So Oakland mayor Jean Quan buckled under pressure from the police chief and the Chamber of Commerce, and order Occupy Oakland evicted and vacated.
As a result, one of her legal advisors, Dan Siegel resigned in protest, and now the duputy mayor Sharon Cornu has resigned as well.
Meanwhile, a 2nd camp has been set up, and multiple unions are preparing for another general strike later this week.
It is becoming increasingly clear, that everytime the police do something to these protests, they lose.
Other than giving you a hard-on . . . . .
There is no logical reason for the methods these people have chosen to express their disagreement with their opponents.
than any OWS protester. According to Saint Croix, they're more violent, too!
Now that should be on Pay Per View. I'd buy just to see the carnage. Have a group of Black Hole fans descend on the Occupy group, and guaranteed those Occupy kids will wet their pants and be back for classes at UC Berkeley or UC Santa Cruz in no time.
Did you hear The Black Hole, Raider Nation whatever hired a PR firm to help them with their image. Now that's funny.
I don't know what to say about Sanchez or Folk, the 2 SoCal kids. Sanchez just does some of the dumbest things, like that timeout near the end of the 1st half. And I was hoping that Harbaugh would really shake the hand, and slap the back of Coughlin (lol).
With almost no warning, the police swept in at 4 a.m. The protesters were told that, after the park was cleaned and sanitized, they could return, but no tents, tarps or sleeping bags would be allowed. If enforced, this would make it impossible to occupy the park 24/7 during the winter.
I think the police were smart to do it this way. With any more advance notice the OWS people would have had time to prepare a better defense and things could have gotten more violent. I'm all in favor of peoples' right to protest, but OWS was destroying small businesses in the area and there was lawlessness in the park. You don't assert your own rights by trampling those of others.
I'm sure this is not the end of OWS. They'll find another way to assert themselves.
Strangely, you never have police break up meetings of the Chamber of Commerce, or gatherings of lobbyists, yet bribery is expressly prohibited by law.
It's also interesting that NY judge Lucy Billings said that the NYPD eviction was illegal.
PW, you said, "There is no logical reason for the methods these people have chosen to express their disagreement with their opponents."
There most certainly is. The reason for these methods is that all other methods have failed.
In the last 10 years, this country has gone done the shitter. First people began holding a protest here and there to address this problem. That failed, and nothing changed.
Next the people elected Democrats to the House, Senate, and White House to solve this problem. That failed, and nothing changed.
What the hell is left to do? Move out of the country? Give up and accept that you live in an undemocratic kleptocracy?
It does not matter who holds it or how power is concentrated. Power never has and it never will concede anything without a fight. These protests are the only strategy left without resorting to widespread violence. The PURPOSE is to bind up the gears and prevent them from functioning. To stop the machine in it's tracks.
These protests can end tomorrow. All that has to happen is for the 1% to allow democracy to function. They stole our representative government from the 99% first. So we're stealing their ability to profit at other's expense.
The real reason for this move in New York is that on Thursday the protesters planned to occupy the NYSE. Could it be any more clear who the state is protecting from whom?
-- Modified on 11/15/2011 7:53:02 AM
are part of the system that needs to be gutted.
i've said before and i'll say it again, these pawns need to be in DC but you wont see that cuz that's where the real master lives
Comparing the OWS to a meeting of the Chamber of Commerce is, perhaps, your most egregious false Equivalency claim ever, Willy. Chamber of Commerce meetings are held in private halls and you have to be a member to get in. They are over in a couple of hours. OWS took place in a public park. They stayed for two months. They were permitted to stay until they became a danger to themselves, to others, and a public nuisance. And they are being permitted to come back, just not to camp there semi-permanently. I'm actually in sympathy with some of their aims, but not when they get co-opted by anarchists, befoul public parks, destroy small businesses which employ ordinary Americans, and become infiltrated by criminals.
Willy, I really like some of the things you post, and even agree with some of them, but when you make sloppy arguments you only hurt your cause.
-- Modified on 11/15/2011 1:23:51 PM
The Occupy protests have been peaceful (with the exception of the police, of course), and have not broken the law. The Chamber of Commerce on the other hand, routinely bribes government officials, which is a violation of the law. So there is no eqivalency here. One is legal, and the other is not.
How arrogant do you have to be to say these protesters are a danger to themselves? Are they dangerous to others? How can they be, when they've been peaceful?
