greatly appreciate your input. xo

"Truth is not determined by majority vote." ~Doug Gwyn

[AtLast]

One of the most important aspects of the entire Occupy movement is having a forum to both agree and disagree and be heard. Also, every city that is participating with protests has it's unique regional flavor. To me, this has been helpful to better understand things outside of my own region and what others are experiencing. This is part of the beauty of the entire movement.

Although it was hard to take criticism back in the 60's about social movements and our discourse as activists, it was an important aspect of growth in order to effect change. No way will all of us agree with tactics utilized. Being able to discuss these things is important and for me, at the core of how Occupy will continue to bring awareness about inequity in the US.

[Slowpurr]

Thank you to those who pointed out my typo. Oakland. I stand corrected. Proof reading at 5am is just out of the question. Sorry.

[SoNotHer]

Larry Cohen has the kind of "fire in the belly" that inspires, inspires, inspires. This motivates me, and I want to see this kind of fight for workers' rights across the country and with other fields:

fNOQEO98mD8


Here's the sample letter that gets sent to your representatives.

fNOQEO98mD8

Watch the video to find out why then call 1-888-516-5820 to connect to your Senator's office.

When you are connected say:

Hello, my name is _____ and I am a constituent. I am calling to ask the Senator not to pass the FAA Reauthorization Bill with the unrelated labor provision that would gut collective bargaining rights for aviation and rail workers. This has no place in a bill for funding of aviation safety, heath and security. Get it out of the bill or don't pass it. Thank you.

From -

http://www.cwa-union.org/video/entry/cwa_president_larry_cohen_on_faa_reauthorization_a nd_workers_rights#.Ty128PmLKSM

[Quintease]

Good god! Have you people seen this? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/11/andrew-breitbart-freaks-o_n_1270390.html

[MsMerrick]

Good god! Have you people seen this? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/11/andrew-breitbart-freaks-o_n_1270390.html

Yeah I saw it.. Wonder what drugs he was on ? Very whacked....

[atomiczombie]

Good god! Have you people seen this? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/11/andrew-breitbart-freaks-o_n_1270390.html

He really wasn't behaving himself, was he?

[Dominique]

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/511964/BANKER-1-PERCENT-TIP-RECEIPT.jpg

[atomiczombie]

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/511964/BANKER-1-PERCENT-TIP-RECEIPT.jpg

What an ass. Sheesh.

[Kätzchen]

This morning I got a txt from Team Blue about our President drafting and implementing a US amendment to the constitution to clean up ethics issues and term limits for the US Supreme Court. I was like: “Yeah, I’m on your side Joe, Let’s Go Team Blue!”

I’m bumping this ages old thread by Atomiczombie that is ripe with posts made years ago that reflect the challenges people face everyday in America: Police brutality, brutal treatment of those who migrate and immigrate to the US, problematic institutional issues that are still current today with Wall Street, Banking entities, Tax evasion by the so-called wealthy (t—p, et al), and of course at the bottom of the ‘swamp’ is all the GOP elected officials who make laws and decisions in the best interest of themselves and the rich who don’t give two hoots about the ordinary citizen, big pharmaceutical interest or PAC’s whose dark interests want your money to keep tearing you down so they can ‘rule the world’ (tears for fears reference).

We need a tsunami of voters who will hurtle us past the dark interests of those who continue to tear down our country and violate democracy.

I hope new members, or members still around, enjoy reading this thread. Thank you to all the members here who posted years ago.

Remember: Freedom — it’s what we must fight for every day, every year and in every election cycle in our country. Freedom from violence, freedom from organized oppression, freedom in our personal lives and freedom from fraud, and freedom from dark interests who only care about lining their pockets with your hard earned money. Don’t let them win. Support Democracy. Support Freedom.

[Kätzchen]

I am bumping AtomicZombie’s forum thread again today. I miss the members of our online community who cared deeply about socio-cultural-political issues that continue to dominate American’s lives.

In today’s current “economy” it would seem that Team Hate is ‘ruling’ the world (Trump & his family of crooks, con-artists & the GOP, etc) and in other places across the globe there is Team Hate in Russia (Putin) and Team Hate in a Mediterranean country who is killing (ethnic cleansing) a certain indigenous people that do not deserve to die or be starved to death or shot at or (…).

The apocalypse is really here and all people are concerned about, in my opinion, is political rivals who outclass them in ethical treatment practices and how they can get revenge on them. But, according to their own version of biblical prophecy “all of it is as it should be.” Meanwhile … people are so overwhelmed with news coverage and reporting about all these evil deeds, that it would appear that the Haters are winning, every single moment of life on earth.

We need an Occupy Hateful People movement supported by a People for Life & Love movement, I think.🤔

Before it’s too late. (w)(w)(w) :vigil: :vigil: :praying: :praying: :praying: