PDA

View Full Version : Occupy Wall Street protest


MaBaker
Oct 2nd, 2011, 10:08 AM
Declaration of the Occupation of New York City (https://occupywallst.org/forum/first-official-release-from-occupy-wall-street/)


NcwjdbMq2hI

Video from Friday, September 30. It seems that the crowd is getting bigger

6ht08vBra9M


From yesterday, October 1. If https://occupywallst.org/ has right informations, around 700 protesters arrested.

XqWEPwuIYtA

Are the police officers allowed to do this?

hMFfU9kj8P8

moD2JnGTToA

Couple of videos from Boston

oPnwib351Kk

oDCNFJByXbA


As I understood, big tv stations are not giving too much attention to this. Since there are a lot of Americans on this forum, what's your oppinion on this?

duhcity
Oct 2nd, 2011, 10:50 AM
The entire thing is a mess.
The protesters are disorganized and cannot collectively tell their message. Because really, what are they trying to say? It started with a stronger belief, and it's been diluted by varying opinions.
I'm all for legal assembly, but streaming on the bridge and actively trying to disturbing the flow of traffic and order is obviously going to get you into trouble.

And the NYPD response has been a complete mess.

Bijoux0021
Oct 2nd, 2011, 12:07 PM
As I understood, big tv stations are not giving too much attention to this. Since there are a lot of Americans on this forum, what's your oppinion on this?
That same 1% of people who control 99% of the wealth in America also control the media. They decide what we should see on the news and what we should read in newspapers. They all sleep in the same bed together.

Thanks to Youtube, Occupy Wall Street was being covered all over the world from day one, whereas TV stations and newspapers in America were ignoring this worthy story. Some in the mainstream media are still ignoring it today.

Not even the New York Times was covering this story until a week ago after 87 protesters were arrested and some were assaulted by police. The New York Times should be ashamed of itself. Their reporters have covered similar protests all over the world this year, millions of miles away, some in countries where the Governments didn't even allow coverage and access of such news. Yet some how, some way, those stories were everyday front page news on the New York Times.

Bismarck.
Oct 2nd, 2011, 12:15 PM
The entire thing is a mess.
The protesters are disorganized and cannot collectively tell their message. Because really, what are they trying to say? It started with a stronger belief, and it's been diluted by varying opinions.
I'm all for legal assembly, but streaming on the bridge and actively trying to disturbing the flow of traffic and order is obviously going to get you into trouble.

And the NYPD response has been a complete mess.

I agree with all of this. I was watching the news coverage this morning and it just looked like a complete shambles: poorly executed, poorly controlled and with the protesters not even having anything interesting to say.

MaBaker
Oct 2nd, 2011, 03:38 PM
The entire thing is a mess.
The protesters are disorganized and cannot collectively tell their message. Because really, what are they trying to say? It started with a stronger belief, and it's been diluted by varying opinions.
I'm all for legal assembly, but streaming on the bridge and actively trying to disturbing the flow of traffic and order is obviously going to get you into trouble.

And the NYPD response has been a complete mess.
Standing on the sidewalk and yelling gets you into trouble (pepper spray in the face) too.
Though I agree about protesters being disorganized so far, but it seems their number is growing.
That same 1% of people who control 99% of the wealth in America also control the media. They decide what we should see on the news and what we should read in newspapers. They all sleep in the same bed together.

Thanks to Youtube, Occupy Wall Street was being covered all over the world from day one, whereas TV stations and newspapers in America were ignoring this worthy story. Some in the mainstream media are still ignoring it today.

Not even the New York Times was covering this story until a week ago after 87 protesters were arrested and some were assaulted by police. The New York Times should be ashamed of itself. Their reporters have covered similar protests all over the world this year, millions of miles away, some in countries where the Governments didn't even allow coverage and access of such news. Yet some how, some way, those stories were everyday front page news on the New York Times.
I first heard about this a week ago and that's why I was surprised that the mainstream media are not giving a lot of (if any) informations about this. But I guess that's one of the ways to control the protest. And yeah, it's a bit ridiculous how some US media are covering protests around the world, but ignoring what's happening in their own country.

*JR*
Oct 2nd, 2011, 03:58 PM
We need to go "all England" on Wall St! :devil:

http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=442113

antonella
Oct 2nd, 2011, 06:03 PM
The revolution begins...........

duhcity
Oct 2nd, 2011, 09:09 PM
Standing on the sidewalk and yelling gets you into trouble (pepper spray in the face) too.
Though I agree about protesters being disorganized so far, but it seems their number is growing.

I first heard about this a week ago and that's why I was surprised that the mainstream media are not giving a lot of (if any) informations about this. But I guess that's one of the ways to control the protest. And yeah, it's a bit ridiculous how some US media are covering protests around the world, but ignoring what's happening in their own country.

Yes, there have been some gross violations of police conduct in the time of the protest.
But the mass arrest yesterday was seemingly justified. People are saying that the police led them onto the bridge. But they were not arrested for being on the bridge. They were arrested for purposely affecting traffic flow on the bridge.

What looks like happened, to what I read, was that an organization at Occupy Wall Street had a plan to peacefully cross the bridge. A mass walk would need crowd control, and the NYPD was notified. Something got out of hand, and protestors reacted rashly, and the police in return also reacted rashly, likely thinking that the supposedly peaceful plan had been a setup as a mass demonstration on the bridge.

