And now we're terrorists..

[Hasbinbad]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/police-include-occupy-movement-on-%E2%80%98terror%E2%80%99-list.html

[Diggles]

i love you docklover but seriously you need to calm down with all the threads today

[Humerox]

He's right though.

That's the first thing that popped in my head when I saw the Occupy movement talking about disrupting west coast shipping. It's not a far cry for the US to follow suit and include them on the "terrorist organization" list ;then unleash the full power of the Patriot Act on our own citizens.

Let freedom ring.

[Hasbinbad]

i love you docklover but seriously you need to calm down with all the threads today
I'll STOP when YOU START.

[Hailto]

According to one of your spokesmen you're threatening to "shutdown all west coast ports, to not only make a statement, but cause a lot of profit loss", what the fuck did you idiots think would happen? Threatening to disrupt shipping IS on par with terrorist acts, christ you guys are stupid.

[purest]

disrupting commerce is now considered terrorism according to rando neckbearded sperglord on everquest emulator forum

news at 11

[Hailto]

Herp derp, i thought we could intentionally blockade ports and disrupt commerce with no consequences

[purest]

i declare you a terrorist. damn this is easy

[Humerox]

Threatening to disrupt shipping IS on par with terrorist acts, christ you guys are stupid.

so the striking dockworkers can be classified as terrorists, right?

We will blockade all of the West Coast Ports on December 12th in solidarity with longshoremen, port workers and truckers in their struggle against the 1 percent!

They're joining and helping the strikers, Einstein. I wouldn't be so quick with an insult, but tit-for-tat.

[Hailto]

Going on strike is one thing, intentionally blockading shipping is something different entirely. I think that is fairly straight forward and easy to comprehend.

[Humerox]

I'm not even going to answer that, rotflmao.

[Hailto]

Im honestly not sure you're aware what the word blockade means.

[Kassel]

pretty sure you need violence or the threat of violence to be called a terrorist..

Throw a punch and here comes the FBI !!

[Doors]

http://board.u18chan.com/uploads/data/13325/Care-o-meter-1_U18chan.jpg

[Humerox]

OK, chief.

[Doors]

http://media.picfor.me/0011615C2/Care-meter-fuck--measure--care--give--odometer--meter--imhotrod11--fun_large.jpg

[Doors]

http://www.sadanduseless.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/gif/22.gif

[Hailto]

Just to help Humerox out a little bit here....

block·ade
   /blɒˈkeɪd/ Show Spelled [blo-keyd] Show IPA noun, verb, -ad·ed, -ad·ing.
noun
1.
the isolating, closing off, or surrounding of a place, as a port, harbor, or city, by hostile ships or troops to prevent entrance or exit.
2.
any obstruction of passage or progress: We had difficulty in getting through the blockade of bodyguards.

strike
   /straɪk/ Show Spelled [strahyk] Show IPA verb, struck or ( Obsolete ) strook; struck or, especially for 31–34, strick·en or ( Obsolete ) strook; strik·ing; noun, adjective
verb (used with object)

65. a concerted stopping of work or withdrawal of workers' services, as to compel an employer to accede to workers' demands or in protest against terms or conditions imposed by an employer.

[Humerox]

You ever seen or been in a strike, bro?

Strikes by nature disrupt commerce. But I'm not gonna argue the point all day because it's clear what side of the fence you're on.

[purest]

lmao he thinks that it is a blockade

[Diggles]

dem dockworkers gonna set up a blockade and shoot dem shippin boats, ned.

[Diggles]

you know you've fucked up when even Diggles thinks you're a retard.

[Hailto]

lmao he thinks that it is a blockade

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/OGqncu3wlEI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Watch this video and tell me what you think they have in mind. Im not implying they are going to surround the ports with naval guns and blow up all the ships coming in or out. Again, refusing to work (strike) and bringing in a shitload of unemployed hippies to disrupt the ports and cause profit loss are two very different things.

Also diggles i have yet to see you make a post that wasn't completely pointless and/or retarded so what you have to say doesn't matter very much in this instance either.

[visage]

lmao he thinks that it is a blockade

This thread delivers just based on purest's post. You can have the purest logic before you or that of common sense. Yet people are still having the most retarded answers. Hasbinbad has just owned you in trollin. Now if only he could get back with Tralina for a weekend or two. So we can get a break of this garbage.

[Humerox]

I still think that video is inspirational, and acvtivism like this hasn't been seen for a long time.

People are quick to dismiss based on stereotypes defined by a corporate media, but even hippies of the sixties did more to change their world than the apathetic do-nothing generations that followed.

This is America in action...and the movement proves change is necessary.

[visage]

I still think that video is inspirational, and acvtivism like this hasn't been seen for a long time.

People are quick to dismiss based on stereotypes defined by a corporate media, but even hippies of the sixties did more to change their world than the apathetic do-nothing generations that followed.

This is America in action...and the movement proves change is necessary.

O yes inspirational. We call gather like retards and protest for no real reason and start createing miny anarchies. WOOT!!! Let's all quit our jobs and become hobos and smell like crap so we can achieve this... O wait.. that just the majority of these people doin it amirite???

[visage]

I still think that video is inspirational, and acvtivism like this hasn't been seen for a long time.

People are quick to dismiss based on stereotypes defined by a corporate media, but even hippies of the sixties did more to change their world than the apathetic do-nothing generations that followed.