Saying they're being "allowed" back into the park seems to mean that they need permission to go back into the park. Free assembly is a RIGHT. Removing the protesters was ILLEGAL.
These protests are not being co-opted by anarchists. Anarchists started these protests. And by the way, since when was it illegal to be an anarchist? Is any other political philosophy subject to mass arrest?
There has been some 100 murders in Oakland this year, and there was a murder near an Occupy encampment, and suddenly the protests are a danger to themselves and the public? Are the mayors concerned at all about criminals in these encampments when they've been dropping drug addicts, the homeless, and criminals off at these encampments? Get real.
Isn't it also strange that when Bloomberg ordered this raid, he also ordered news helicopters out of the sky? Isn't it odd that in city after city mayors have been trying to evict these protests all at the same time? Do you really think these excuses from the state to violate Constitutional freedoms holds any water at all?
This happened for one simple reason. On Thursday, protesters plan to occupy the NYSE. How determined do you think these protesters will be now?
1) Re the CofC bribing people, prove it.
2) The park in NYC is not a public park. It's private and OWS has been given permisson to be there, which they've abused by turning the park into a cesspool.
3) It's wrong to assert all the OWS people are anarchists. Some are, some aren't.
4) Governments have been dropping criminals off at the encampments? Prove it.
5) I was very concerned some members of the press were arrested for covering the eviction.
6) Good luck trying to "occupy the NYSE." They'll never get in the door.
1) You want me to prove the Chamber of Commerce bribes politicians? That's like asking me to prove the sun shines or that the grass is green. What do you think the fucking purpose of the Chamber of Commerce is in the first place? To go around to local business and pat their owners on the back and say, "hang in there, hero"?
2) I was not aware that someone could "abuse" their freedom of assembly. Of course, the fact that the park is private is no surprise, despite that the 9/11 memorial, which this park is part of, received plenty of taxpayer funds.
3) When did I say all the Occupy protesters were anarchists? It was started however primarily by anarchists.
4) Here you go. http://news.yahoo.com/occupy-wall-street-being-sabotaged-york-police-department-193200664.html
5) Thank you for your concern. I'm sure it will help prevent others from having their rights forcibly stripped from them in the future. Yes, that was sarcasm.
6) We'll see.
I'm really his Dad. Now, as to your points:
1) Yes, if you make a reckless charge I want you to prove it. I don't like lobbyists much, either, and some, like Jack Abramoff, have been convicted of bribery. Most haven't. So, yes, show me any credible evidence the Chamber actually bribes people, as opposed to legal lobbying. PS: Any OWS person can visit with their Congressperson in his/her office if they want. I've done it and I didn't have to bribe her.
2) Yes, you can abuse your freedom of assembly when your presence becomes violent or dangerous in any way. OWS was bordering on that. See the article quoted below.
3) Did I really accuse you of saying all the OWS people are anarchists? I doubt it. Anyway, I don't think they all are. So what?
4) Do you even read your own links? Here's how that story ended:
"The question arises, what is Occupy Wall Street prepared to do now? Whatever passes for an authority in Zuccotti Park seems incapable of maintaining order in a place that has rapidly devolved into a state of nature. But if the NYPD is invited in to roust out the vagrants and criminals from the area, it is likely all over. Police will be obliged to enforce all laws, and not just those against assault and rape. That includes drug laws as well as that part of the city code dealing with sanitation.
The Occupy Wall Street crowd may have pretensions of being like the army at Valley Forge, though the difference is that the Continental Army had discipline and a provost detachment to back that up." Thanks so much for posting this.
5) Your sarcasm is noted. Sorry if I don't live up to your radical ideals enough for you to deem my concern for the press credible. But unlike you I actually worked for a journalistic organization and was even a member of the Newspaper Guild. I've walked a picket line for them. So I suspect I've backed up my right to express concern for the press more than whatever you've done to justify your judgemental crap.
6) We'll see.
Pass me a brick!
Willy, your answer to just about everything is to blame the police. Good luck when someday you yourself may need their help . . .
"The reason for these methods is that all other methods have failed"
So, in your logic, since Capitalism hasn't been brought to heel (to your satisfaction), the next and only step is violence and mass lawlessness? What a crybaby!
The judge has found that the law that prohibits camping out in the park doesn't violate free speech. They can show up, day after days, night after night. Bang their drums. Chant their chants. But they CANNOT make a campground out of a public or private park.
Not that you care, obviously, about anyone elses rights.