Everyone comes out lookign worse

Brena
Oct 2nd, 2011, 09:20 PM
The revolution begins...........

*fingers crossed*

Martian Jeza
Oct 3rd, 2011, 12:30 AM
Welcome in the Police State of America ! Those policemen should be ashamed of themselves ! Let the peaceful protestors do their job ! They ain't the terrorist of this world ! Wall Street and the Banksters are the true terrorists of this world ! They are responsible for poverty, unemployment, crimes all over the world but yet none of them are in jail !

I completely endorse OccupyWallStreet ! They shouldn't respond to the provocations and the intimidation of the police !

It's time humanity wakes up to bring down the true terrorists of this planet and it isn't Al Qaeda at all !

All who are in Obama's team are Pro Wall Street, Council of Foreign Relations, Bilderberg, Free Masons, Zionists !

Don't forget the Jesuits and Knights of Malta !

stevos
Oct 3rd, 2011, 01:18 AM
Also every report shows the police stopping people and bunching them together on the bridge, not allowing them to move. Then telling everyone that the protestors were the ones stopping traffic. Instead they stopped them and then arrested them after they had nowhere to move.
The exact same shit happened at the G8/G20, I love how people still have all this faith in their police force as if they have the public's good in mind. It's hilarious how people are spoonfed these ideas.

*JR*
Oct 3rd, 2011, 01:23 AM
All who are in Obama's team are Pro Wall Street, Council of Foreign Relations, Bilderberg, Free Masons, Zionists !

Don't forget the Jesuits and Knights of Malta !

You forgot to list Opus Dei and The Trilateral Commission. :p

Berlin_Calling
Oct 3rd, 2011, 02:09 AM
We need to go "all England" on Wall St! :devil:

http://www.tennisforum.com/showthread.php?t=442113

Oh yeah, riots are hilarious. Let's start burning, destructing and looting in lower Manhattan! Seriously, are you for real? :help::weirdo::facepalm:

MaBaker
Oct 3rd, 2011, 09:08 AM
Yes, there have been some gross violations of police conduct in the time of the protest.
But the mass arrest yesterday was seemingly justified. People are saying that the police led them onto the bridge. But they were not arrested for being on the bridge. They were arrested for purposely affecting traffic flow on the bridge.

What looks like happened, to what I read, was that an organization at Occupy Wall Street had a plan to peacefully cross the bridge. A mass walk would need crowd control, and the NYPD was notified. Something got out of hand, and protestors reacted rashly, and the police in return also reacted rashly, likely thinking that the supposedly peaceful plan had been a setup as a mass demonstration on the bridge.

Everyone comes out lookign worse
It seems more like that this happened:
Also every report shows the police stopping people and bunching them together on the bridge, not allowing them to move. Then telling everyone that the protestors were the ones stopping traffic. Instead they stopped them and then arrested them after they had nowhere to move.
The exact same shit happened at the G8/G20, I love how people still have all this faith in their police force as if they have the public's good in mind. It's hilarious how people are spoonfed these ideas.
kz172asCf2M

From this video, it seems that police were leading them to the bridge, stopped them, then started to arrest people.

duhcity
Oct 3rd, 2011, 09:40 AM
It seems more like that this happened:

kz172asCf2M

From this video, it seems that police were leading them to the bridge, stopped them, then started to arrest people.


Before I start, I want to just state that I really do want to support OWS, and have no vendetta against them. However, I honestly can't support the cause if they blatantly break laws. And I also apologize because it's 3:30 am, and this post is poorly written.

This post will look like I'm supporting the NYPD, but rather, I'm supporting the idea that many OWS participants knowingly broke the law, and they need to accept the consequences.

First, take a look for yourself: http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/police-gave-warnings-at-bridge-videos-show/?smid=tw-nytmetro&seid=auto

FSf7JzpD7kg
6rwWmM1h-P8

The NYPD at one point did warn them that they could be arrested. But it's rather obvious that they didn't try as hard as they could to stop them. Instead, they did the bare minimum. And they knew that doing so would allow them to arrest a ton of people that have been a logistical nightmare for the NYPD. It's how you view the situation. Should the police have done more to prevent this from happening? In my opinion, no. YOU ARE WALKING ONTO THE PART OF THE BRIDGE RESERVED FOR VEHICLE TRAFFIC. Have common sense and accept the consequences for your actions.

And a quote from the organizers :

Direct Action—

Sandy—Direct Action planned for a peaceful march over the Brooklyn Bridge pedestrian walkway. During the march a small group of individuals took it upon themselves to take the vehicle roadway that was not blocked off. Immediately people from Direct Action started communicating to protestors that there were two options. The planned route on the public pedestrian walkway, or if they wanted, to autonomously take the vehicle roadway, which we warned them was illegal and highly unsafe. Many people were unfortunately corralled into the vehicle roadway.

And this perfectly sums up why I cannot support OWS. There is no leader, no voice, and absolutely no message anymore. There are too many interests groups that aren't willing to work together, and communication from those who "lead" this protest and those who are protesting with them seem almost non-existent. The problem is, a few people decided that they were going to cross the bridge. And they knew they were going to be in trouble, but were willing to do so anyway. But this information was not given to those who are just following in solidarity.



It boils down to this: It is illegal to disrupt the flow of traffic. If you have any semblance of common sense, you would have realized you were walking onto the part of the Brooklyn Bridge reserved for cars. That is illegal. You broke the law, and you deserve to be arrested. Could the police have done more? Yes. And they could have. But they shouldn't have to.