This is America in action...and the movement proves change is necessary.

ps... Your a moron... Hippies changing the world??? They did more??? You do realize it's because of idiots like IE: Hippies and these retards that ruin the very thing you whine and complain about. Great so people are taking protested stands for random ass things. Preventing certain companies from making money and causing chaos and feeding the media more money. Which by the way the media is ran by corporate america. It doesn't matter which way you spin it someone is making money off it. Now because theres a problem at hand people will try to solve it. In ways that others won't agree with. Like make more laws on protest... Disabling more of our rights... Now to make those laws we have to hire legislature... Let alone hire more officers /security to keep these mobs at bay... More government.... which is ran by taking our taxes and doing corrupt things behind our backs. To compensate for the money they don't have because they try to solve " Our problems". This has gone on throughout history. You and the idiots that think this is inspirational. Are the very morons sucked into the mess and decide one day it's your turn. You take a stand or do something outrageous. Screwing over people left and right in the long run. The fugure generations are screwed because of the more laws taking place and the chatoic ripple effect this creates. Yet people wonder why we drifted so far away from the country America once was... New's flash. Because of the morons like this... Regardless they will always be stupid people that ruin it for the rest. No matter what happens. Chaos theory. It just goes on and on. It really doesn't matter , but we will fuel it. Cause humans are forever doomed of chaos. One person at a time until we hit are brink of exsistance and are now more. But see that would solve the problem ultimately... Though we haven't gotten there yet....

[purest]

lmao he thinks that it is a blockade

[visage]

LOL probably felt so inspired he saw the name " Spear the nation", and decided the join the guild on project1999 due the inspiration he aquired, and the wording in the guild. LOL I bet he feels mighty in his guild when watching you tube vids that some retard posts... Lol whatever justifies is actions and helps him sleeps at night I guess

[Hasbinbad]

<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/OGqncu3wlEI" allowfullscreen="" width="560" frameborder="0" height="315"></iframe>
Again, refusing to work (strike) and bringing in a shitload of unemployed hippies to disrupt the ports and cause profit loss are two very different things.
lol you dumbfuck, you realize that is the president of the ILWU at 1:47 in that video, right?

[Hailto]

And?

What i said before still stands, refusing to work, and barring commerce like the idiots you see in the video standing in front of trains are two different things.

[Hasbinbad]

So what do you suggest we do in order to change the situation, Hailto?

[Hailto]

If you want to protest, that's fine. If you want to go on strike, that's fine. First amendment rights are extremely important in this country, but it goes both ways, when you start encroaching on other people's rights is when you cross the line. The video i linked earlier in this thread is a good example of things that give your movement a bad name, stand out there and picket until you're blue in the face if you want, but stay off the train tracks and let the guy who actually trying to make some money do his damn job.

[Hasbinbad]

If you want to protest, that's fine. If you want to go on strike, that's fine. First amendment rights are extremely important in this country, but it goes both ways, when you start encroaching on other people's rights is when you cross the line. The video i linked earlier in this thread is a good example of things that give your movement a bad name, stand out there and picket until you're blue in the face if you want, but stay off the train tracks and let the guy who actually trying to make some money do his damn job.
So what you're suggesting is that we stand there like idiots with signs while people with power ignore us?

That is what hasn't worked since bloody thursday.

Nothing has ever been changed by people with signs. All major civil rights movements have had an element of struggle attached to them that made the people impossible to ignore. With women, men not getting laid by their wives nipped that shit in the bud quick. With Racism, it took an old black woman breaking the law on a bus to kick start the whole deal, and then several major black leaders went to jail and were killed before any real progress was made. The gay rights movement has probably had the easiest time as far as protests go, but they have a hundred years of straight up hate crimes to put wind in their sails. Nothing changed the Vietnam war until the people in power decided it was to end, because the hippies were - by and large - not willing to go to phase 2, and were distracted by drugs.

What can we do in this world that will force them to stop economically raping us besides what we are doing? Standing there with a sign isn't doing it bro. We're open to suggestions.

Also, it is hardly equitable to ask us to keep strictly within the bounds of the law, when those laws are corrupt in the first place, and they do things like vote in the senate for the ability to suspend habeus corpus in this country at will. When they do things like unleash less lethal weapons on peaceful protestors. When they do things like enforce illegal foreclosures on the working poor and the middle class. When they do things like send big dumb jocks in official uniforms to club legally and peacefully protesting tiny female UC Berkeley students in the gut at full force when there were at least ten other tactical options to achieve the same effect in a non-violent way. When the police break the law, what are we supposed to do?

This is not Oceania. You don't belong to the Inner Party. This is not double plus good.

[Humerox]

Maybe we're not all on the same page.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/b0BiADVGp6s" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Hasbinbad]

..anyway, the port closure is what is known as civil disobedience. We're doing it because it is both civil (peaceful [no violence]) and disobedient (probably breaking the law, and certainly not what they want us to do). Some pretty smart people have encouraged us to be civilly disobedient throughout human history.

[visage]

So what you're suggesting is that we stand there like idiots with signs while people with power ignore us?

That is what hasn't worked since bloody thursday.

Nothing has ever been changed by people with signs. All major civil rights movements have had an element of struggle attached to them that made the people impossible to ignore. With women, men not getting laid by their wives nipped that shit in the bud quick. With Racism, it took an old black woman breaking the law on a bus to kick start the whole deal, and then several major black leaders went to jail and were killed before any real progress was made. The gay rights movement has probably had the easiest time as far as protests go, but they have a hundred years of straight up hate crimes to put wind in their sails. Nothing changed the Vietnam war until the people in power decided it was to end, because the hippies were - by and large - not willing to go to phase 2, and were distracted by drugs.

What can we do in this world that will force them to stop economically raping us besides what we are doing? Standing there with a sign isn't doing it bro. We're open to suggestions.

Also, it is hardly equitable to ask us to keep strictly within the bounds of the law, when those laws are corrupt in the first place, and they do things like vote in the senate for the ability to suspend habeus corpus in this country at will. When they do things like unleash less lethal weapons on peaceful protestors. When they do things like enforce illegal foreclosures on the working poor and the middle class. When they do things like send big dumb jocks in official uniforms to club legally and peacefully protesting tiny female UC Berkeley students in the gut at full force when there were at least ten other tactical options to achieve the same effect in a non-violent way. When the police break the law, what are we supposed to do?

This is not Oceania. You don't belong to the Inner Party. This is not double plus good.

Heres a sign that changed , and had things change. I figured it was something you yourself help change
http://i44.tinypic.com/29qfyap.jpg

[Hasbinbad]

visage (http://www.project1999.org/forums/member.php?u=15939) This message is hidden because visage is on your ignore list (http://www.project1999.org/forums/profile.php?do=ignorelist).

[Hasbinbad]

Maybe we're not all on the same page.
Those look like people who were 10ish in 1969, completely missed out on the hippie movement, and still think that working within the system can create real change. Optimists. Real (old [60+ years old now]) hippies understand Occupy, and why the ideas in that video simply will not work. There is a reason you haven't heard more from them since October 17th.

[Humerox]

The only way to work outside the system is to start talking armed revolution, which isn't going to happen.

Look what happened in the Arab Spring (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Spring). Change CAN occur and social media can be the catalyst. Change can occur if enough people start speaking out.

[Hasbinbad]

The only way to work outside the system is to start talking armed revolution, which isn't going to happen.

Look what happened in the Arab Spring (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Spring). Change CAN occur and social media can be the catalyst. Change can occur if enough people start speaking out.
Arab Spring was most definitely NOT armed revolution, and also was most definitely NOT within the system.

You really, really should read this:
Gene Sharp - From Dictatorship To Democracy (http://www.aeinstein.org/organizations/org/FDTD.pdf)

[Humerox]

You're right. I was applying mass demonstration to US law and NOT the law of the countries involved.

It was, however, the principle I was referring to. Mass demonstration, refusal to bow to authority, and civil disobediance.

We are on the same page with that, I think.

[Aadill]

The new Red Scare: The Green Scare.

[Klath]

It's not a far cry for the US to follow suit and include them on the "terrorist organization" list ;then unleash the full power of the Patriot Act on our own citizens.

Yep, if history has shown us anything it's that, when you law enforcement additional powers, they'll use and abuse them. Look at the way the asset forfeiture laws are applied in the war on drugs. Same with no-knock warrants (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/radley-balko/police-militarization-use-of-force-swat-raids_b_1123848.html).

[Humerox]

That is one disturbing video (<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/RbwSwvUaRqc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>). Hadn't seen it...thx Klath.

[Loke]

While I don't think blocking ports makes someone a terrorist, before you get outraged maybe you should compare it to some other groups who have been classified as being a high risk for potential terrorist - namely Veterans. I'm not saying that it is right to throw those kind of labels around with OWS, but this is far from the most outrageous use of the terrorist label in recent history.

Furthermore, blockading ports and disrupting commerce should be illegal. As the OWS champion Elizabeth Warren points out - everyone contributed to building those roads and what not that they use to transport their goods, so no one can be justified in revoking the right of another to use any public infrastructure.

Honestly, now that the OWS movement has settled down a bit and only the social democrat crowd really remains, it is easier and easier for me to disagree with them. How people can complain about companies being greedy for not wanting to hand over more money while demanding free healthcare at the same is just beyond me. The sense of entitlement is simply sickening. How evil were the banks when people's 401ks and home equity was soaring? Were they greedy when they were making people all sorts of money? People aren't greedy when they want a raise, but a company is greedy when it lays off employees to remain in business. The hypocrisy is strong with OWS.

That being said, fraud resulting from the collusion of government and big business is a legitimate complaint, as is the notion that socialized losses through bail outs are morally reprehensible. I'll give OWS credit there.

[Autotune]

Furthermore, blockading ports and disrupting commerce should be illegal

p sure it is.

[purest]

itt: complete idiots who dont know what the word blockade means

[Hailto]

Purest, why don't you enlighten us? I've already proven you wrong, but go ahead.

[Seaweedpimp]

Put it in off topic you faggots

[Autotune]

I would also like to know how you are going to block something without blocking it. Unless you don't plan to block anything and are just using the word block in a way that it is normally not.

Physically blocking someone from doing his job will result in disturbing the peace. Blocking traffic is generally illegal.

If they even step inside the port's gates, it's a federal offense. Trying to intentionally block any waterway would also be illegal.

So, I am probably misunderstanding this blocking of not blocking.