OWS is trying to support a worthy cause, but they are marginalizing and discrediting the entire process by doing what they're doing.

MaBaker
Oct 3rd, 2011, 12:10 PM
Before I start, I want to just state that I really do want to support OWS, and have no vendetta against them. However, I honestly can't support the cause if they blatantly break laws. And I also apologize because it's 3:30 am, and this post is poorly written.

This post will look like I'm supporting the NYPD, but rather, I'm supporting the idea that many OWS participants knowingly broke the law, and they need to accept the consequences.

First, take a look for yourself: http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/02/police-gave-warnings-at-bridge-videos-show/?smid=tw-nytmetro&seid=auto

FSf7JzpD7kg
6rwWmM1h-P8

The NYPD at one point did warn them that they could be arrested. But it's rather obvious that they didn't try as hard as they could to stop them. Instead, they did the bare minimum. And they knew that doing so would allow them to arrest a ton of people that have been a logistical nightmare for the NYPD. It's how you view the situation. Should the police have done more to prevent this from happening? In my opinion, no. YOU ARE WALKING ONTO THE PART OF THE BRIDGE RESERVED FOR VEHICLE TRAFFIC. Have common sense and accept the consequences for your actions.

And a quote from the organizers :



And this perfectly sums up why I cannot support OWS. There is no leader, no voice, and absolutely no message anymore. There are too many interests groups that aren't willing to work together, and communication from those who "lead" this protest and those who are protesting with them seem almost non-existent. The problem is, a few people decided that they were going to cross the bridge. And they knew they were going to be in trouble, but were willing to do so anyway. But this information was not given to those who are just following in solidarity.
Masses aren't characterized by common sense. On the other hand, police is trained for stuff like this. It would've been a lot easier to put a line of police officers at the beginning of the bridge and direct everyone to the sidewalk by not letting them walk into the part of the bridge reserved for vehicle traffic, then to arrest 700+ people. This way it looks like police were leading them to be arrested. And I doubt that many people could actually hear the warning of one officer with a megaphone.
It boils down to this: It is illegal to disrupt the flow of traffic. If you have any semblance of common sense, you would have realized you were walking onto the part of the Brooklyn Bridge reserved for cars. That is illegal. You broke the law, and you deserve to be arrested. Could the police have done more? Yes. And they could have. But they shouldn't have to.

OWS is trying to support a worthy cause, but they are marginalizing and discrediting the entire process by doing what they're doing.
So basically, a bank robber is on his way to the bank. Police picks him up in the street and escorts him to the bank. On the way there, they explain to the robber that what's he about to do is illegal, but escorts him there anyway. After the robber gets out of the bank with money, police arrest him. Could the police have done more? Yes. And they could have. But they shouldn't have to? If they can prevent illegal activity, but don't do that, it's their fault too.

Police looked like a mess so far, but I agree that the crowd without a leader is even a bigger mess.

MaBaker
Oct 3rd, 2011, 12:24 PM
*fingers crossed*
http://i53.tinypic.com/x59h1k.jpg

Lin Lin
Oct 3rd, 2011, 12:42 PM
Great move,people:yeah:

duhcity
Oct 3rd, 2011, 02:34 PM
Masses aren't characterized by common sense. On the other hand, police is trained for stuff like this. It would've been a lot easier to put a line of police officers at the beginning of the bridge and direct everyone to the sidewalk by not letting them walk into the part of the bridge reserved for vehicle traffic, then to arrest 700+ people. This way it looks like police were leading them to be arrested. And I doubt that many people could actually hear the warning of one officer with a megaphone.

So basically, a bank robber is on his way to the bank. Police picks him up in the street and escorts him to the bank. On the way there, they explain to the robber that what's he about to do is illegal, but escorts him there anyway. After the robber gets out of the bank with money, police arrest him. Could the police have done more? Yes. And they could have. But they shouldn't have to? If they can prevent illegal activity, but don't do that, it's their fault too.

Police looked like a mess so far, but I agree that the crowd without a leader is even a bigger mess.

I agree that the police could have done more, but again it was very convenient for them. A mass of people, a few of whom wanted to break the law, with several hundred following behind like sheep was a godsend for them.
Again, it's rather clear that the police were not leading them to their arrest. There were warnings, several times as those videos show by various officers. And who knows what other instances there might have been.

And a crowd of several hundred, all of whom seem hostile and intent on carrying out their mission, is far different than one bank robber.

But, as I say again, the entire thing is a complete and utter mess. Just read that one of the leaders of the protest made up the story about Radiohead coming to perform in order to gain interest and followers for the cause...:rolleyes:

Wigglytuff
Oct 3rd, 2011, 03:12 PM
The entire thing is a mess.
The protesters are disorganized and cannot collectively tell their message. Because really, what are they trying to say? It started with a stronger belief, and it's been diluted by varying opinions.
I'm all for legal assembly, but streaming on the bridge and actively trying to disturbing the flow of traffic and order is obviously going to get you into trouble.

And the NYPD response has been a complete mess.

where to begin,

actually the protestors ASKED FOR and were GRANTED permission to go on to the brigde...

secondly, really, they are occupying wall street and you cant think of any reasons why? they dont need to spell out demands, its clear as hell why they are there. if you dont know, you might want to read about wall street bail outs, tax cuts for the rich, and growing wealth and access in america... its not rocket science... they are there because the pissed at the excesses of the rich at the expense of everyone else...

Wigglytuff
Oct 3rd, 2011, 03:16 PM
a few of whom wanted to break the law

im sorry but that is a bold face lie. what law did the women who were pepper sprayed break? none! what law did the guying taping it who also got pepper sprayed later break? NONE! what law did the other officer who was also pepper sprayed break? NONE!

you are entitled to your own opinion, but you can not tell a bold faced lie when the video is right there.

Wigglytuff
Oct 3rd, 2011, 03:22 PM
It boils down to this: It is illegal to disrupt the flow of traffic. If you have any semblance of common sense, you would have realized you were walking onto the part of the Brooklyn Bridge reserved for cars. That is illegal.

you are so lying again...

the protesters ASKED FOR and were GRANTED the right to set onto the bridge. in order to do this would needed to have some cooperation from the police because otherwise they have have been killed or caused car accidents by going onto oncoming traffic. that did not happen. why? because they had prior approval. plain and simple.

Wigglytuff
Oct 3rd, 2011, 03:25 PM
i can not say what every single person was doing or thinking, but i can say with 100% certainty, that the cop, the women who were penned in and the person recording it did NOTHING to deserve being pepper sprayed or arrested. and that they did not commit or seek to commit any crime.

duhcity
Oct 3rd, 2011, 04:25 PM
This is going to be fun.

where to begin,

actually the protestors ASKED FOR and were GRANTED permission to go on to the brigde...

secondly, really, they are occupying wall street and you cant think of any reasons why? they dont need to spell out demands, its clear as hell why they are there. if you dont know, you might want to read about wall street bail outs, tax cuts for the rich, and growing wealth and access in america... its not rocket science... they are there because the pissed at the excesses of the rich at the expense of everyone else...

1. No. They are allowed to march on the PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY. Those arrested were on the part of the bridge reserved for VEHICLE TRAFFIC.
2. Actually, they do need to spell out why. Bailouts were agreed on by both major political parties of the United States. Tax Cuts for the rich are generally supported by only one party. There is no semblance of leadership or cohesive message in this protest, making it ineffective.

im sorry but that is a bold face lie. what law did the women who were pepper sprayed break? none! what law did the guying taping it who also got pepper sprayed later break? NONE! what law did the other officer who was also pepper sprayed break? NONE!

you are entitled to your own opinion, but you can not tell a bold faced lie when the video is right there.

If you decided you wanted to read all of my posts, I have already stated my opinion that the police are also at fault, and that the instances you mentioned are indeed inexcusable. The law that they broke has been officially listed as disorderly conduct for assembling on a roadway reserved for vehicle traffic.

you are so lying again...

the protesters ASKED FOR and were GRANTED the right to set onto the bridge. in order to do this would needed to have some cooperation from the police because otherwise they have have been killed or caused car accidents by going onto oncoming traffic. that did not happen. why? because they had prior approval. plain and simple.

You are truly ridiculous. The protestors do not, I repeat, DO NOT, NEED TO ASK OR BE GRANTED THE RIGHT TO BE ON THE PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY ON THE BRIDGE. IF YOU LOOK AT PICTURES THERE ARE SEVERAL HUNDRED PEOPLE ON THE PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY OF THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE. THESE PEOPLE WERE NOT ARRESTED . I truly do not understand how you got any idea from my posts or from reading articles that 700 protestors did something legal and sanctioned by the police department of New York City.

And, as I assume you're not from New York, I have been on the Brooklyn Bridge. Without prior permission. I assure you I did not feel the need to stop oncoming traffic nor was I ever exposed to it. I did not need to apply for a permit to take pictures on a gorgeous bridge.

i can not say what every single person was doing or thinking, but i can say with 100% certainty, that the cop, the women who were penned in and the person recording it did NOTHING to deserve being pepper sprayed or arrested. and that they did not commit or seek to commit any crime.

And, as i'll repeat again, Anthony Bologna is under investigation, and that situation is appalling. Those women did not commit a crime. 700 people blocking vehicular traffic is a crime.

And to go back to the idea that this protest needs organization, a quote from the NYT sums it up today. Several dozen activists, some say anarchists, that led the march were warned about the illegality of the actions. They chanted things like "take the bridge" and knowingly broke the law. The people behind them followed suit, and were not given any information from the people they believed were leading them.

Wigglytuff
Oct 3rd, 2011, 06:32 PM
Ok, whatever, you can not talk logic and facts with some people.

The fact they had pre approval to march where they were.
The fact that those women and that fellow cop were not looking to get arrest or pepper sprayed.
The fact that this is America and we have freedom of assembly.

Liars and fools will say those women and that cop deserved to be pepper sprayed. The fact that charges were dropped for most people arrested and that the videos clearly show peaceful assembly is plain to any thinking person. For fox news viewers and their kin, well it is what it is.

MaBaker
Oct 3rd, 2011, 08:40 PM
I agree that the police could have done more, but again it was very convenient for them. A mass of people, a few of whom wanted to break the law, with several hundred following behind like sheep was a godsend for them.
Again, it's rather clear that the police were not leading them to their arrest. There were warnings, several times as those videos show by various officers. And who knows what other instances there might have been.