[purest]

blockading simply means blocking now damn got a deep thinker here

[Autotune]

blockading simply means blocking now damn got a deep thinker here

I suppose I should look up what they are doing and why they are calling it a blockade, but I generally don't care. I suppose you want me to look it up and that is why you refuse to elaborate on wtf this "blockade" is. I'll just wait to see if it makes the news I suppose.

[Hailto]

It is illegal, and very different from striking or picketing, purest is just a fail troll. Look at all his previous posts for confirmation.

[Hailto]

Look at the footage posted earlier in this thread, that's some of the stuff they plan on doing, and it is quite illegal. Purest doesn't have the mental capacity to comprehend that blockading doesn't necessarily mean blowing shipping up with naval guns as referred to the Websters definition of the word.

[Autotune]

Look at the footage posted earlier in this thread, that's some of the stuff they plan on doing, and it is quite illegal. Purest doesn't have the mental capacity to comprehend that blockading doesn't necessarily mean blowing shipping up with naval guns as referred to the Websters definition of the word.

i really don't care about looking at it honestly, I was just interested in the blockade that wasn't a blockade and that interest faded when he wouldn't elaborate so whatev.

[purest]

usually when u call something illegal u cite specific statutes, aka what's known as "the law," not your own opinion

but ok, ur right, blockading simply means blocking, and the definition of a terrorist is anyone who doesnt agree with rando eqemu sperglord #13's extremist political opinions

[Hailto]

usually when u call something illegal u cite specific statutes, aka what's known as "the law," not your own opinion

but ok, ur right, blockading simply means blocking, and the definition of a terrorist is anyone who doesnt agree with rando eqemu sperglord #13's extremist political opinions

If you can't understand why its illegal to stand on train tracks and prohibit the transportation of goods, or physically block commerce then there is no hope for you. Even you pal HBB admitted earlier in this thread that the shit is illegal.

[purest]

not arguing legality arguing what blockade means try to keep up i know its hard for you

[Autotune]

usually when u call something illegal u cite specific statutes, aka what's known as "the law," not your own opinion

but ok, ur right, blockading simply means blocking, and the definition of a terrorist is anyone who doesnt agree with rando eqemu sperglord #13's extremist political opinions

I never said anything about the definition of terrorist - you're an idiot.
blockading generally means to block - you're an idiot.
intentionally blocking/disrupting traffic is illegal and will get you in jail (unless Obama saves you) - you're an idiot.

[Hailto]

not arguing legality arguing what blockade means try to keep up i know its hard for you

usually when u call something illegal u cite specific statutes

Sounds like you are arguing legality to me. But why don't you go ahead and explain to us what blockade means now, since you have yet to do so.

[purest]

blockading simply means to block something

give this man an honorary degree in int'l law

[Autotune]

blockading simply means to block something

Glad you agree.

[vaylorie]

change cannot be made within the existing system because it's harder to achieve than just sitting in a park and whoring attention. It takes planning, structure and most importantly... consensus...

OWS has no planning, structure or consensus.. (let alone mainstream support) therefore change cannot be made within normal routes.

Clearly they can be pepper sprayed and get some sympathy attention however playing the victim card for all it's worth.

[fastboy21]

I guess throwing a bunch of rich americans throwing someone else's tea cargo into the water and destroying it over two hundred years ago were terrorists too...

oh wait, they are our founding fathers.

[Autotune]

I guess throwing a bunch of rich americans throwing someone else's tea cargo into the water and destroying it over two hundred years ago were terrorists too...

oh wait, they are our founding fathers.

you should stop typing now and go back to whatever forum section you came from.

[Hagglebaron]

Out of curiosity, are the members of the 1% generally known? Or are they more or less anonymous besides the obviously famous wealthy ppl

Forgive my ignorance brothers and sisters, my friends tell me i'm rather oblivious to many things

[Diggles]

i'm in the 1%

[Hailto]

Out of curiosity, are the members of the 1% generally known? Or are they more or less anonymous besides the obviously famous wealthy ppl

Forgive my ignorance brothers and sisters, my friends tell me i'm rather oblivious to many things

You are part of the 1 percent of Project1999 Hagglebaron :P

Also lol at fastboy comparing OWS activists to the founding fathers.

[Hasbinbad]

#1 As far as the "how" - On the 2nd and 3rd, when we shut down the Port of Oakland for 24 hours, we did it by building a barricade with stolen chain link fences, stolen dumpsters turned on their sides, pallets, and people. This was accomplished at thoroughfare intersections distal to the border of the port. The march actually went in, but our barricades were not inside the border of the port.

#2 This is all very much illegal. It's called "civil disobedience." Jesus (basically) invented it, and people like Thomas Jefferson, Henry D. Thoreau, the BOSTON Tea Party (1773), and Mohandas Ghandi refined it before Gene Sharp (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Sharp) got ahold of it and gave us the keys to our own salvation with his lectures - but more importantly his book From Dictatorship To Democracy (http://www.aeinstein.org/organizations/org/FDTD.pdf). You might want to look it up.

[Humerox]

i'm in the 1%

loan me 1.5m dude, and write it off, k? the lowering of the US credit rating is about to inflate my interest rate, and I gotta keep the banks happy.