And a crowd of several hundred, all of whom seem hostile and intent on carrying out their mission, is far different than one bank robber.
I don't think it's clear, but that's just my opinion. I really do think that police could prevent things like that, especially when the protesters don't behave violently.
But, as I say again, the entire thing is a complete and utter mess. Just read that one of the leaders of the protest made up the story about Radiohead coming to perform in order to gain interest and followers for the cause...:rolleyes:
lol, for real?

duhcity
Oct 3rd, 2011, 08:40 PM
Ok, whatever, you can not talk logic and facts with some people.

The fact they had pre approval to march where they were.
The fact that those women and that fellow cop were not looking to get arrest or pepper sprayed.
The fact that this is America and we have freedom of assembly.

Liars and fools will say those women and that cop deserved to be pepper sprayed. The fact that charges were dropped for most people arrested and that the videos clearly show peaceful assembly is plain to any thinking person. For fox news viewers and their kin, well it is what it is.

Well first, I'd like an apology for being called a liar, which I'm not. I actually think I discussed the topic in a neutral way, but I guess not.
But I really don't want you, for the sake of your character, to walk away with false conceptions about the protest.

1. They did not have pre approval to march where they were. If you give me any evidence that they were allowed on vehicular pathway, I will quit posting in this topic.
2. I already stated that I agree with you on the second topic, that Anthony Bologna showed a gross misuse of police power.
3. And that I actually already stated that they have the right to assemble on Wall Street. That is true. They can walk on the pedestrian walkway without a permit. There were people who protested peacefully on that walkway.

I never said that those women deserved to be pepper sprayed. I do however agree with people being arrested for entering an area and disturbing traffic.

If anything, I would LOVE for you to ask someone to come read this thread and ask them who tried to be logical. Because you bristle with hostility at any sort of disagreement.

duhcity
Oct 3rd, 2011, 08:44 PM
lol, for real?


I will apologize, I was wrong. Someone made up the rumor to attract attention to the protest. But it wasn't a notable figure. But the notable figures of the protest took it upon themselves to declare it as official:

Yeah, you found me, but I'll be taking my story to the Times freelancer who got arrested on the bridge yesterday instead. To the gutsy go the spoils. I'm not an "organizer" or a provocateur, I'm an occupier who tried something, like a lot of us are. The whole occupation was a bluff by Canadians in the beginning anyway. If you continue to think of the only acting bodies as the organizers and self-declared spokespeople, you'll continue to miss what's happening. The prank was to give folks an excuse to go to Zuccotti, and although I'm sure I'm terribly sorry for all the pain and suffering I've caused apolitical Radiohead fans, it worked, and now our numbers are larger and growing. But it was also to illustrate the buffoonery of self-important spokespeople and committees. This is what happens when two people get put in charge of something (the vaguely tyrannical "Arts and Culture committee") and empower themselves to speak "officially." Now they've put one person in charge of communications. There are left authoritarians too, they're a vocal minority, but they don't speak for me or plenty of others.
So this is a call for more humor, more pranks, more of that good old anon shit at Occupy Wall Street and at the other occupations springing up around the country. It's not that hard, it's a lot more fun than long meetings, and it'll work.
NOTE: This email is for publication in its entirety or not at all. None of that out-of-context lamestream media trickery. As a precautionary measure, I've CC'ed the comrades at Gothamist, who seem totally prepared to call you out for even the appearance of violating source instructions. You, of course, don't have to publish this note, but I imagine they probably will.
Officially yours,
J. Erin Stubbie

VillageVoice article: http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2011/10/occupy_wall_street_radiohead.php

MaBaker
Oct 3rd, 2011, 08:52 PM
I will apologize, I was wrong. Someone made up the rumor to attract attention to the protest. But it wasn't a notable figure. But the notable figures of the protest took it upon themselves to declare it as official:

VillageVoice article: http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2011/10/occupy_wall_street_radiohead.php
A mess. But why would they need Radiohead anyway, this guy is way better http://www.livestream.com/globalrevolution

Wigglytuff
Oct 4th, 2011, 12:30 AM
these is dangerous thugs that were attacked and arrested... yeah real dangerous.

stevos
Oct 4th, 2011, 12:45 AM
Oh no, the LAW. :eek:

Mynarco
Oct 4th, 2011, 12:58 AM
That's a cheeky trap by NYPD. I am just disgusted at how NYPD messed things up as well - those brutalities are way below the belt and unnecessary. But I guess as long as you have a badge with you, any violent acts towards civilians can be easily justified.

Moveyourfeet
Oct 4th, 2011, 08:33 AM
Can we all stop grouping all police officers together? The reality of the situation lies somewhere in between.
You guys make it sound like the NYPD just couldn't wait to taze the hell out of anyone they saw. It's so cheeky and childish, the whole "i'm just a defenseless protester and the big bad cops arrested me". Situations can escalate at a moments notice. These officers are under immense pressure when dealing with large crowds. Ultimately, the police is there to PROTECT you and for the most part, they do a good job of it.

canuckfan
Oct 4th, 2011, 06:04 PM
I really like the "We are the 99%" slogan. It's catchy and powerful.

http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com/

MaBaker
Oct 5th, 2011, 09:41 AM
31GIdFyr3Cg

IEBBC25kvAw

sNSM54SODsc

4SUdPe-X7b4#!