[Diggles]

if i wanted to throw away 1.5m i'd give it to rogean and the big nilbog for a high budget p99 trailer

[Autotune]

#1 As far as the "how" - On the 2nd and 3rd, when we shut down the Port of Oakland for 24 hours, we did it by building a barricade with stolen chain link fences, stolen dumpsters turned on their sides, pallets, and people. This was accomplished at thoroughfare intersections distal to the border of the port. The march actually went in, but our barricades were not inside the border of the port.

#2 This is all very much illegal. It's called "civil disobedience." Jesus (basically) invented it, and people like Thomas Jefferson, Henry D. Thoreau, the BOSTON Tea Party (1773), and Mohandas Ghandi refined it before Gene Sharp (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Sharp) got ahold of it and gave us the keys to our own salvation with his lectures - but more importantly his book From Dictatorship To Democracy (http://www.aeinstein.org/organizations/org/FDTD.pdf). You might want to look it up.

So from what you are saying, they've done this to a port in Oakland and was successful. I take it that the "port master" (or whatever) allowed this and didn't press the issue with police or some city official decided to try and keep it peaceful so that they wouldn't be remembered as the person that lit the fuse and made the police stand down.

Color me surprised, I'd like to know more details about the port in a way, but I suppose it doesn't matter because not much was really accomplished.

However, I also imagine that the occupy crowd didn't press the issue much either. I suppose if the ports the are planning to mess with come the 12th are less worried about the media impact they will involve the feds and their will be a much different result. All will be revealed in due time i suppose.

[Harrison]

I can't wait for them to try this and end up in jail; Bubba's new dickpuppet inc

[Abacab PvP Prophet]

I can't wait for them to try this and end up in jail; Bubba's new dickpuppet inc

Harrison did you know?

Hasbinbad would call the police and or have his mob physically detain me if I struck back at a police officer that pepper sprayed me?

But is not below stealing hundreds of dollars of private and public property to completely blockade a port?

Remember guise this is a peaceful protest so as long as you don't physically fight police on the protest grounds, theft, arson, vandalism, and disorderly conduct is OK!

[Harrison]

I think he's just so fucking devoid of worth he wants to feel a part of something, without laying down the footwork for it. I.E. cry about it, and accomplish NOTHING. EVER.

[Truth]

you guys really thought the largest defense budget in the history of the world was only going to use its anti-error apparatus on towelheads in caves and not you?

ha ha

[Twoberries]

you guys really thought the largest defense budget in the history of the world was only going to use its anti-error apparatus on towelheads in caves and not you?

ha ha

xoxox

[Hasbinbad]

So from what you are saying, they've done this to a port in Oakland and was successful. I take it that the "port master" (or whatever) allowed this and didn't press the issue with police or some city official decided to try and keep it peaceful so that they wouldn't be remembered as the person that lit the fuse and made the police stand down.

Color me surprised, I'd like to know more details about the port in a way, but I suppose it doesn't matter because not much was really accomplished.

However, I also imagine that the occupy crowd didn't press the issue much either. I suppose if the ports the are planning to mess with come the 12th are less worried about the media impact they will involve the feds and their will be a much different result. All will be revealed in due time i suppose.
Yes, we shut down the Port of Oakland from 9am on November 2nd to 9am on November 3rd. We turned outgoing trucks around to go back into the port and wait, and incoming longshoremen were turned away from work, and incoming trucks were turned away as well. This was accomplished by main force for most of the day, as there were between 30-40,000 people physically occupying the entrances and exits, but as time wore on it was a small group of militants that stayed behind the barricade and went toe to toe with angry workers UNTIL

The president of (one chapter of) the ILWU came and spoke with us, me, actually.

He didn't really know what was going on at that point. When I explained it to him, he gave us his unconditional support, thanked us, and explained what was going on to the crowd of angry longshoremen trying to tear down our barricades. Since then, I have personally seen him at no less than 2 marches, and 3 direct actions, at least 2 of which involved a large mass of riot cops which he faced down in solidarity with Occupy. I've also seen several other ILWU chapter presidents make public statements in support of us and both port shut downs.

There was no Union support going in to the first shut down, which was 100% successful. Now we have the support (and I'm not talking fucking lip service, like I said, this guy and a bunch of his men faced down riot cops with us - several labor leaders have actually been arrested in solidarity) of every major labor union in the country going into this.

The police weren't involved at the port on the 2nd/3rd because during the day the march was literally 30k+ people, and they just don't have the manpower (homeland security feds were definitely there, but didn't lift a finger other than to make an honor force known, because they knew we were 100% nonviolent). Later at night was when they had "Mutual Aid" come oppress Occupy Oakland because simultaneous to the nighttime shifts at the port, (partially chosen to occur at this time as a distraction) was the precedent-setting takeover of the Travellers Aid building at 16th and Telegraph (very near Oscar Grant Plaza). Because we seized property from a bank, the riot cops came in in force, leaving the small band of militants at the port unmolested until the 6am shift, which included a lot more workers who were - at the time - ignorant of our talks with their president. This is what you may have seen on the news with angry workers clashing with protestors at the port.

This will of course be different on 12/12/11, and we all expect more police presence. That being said, it is a major theme of this action that if the police cause any trouble, we will extend the shutdown long past one day. They can either comply and take their lumps for the day or spend massive amounts of resources keeping us away over a much longer period of time.