X-po6Fh7KlI

duhcity
Oct 5th, 2011, 09:07 PM
Legitimate Unions, a stronger cause, and a permit validated by the NYPD.
Things are looking up for OWS.

http://blogs.wsj.com/metropolis/2011/10/05/occupy-wall-street-march-past-city-hall-expected-to-draw-thousand/

duhcity
Oct 5th, 2011, 10:03 PM
http://www.politickerny.com/2011/10/05/occupy-wall-street-protesters-more-popular-than-congress-poll/

A new poll out today by Rasmussen Reports shows that 33 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of the protesters now occupying Lower Manhattan as part of a demonstration against what they see as a financial system tilted toward the rich.

Thirty-three percent (33%) have a favorable opinion, 27% hold an unfavorable view, and a plurality of 40% have no opinion one way or the other. Fifty percent (50%) of Democrats have a favorable opinion while a plurality of Republicans (43%) say the opposite. Among those not affiliated with either major party, a solid plurality (45%) have no opinion. Most unaffiliateds are not following the story.



40% without an opinion! To me, that says 40% of people who are willing to be favorable towards the cause, but don't understand it because it lacks a cohesive meaning.

With working unions joining the cause, there is more of a middle class worker vs. Corporation aspect now.

MaBaker
Oct 6th, 2011, 10:04 AM
I1E5_rb9-oc

From some of this videos it looks like the cops are just acting like idiots

xpOMlDVaXzc

-YXuvhg8Ahw

But this one shows how it started, at least some of it.

LWXvRGYFaBY

duhcity
Oct 6th, 2011, 10:16 AM
Tried to keep up with most of it today, but was busy.
It seems, for the most part, the march was a success. Peaceful, LOTS of attention, BIG numbers, and it just seems more cohesive/organized.

Looks like problems started around 6pm EST:

https://twitter.com/#!/petenychange/status/121704338774163456
The barrier's been broken on Chambers. There are gonna be arrests. #occupywallstreet

And then from the Daily News

After marching back to Zuccotti Park, where a rag-tag group of several hundred activists have been camped out for weeks, the protesters turned their sights on Wall Street.

Led by veteran leftist filmmaker Michael Moore, "the 99%" marched to the corner of Wall Street and Broadway, where they immediately found themselves in a tense standoff with the NYPD. Hundreds of protesters and cops faced off on either side of the street leading to the heart of America's financial epicenter, the New York Stock Exchange.

In the shadow of the historic Trinity Church, some of the protesters linked arms and attempted to storm the barricades leading to Wall Street, according to eyewitness reports. Some police responded with pepperspray and baton beatings, and there were several arrests.

A small group of protesters made several more unsuccessful attempts to enter Wall Street throughout the evening.


Read more: http://live.nydailynews.com/Event/Occupy_Wall_Street_Protests_Rock_New_York_City#ixz z1ZzXAWijX

So for the most part, it was a legal, sanctioned event that I think was really extraordinary. But, unfortunately, most media outlets will focus on these fringe situations that really don't represent 99% of the people who marched today.

duhcity
Oct 6th, 2011, 10:21 AM
From some of this videos it looks like the cops are just acting like idiots



Absolutely no offense, but that's the problem. Your videos make it looks like the cops were looking like idiots.
As far as we know, that's about 100 people, and maybe only dozen cops in those videos. I've only read of a few other incidents with pepper spray in other barricade storming incidents.

But there were over 10 thousand people marching today and over a hundred cops. And it's sad that the entire thing may be overshadowed by this.

*JR*
Oct 6th, 2011, 02:17 PM
Its sad when cops (who generally come from working class backgrounds) seem to get an "adrenaline rush" from attacking protesters on behalf of ppl who couldn't give a FF about them, besides as protectors. :(

MaBaker
Oct 6th, 2011, 02:19 PM
Absolutely no offense, but that's the problem. Your videos make it looks like the cops were looking like idiots.
As far as we know, that's about 100 people, and maybe only dozen cops in those videos. I've only read of a few other incidents with pepper spray in other barricade storming incidents.

But there were over 10 thousand people marching today and over a hundred cops. And it's sad that the entire thing may be overshadowed by this.
You missed the point of my post
From some of this videos it looks like the cops are just acting like idiots

But this one shows how it started, at least some of it.

The last video actually shows how it wasn't unprovoked. If I only posted that first RT video, then you would've been right about that.

Media focusing on this made the title this way. I'll remove it though, since you are right, this

cjqqtx57YNc

shouldn't be overshadowed by that incident.

HippityHop
Oct 6th, 2011, 04:04 PM
I'd still like to know how many of the protestors (and particularly how many people here) continue to be the big bank's bitches. Move your money. If you have any. :fiery:

Wigglytuff
Oct 7th, 2011, 02:49 AM
Local Fox news reporter clubbed and attacked by the police. or who defended the actions of the nypd on the Brooklyn bridge (arresting and cuffing 12 year old girls). I wonder if those who continue to say that the cops who pepper sprayed the four women who were already penned in did nothing wrong will NOW say the cops are as innocent as babies. A few people decided to risk arrest and the video shows a white shirt cop attacking the crowd hitting reporters and anyone in sight regardless whether or not they were in violation of any law.

And no it's not all cops. its the white shirts, higher ranking cops who are the most powerful and the most dangerous. (though, it was a blue shirt who said "my nightstick is going to get a workout tonight".

I am more sickened by though who defend the violent cops than by the cops. It is because they know they will be defended and that nothing will happened to them that they went ahead and do this shit week after week. Just when you thought they, the nypd, had hit a new low, the cops get worse and the defenders of their violence pull more and more excuses out of their asses.