I must take exception with your statement that the November 2nd/3rd shutdown didn't accomplish anything. That is the same old hackneyed propaganda everyone who disagrees (doesn't understand) with Occupy uses, and I think you're probably smarter than that. We reduced annual trade into and out of Oakland by 1/365th. That may not seem like a lot, but when you consider what the total product of the Port of Oakland is in the course of one year, you may need to rethink your "didn't accomplish much" statement.

[Srs Not Ames]

so many words

[Autotune]

Yes, we shut down the Port of Oakland from 9am on November 2nd to 9am on November 3rd. We turned outgoing trucks around to go back into the port and wait, and incoming longshoremen were turned away from work, and incoming trucks were turned away as well. This was accomplished by main force for most of the day, as there were between 30-40,000 people physically occupying the entrances and exits, but as time wore on it was a small group of militants that stayed behind the barricade and went toe to toe with angry workers UNTIL

The president of (one chapter of) the ILWU came and spoke with us, me, actually.

He didn't really know what was going on at that point. When I explained it to him, he gave us his unconditional support, thanked us, and explained what was going on to the crowd of angry longshoremen trying to tear down our barricades. Since then, I have personally seen him at no less than 2 marches, and 3 direct actions, at least 2 of which involved a large mass of riot cops which he faced down in solidarity with Occupy. I've also seen several other ILWU chapter presidents make public statements in support of us and both port shut downs.

There was no Union support going in to the first shut down, which was 100% successful. Now we have the support (and I'm not talking fucking lip service, like I said, this guy and a bunch of his men faced down riot cops with us - several labor leaders have actually been arrested in solidarity) of every major labor union in the country going into this.

The police weren't involved at the port on the 2nd/3rd because during the day the march was literally 30k+ people, and they just don't have the manpower (homeland security feds were definitely there, but didn't lift a finger other than to make an honor force known, because they knew we were 100% nonviolent). Later at night was when they had "Mutual Aid" come oppress Occupy Oakland because simultaneous to the nighttime shifts at the port, (partially chosen to occur at this time as a distraction) was the precedent-setting takeover of the Travellers Aid building at 16th and Telegraph (very near Oscar Grant Plaza). Because we seized property from a bank, the riot cops came in in force, leaving the small band of militants at the port unmolested until the 6am shift, which included a lot more workers who were - at the time - ignorant of our talks with their president. This is what you may have seen on the news with angry workers clashing with protestors at the port.

This will of course be different on 12/12/11, and we all expect more police presence. That being said, it is a major theme of this action that if the police cause any trouble, we will extend the shutdown long past one day. They can either comply and take their lumps for the day or spend massive amounts of resources keeping us away over a much longer period of time.

I must take exception with your statement that the November 2nd/3rd shutdown didn't accomplish anything. That is the same old hackneyed propaganda everyone who disagrees (doesn't understand) with Occupy uses, and I think you're probably smarter than that. We reduced annual trade into and out of Oakland by 1/365th. That may not seem like a lot, but when you consider what the total product of the Port of Oakland is in the course of one year, you may need to rethink your "didn't accomplish much" statement.

I had actually no real clue what was accomplished or not. I put that plug in there to get a response. I had actually put it as accomplished nothing and changed to not much due to the fact that it seemed you guys won a slight victory just off what you posted first.

Anyhow, it is good to know the outcome of what you posted in greater detail than I could have probably searched and found.

So in a way, thx for the shaere.

[Hasbinbad]

Word.

[vaylorie]

You seriously need to stop comparing yourselves to the founding fathers. This is like saying every person that breaks the law for political reasons is like the founding fathers. Don't be foolish.

We have a constitution that secures lawful and peaceable protections for the majority to impact change and steer the direction of the country. You are lazy and would rather just get attention the fast and easy way by trying to shut down a port or by claiming police brutality. This is why you are irrelevant in spite of the disruptions you try to cause. Knowingly break the law to get attention instead of trying to achieve change the way the founding fathers set up for you.

I know... too hard.. why try right?

[Hasbinbad]

OK smart guy, then go campaign and vote our corporations to stop economically raping people.

See how far you get.

[Humerox]

The biggest lesson that should have been learned from the 1999 WTO demonstrations (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amnSUM8mSxI&feature=related) is that violence causes an unsurmountable backlash in public opinion.

This "movement" has been coming for a long time.

When people across America, whose lives have been shattered and destroyed, come to realize the true face of the global "free market" system, the legitimacy of Wall Street, the Federal Reserve and the US administration will be challenged.

A latent protest movement directed against the seat of economic and political power is unfolding.

How this process will occur is hard to predict. All sectors of American society are potentially affected: wage earners, small, medium and even large businesses, farmers, professionals, federal, State and municipal employees, students, teachers, health workers, and unemployed. Protests will initially emerge from these various sectors.

That was written in 2009. The source is Preparing for Civil Unrest in America - Legislation to Establish Internment Camps on US Military Bases (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?aid=12793&context=va). for anyone that cares to look.

The government will crack down, and at that point the movement is doomed.
Not because it isn't legitimate, but because there is real fear it may grow beyond control. (http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/10-signs-that-economic-riots-and-civil-unrest-inside-the-united-states-are-now-more-likely-than-ever)

The term civil resistance, alongside the term nonviolent resistance, is used to describe political action that relies on the use of non-violent methods by civil groups to challenge a particular power, force, policy or regime. Civil resistance operates through appeals to the adversary, pressure and coercion: it can involve systematic attempts to undermine the adversary's sources of power. Forms of action have included demonstrations, vigils and petitions; strikes, go-slows, boycotts and emigration movements; and sit-ins, occupations, and the creation of parallel institutions of government.