Wigglytuff
Oct 7th, 2011, 02:53 AM
I1E5_rb9-oc

From some of this videos it looks like the cops are just acting like idiots

xpOMlDVaXzc

-YXuvhg8Ahw

But this one shows how it started, at least some of it.

LWXvRGYFaBY
They were not acting like idiots so much as they were engaged in felony assault. you know randomly beating reporters and bystanders with nightsticks without making any effort to diffuse and resolve the situation.

I hope they were trained to Arrest the few who planned to be arrested and restore the barrier. And to just start beating people left and right.

Berlin_Calling
Oct 7th, 2011, 03:16 AM
I'd still like to know how many of the protestors (and particularly how many people here) continue to be the big bank's bitches. Move your money. If you have any. :fiery:

I think that it's pretty evident that most of these people have zero financial status, hence why a lot of them are protesting. People would take this protest a bit more seriously if there wasn't such an abundance of dumb, rowdy hippies running around like headless chickens :tape:

Moveyourfeet
Oct 7th, 2011, 04:18 AM
A protest isn't a protest till somebody gets pepper-sprayed. Crowd antagonizes police, pepper spray comes out, Media sensationalizes it, and the hippies are on tv.

Moveyourfeet
Oct 7th, 2011, 04:19 AM
I think that it's pretty evident that most of these people have zero financial status, hence why a lot of them are protesting. People would take this protest a bit more seriously if there wasn't such an abundance of dumb, rowdy hippies running around like headless chickens :tape:

This.

Moveyourfeet
Oct 7th, 2011, 04:23 AM
Its sad when cops (who generally come from working class backgrounds) seem to get an "adrenaline rush" from attacking protesters on behalf of ppl who couldn't give a FF about them, besides as protectors. :(

Nice sensationalism. NYPD officers, with blood lust in their eyes, "attacking' all protesters in sight.
Anyone aside from Anthony with any semblance of balance in this thread??? Geez!

young_gunner913
Oct 7th, 2011, 07:02 AM
The protests are a fucking mess. :lol: I wish I didn't have to hear about them as much as I do, honestly, I'd rather be watching 30 Rock right now rather than watching 20 officers pin 3 hippies down and beat them.

Wigglytuff
Oct 8th, 2011, 11:32 AM
Can we all stop grouping all police officers together? The reality of the situation lies somewhere in between.
You guys make it sound like the NYPD just couldn't wait to taze the hell out of anyone they saw. It's so cheeky and childish, the whole "i'm just a defenseless protester and the big bad cops arrested me". Situations can escalate at a moments notice. These officers are under immense pressure when dealing with large crowds. Ultimately, the police is there to PROTECT you and for the most part, they do a good job of it.

It's a sad day for NYPD when you have video of the white shirts (commanders) attacking and pepper spraying people with impunity and then you have video of the LAPD doing the right thing and maintaining order without traps, pepper spray, random beatings of fox news reporters and protesters or nonsense.

stevos
Oct 9th, 2011, 06:12 AM
Can we all stop grouping all police officers together? The reality of the situation lies somewhere in between.
You guys make it sound like the NYPD just couldn't wait to taze the hell out of anyone they saw. It's so cheeky and childish, the whole "i'm just a defenseless protester and the big bad cops arrested me". Situations can escalate at a moments notice. These officers are under immense pressure when dealing with large crowds. Ultimately, the police is there to PROTECT you and for the most part, they do a good job of it.

Know how I know you've never actually been part of a protest?
At least not a protest that has police trying to beat you down at all angles.
The police are there to protect the people in their Wall Street highrises, and the government. Who do you think pays them?
Have you never heard of police brutality? Or the violent police culture?
You're clueless.

Sam L
Oct 9th, 2011, 01:09 PM
So what is this about? I've been out of the loop lately.

Bijoux0021
Oct 10th, 2011, 11:58 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/10/opinion/panic-of-the-plutocrats.html?src=ISMR_HP_LO_MST_FB

Op-Ed Columnist

Panic of the Plutocrats

By PAUL KRUGMAN

Published: October 9, 2011

It remains to be seen whether the Occupy Wall Street protests will change America’s direction. Yet the protests have already elicited a remarkably hysterical reaction from Wall Street, the super-rich in general, and politicians and pundits who reliably serve the interests of the wealthiest hundredth of a percent.

And this reaction tells you something important — namely, that the extremists threatening American values are what F.D.R. called “economic royalists,” not the people camping in Zuccotti Park.

Consider first how Republican politicians have portrayed the modest-sized if growing demonstrations, which have involved some confrontations with the police — confrontations that seem to have involved a lot of police overreaction — but nothing one could call a riot. And there has in fact been nothing so far to match the behavior of Tea Party crowds in the summer of 2009.

Nonetheless, Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, has denounced “mobs” and “the pitting of Americans against Americans.” The G.O.P. presidential candidates have weighed in, with Mitt Romney accusing the protesters of waging “class warfare,” while Herman Cain calls them “anti-American.” My favorite, however, is Senator Rand Paul, who for some reason worries that the protesters will start seizing iPads, because they believe rich people don’t deserve to have them.

Michael Bloomberg, New York’s mayor and a financial-industry titan in his own right, was a bit more moderate, but still accused the protesters of trying to “take the jobs away from people working in this city,” a statement that bears no resemblance to the movement’s actual goals.