It does NOT include violence or destruction.

OWS may not be the face of the movement when it's all said and done, but people are tired and want real change. Real change, not administrations that promise it and don't deliver.

[to0p]

vote our corporations to stop economically raping people.


Go live in Russia or China, then you might be able to stop taking your Rx anti-depressants

[Daldolma]

The reason the Occupy movement will inevitably fail is the same reason it has become so successful in the first place. The lack of stated goals has allowed a lot of people with diverse interests to join the movement. But the lack of stated goals also prevents the common citizen, who is not outraged enough to protest, from supporting the movement in less drastic ways. The Occupy movement may seem large, but it's a relatively small proportion of the voting public.

The delusions of revolution are misplaced. This is a stable, prosperous country with overwhelming military might. If violence becomes a prominent part of the protests, OWS will die out quickly.

There are changes that could be realized by OWS if they were to settle on a few. For example, the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall. The public would be open to this, if sufficiently educated on the subject, and it would solve some of the core issues being protested against by OWS. OWS could also probably garner enough public support to significantly increase taxes on the wealthy.

But other goals are unattainable. A solution to wealth inequality is not something the majority of the nation would support. There is no consensus on that subject.

Regardless, blockading the port of Oakland isn't helping anything. The people most harmed by such a blockade aren't Wall Street bankers or the financial elite. If you want to harm the financial elite, boycott the stock market and keep your money in a box under your bed, instead of letting them play with it.

[Aadill]

There are changes that could be realized by OWS if they were to settle on a few. For example, the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall. The public would be open to this, if sufficiently educated on the subject, and it would solve some of the core issues being protested against by OWS. OWS could also probably garner enough public support to significantly increase taxes on the wealthy.


Pretty much. The problem media does a good job of picking up on "the other stuff" and diffusing the message.

[ColdFritter]

No truce with the shadow.

[Daldolma]

Pretty much. The problem media does a good job of picking up on "the other stuff" and diffusing the message.

Well, you could blame that on the media. I wouldn't. I'd blame it on OWS itself. OWS has made it clear that they do not want to target any specific reforms. Because of that, they leave themselves susceptible to being manipulated. Any idiot with the time to sit in a park can make a sign and misrepresent OWS, and the media isn't incorrect in questioning whether that person is a representative sampling of OWS.

Until OWS narrows its scope to a few key issues, it will be impossible to garner enough public support to actually enact change. The Tea Party is a good example of this. Whether or not you agree with their proposed policies, they took a nebulous dissatisfaction with government and narrowed it down to a set of policy points that allowed them to zero in on candidates and impact elections, and in turn, legislation.

OWS can't have that impact until it decides exactly what it is that it wants to do.

[Aadill]

Yes and no... I mean unless I'm mistaken, "no untraceable anonymous money in campaign funding" is a big one. Amendment 28.

Things like reinstating Glass-Steagall because that's where shit started getting fucked up may not be on every person's mind in particular, it's another big issue. Maybe I'm only speaking from my experience with ORaleigh (and maybe we're a bit more organized), but those are two really big things that for some reason people still seem to think is not the issue and instead focus on whiny college kids getting pepper sprayed for trespassing.

[Humerox]

OWS can't have that impact until it decides exactly what it is that it wants to do.

Adopting the goals stated by the Occupy London Movement might not be a bad idea, for starters:


The current system is unsustainable. It is undemocratic and unjust. We need alternatives; this is where we work towards them.
We are of all ethnicities, backgrounds, genders, generations, sexualities dis/abilities and faiths. We stand together with occupations all over the world.
We refuse to pay for the banks’ crisis.
We do not accept the cuts as either necessary or inevitable. We demand an end to global tax injustice and our democracy representing corporations instead of the people.
We want regulators to be genuinely independent of the industries they regulate.
We support...actions to defend our health services, welfare, education and employment, and to stop wars and arms dealing.
We want structural change towards authentic global equality. The world’s resources must go towards caring for people and the planet, not the military, corporate profits or the rich.
The present economic system pollutes land, sea and air, is causing massive loss of natural species and environments, and is accelerating humanity towards irreversible climate change. We call for a positive, sustainable economic system that benefits present and future generations.
We stand in solidarity with the global oppressed and we call for an end to the actions of our government and others in causing this oppression.

[Daldolma]

Yes and no... I mean unless I'm mistaken, "no untraceable anonymous money in campaign funding" is a big one. Amendment 28.

Things like reinstating Glass-Steagall because that's where shit started getting fucked up may not be on every person's mind in particular, it's another big issue. Maybe I'm only speaking from my experience with ORaleigh (and maybe we're a bit more organized), but those are two really big things that for some reason people still seem to think is not the issue and instead focus on whiny college kids getting pepper sprayed for trespassing.

It's not that people think that's not the issue. It's that those two issues are some of the least divisive being supported by OWS, and they're muddled by a dozen other issues that aren't supported by the average citizen. You can be pro-life without being a Republican. Similarly, you can be pro-Glass Steagall without sympathizing with OWS. That's because OWS has a platform that's far too wide at the moment.