And if you were listening to talking heads on CNBC, you learned that the protesters “let their freak flags fly,” and are “aligned with Lenin.”

The way to understand all of this is to realize that it’s part of a broader syndrome, in which wealthy Americans who benefit hugely from a system rigged in their favor react with hysteria to anyone who points out just how rigged the system is.

Last year, you may recall, a number of financial-industry barons went wild over very mild criticism from President Obama. They denounced Mr. Obama as being almost a socialist for endorsing the so-called Volcker rule, which would simply prohibit banks backed by federal guarantees from engaging in risky speculation. And as for their reaction to proposals to close a loophole that lets some of them pay remarkably low taxes — well, Stephen Schwarzman, chairman of the Blackstone Group, compared it to Hitler’s invasion of Poland.

And then there’s the campaign of character assassination against Elizabeth Warren, the financial reformer now running for the Senate in Massachusetts. Not long ago a YouTube video of Ms. Warren making an eloquent, down-to-earth case for taxes on the rich went viral. Nothing about what she said was radical — it was no more than a modern riff on Oliver Wendell Holmes’s famous dictum that “Taxes are what we pay for civilized society.”

But listening to the reliable defenders of the wealthy, you’d think that Ms. Warren was the second coming of Leon Trotsky. George Will declared that she has a “collectivist agenda,” that she believes that “individualism is a chimera.” And Rush Limbaugh called her “a parasite who hates her host. Willing to destroy the host while she sucks the life out of it.”

What’s going on here? The answer, surely, is that Wall Street’s Masters of the Universe realize, deep down, how morally indefensible their position is. They’re not John Galt; they’re not even Steve Jobs. They’re people who got rich by peddling complex financial schemes that, far from delivering clear benefits to the American people, helped push us into a crisis whose aftereffects continue to blight the lives of tens of millions of their fellow citizens.

Yet they have paid no price. Their institutions were bailed out by taxpayers, with few strings attached. They continue to benefit from explicit and implicit federal guarantees — basically, they’re still in a game of heads they win, tails taxpayers lose. And they benefit from tax loopholes that in many cases have people with multimillion-dollar incomes paying lower rates than middle-class families.

This special treatment can’t bear close scrutiny — and therefore, as they see it, there must be no close scrutiny. Anyone who points out the obvious, no matter how calmly and moderately, must be demonized and driven from the stage. In fact, the more reasonable and moderate a critic sounds, the more urgently he or she must be demonized, hence the frantic sliming of Elizabeth Warren.

So who’s really being un-American here? Not the protesters, who are simply trying to get their voices heard. No, the real extremists here are America’s oligarchs, who want to suppress any criticism of the sources of their wealth.

Bijoux0021
Oct 10th, 2011, 12:49 PM
http://i54.tinypic.com/2di269s.jpg

Moveyourfeet
Oct 10th, 2011, 02:32 PM
Know how I know you've never actually been part of a protest?

Know how I know you're a presupposing dumbass? You make assumptions about people or things you know very little about.

The police are there to protect the people in their Wall Street highrises, and the government.
Have you never heard of police brutality? Or the violent police culture?
You're clueless.

You are the clueless one. Everything you know about the police is from the media. Do you actually know any police officers? Have you ever discussed with a police chief?

Sit the fuck down and stop throwing regurgitated sound bites my way.

Mugilda
Oct 10th, 2011, 03:14 PM
The world against Wall Street (Avaaz is collecting signatures to support the demonstrators)

http://www.avaaz.org/en/the_world_vs_wall_st/?vl

Pump-it-UP
Oct 11th, 2011, 06:25 AM
Occupy Boston is about to get real messy. :o:scared:

stevos
Oct 11th, 2011, 07:56 AM
Know how I know you're a presupposing dumbass? You make assumptions about people or things you know very little about.



You are the clueless one. Everything you know about the police is from the media. Do you actually know any police officers? Have you ever discussed with a police chief?

Sit the fuck down and stop throwing regurgitated sound bites my way.

What I know about police is being present while they, for no reason, charge and decide to pepper spray, tear gas, and beat up peaceful protestors.
In Toronto, Canada.

I of course know there are nice people who are also police officers. This doesn't make me trust them as a group any more, or not hold them responsible for actions which have been obvious to people (especially racialized people, for the past how many years)?
I'm sure there were nice police officers when Rodney King happened.

*JR*
Oct 11th, 2011, 03:57 PM
Occupy Wall Street Protests Rankle the Rich :tape:

By ALAN FARNHAM | ABC News – 20 hrs ago

In the 5th week of the Occupy Wall St. movement, with protests now having spread now to 150 U.S. cities and even to Europe, the apparent objects of that protest—the richest 1 percent—are starting to push back.

The grumbling from the wealthy took off with a sign posted in the windows of the Chicago Board of Trade last week, in a place where street protesters easily could see it, which proclaimed: "We Are The 1%." No one is sure who put up the sign, but plenty of folks in the building could be included in the 1 percent.

If a joke, it was one many protesters didn't get. "I thought [the sign] was extremely disrespectful," a special education teacher named Corey, 35, told TimeOut Chicago. Mike Polski, 53, from Joliet, disagreed, telling TimeOut, "These people wish they were the 1 percent! The 1 percent are billionaires."

Full article (http://news.yahoo.com/occupy-wall-street-protests-rankle-rich-193928054.html)