For example, another of the common complaints of OWS is wealth inequality, but the average American voter does NOT believe wealth inequality is something that needs to be legislated against. There is an ideological reason people from lower income brackets consistently vote against tax hikes on the richest of the rich. Without passing judgment, many of the 99% don't feel entitled to the wealth of the 1%. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but it's true. So when you conflate that with Glass-Steagall, you're going to lose supporters.

Another example is the general anti-war rhetoric of OWS. Many OWS protesters have cited the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and military spending in general, as targets of their protest. But there are a lot of people that would be on board for campaign finance reform and the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall, but are not passionately opposed to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq or military spending.

The point isn't that people prefer focus on kids getting pepper-sprayed. The point is that the general public may agree with some of the goals of OWS, but they are alienated by others -- and that prevents them from buying into the movement.

[Daldolma]

Adopting the goals stated by the Occupy London Movement might not be a bad idea, for starters:


The current system is unsustainable. It is undemocratic and unjust. We need alternatives; this is where we work towards them.
We are of all ethnicities, backgrounds, genders, generations, sexualities dis/abilities and faiths. We stand together with occupations all over the world.
We refuse to pay for the banks’ crisis.
We do not accept the cuts as either necessary or inevitable. We demand an end to global tax injustice and our democracy representing corporations instead of the people.
We want regulators to be genuinely independent of the industries they regulate.
We support...actions to defend our health services, welfare, education and employment, and to stop wars and arms dealing.
We want structural change towards authentic global equality. The world’s resources must go towards caring for people and the planet, not the military, corporate profits or the rich.
The present economic system pollutes land, sea and air, is causing massive loss of natural species and environments, and is accelerating humanity towards irreversible climate change. We call for a positive, sustainable economic system that benefits present and future generations.
We stand in solidarity with the global oppressed and we call for an end to the actions of our government and others in causing this oppression.


This is a perfect example of the problem with the OWS movement.

First of all, it's absurdly vague.

Global tax injustice? How so? What is unjust about current tax rates? How could those rates be fixed? If you ask conservatives about tax rates, they say they're unjustly harsh for the rich.

Actions to defend? That's unbelievably vague. You're never going to see a politician say he is attacking your health services. They all are "defending" your health services, welfare, education, and employment. The point is: how?

That group of statements touches on government bail-outs, taxes, corporate regulation, health care, welfare, education, employment, military spending, military action, foreign aid, environmental conservation, economic reform, and foreign policy. It doesn't cite or promote a single piece of legislation or any particular reform. It's unbelievably broad and vague.

You might as well draft a policy goal of making the world a better place.

[Hasbinbad]

Therefore we propose to make the world a better place.

What the fuck is wrong with that?

You "don't" get it bro, it's cool. We understand that there are going to be intentionally ignorant people.

We'll help you anyway.

[Daldolma]

What's wrong with it is that it doesn't mean anything. Proposing to make the world a better place isn't a policy point. Everyone from Obama to McCain to Palin to Richard Simmons could run on making the world a better place. The "how" is what matters.

As of now, OWS has no "how". Or more accurately, they have a hundred "hows". It's impossible to gain enough public support to sway elections with a group of loosely affiliated people that really don't even agree with each other over what reforms are necessary. In order to impact the government, it's going to be necessary to target specific policies that can gain broad popular appeal.

And I don't see how you figure you're helping me. As of now, you're not changing anything. Once you decide what it is you're trying to change, then we can decide if it's helping me or not.

[Hasbinbad]

Question: What are we trying to change?
Answer: Everything.

the only solution is <big>WorldRevolution</big>

[Daldolma]

Haha, okay. Good luck with that.

I'm assuming, eventually, some prudent people become leaders within the OWS movement and limit the scope to bringing about a few significant changes. It would be a shame to waste so much political will.

[Humerox]

What's wrong with it is that it doesn't mean anything.

I understand what your saying, but defining goals is the first step in the how.

And I agree the movement is lacking direction. The fact remains that a lot of people get the fact that a lot of things are wrong, and that the non-rich haven't been properly served for a very long time.

[Humerox]

I'm assuming, eventually, some prudent people become leaders within the OWS movement and limit the scope to bringing about a few significant changes. It would be a shame to waste so much political will.

Totally agree.

[Daldolma]

The fact remains that a lot of people get the fact that a lot of things are wrong, and that the non-rich haven't been properly served for a very long time.

That's true. And I agree with that, for what it's worth.

[Hasbinbad]

The problem with defining a limited scope of goals is that they could provide half measures to shut us up on those few things, leaving them unchanged in reality and then ignore the rest of what is wrong. By not allowing them to categorize and minimize us, we make it impossible to do so. Thank you for your good luck wishes.

[Hasbinbad]

Working within the system for change is what has not worked. We are now exploring other options.

For historical reference, I'm very sure a snide Englishman once said "Those settlers want to revolt from the crown? Haha, Okay. Good luck with that."

[Daldolma]

Are you attempting to secede now?

Working within the system for massive reform has worked a dozen times over throughout US history. Moreover, OWS has never attempted to work within the system. There hasn't been a national election since OWS was founded.

What is it that you realistically expect to do? When I say you, I mean you -- not OWS as a whole. Realistically, how do you see OWS playing out?

[Hasbinbad]

Are you attempting to secede now?

Working within the system for massive reform has worked a dozen times over throughout US history. Moreover, OWS has never attempted to work within the system. There hasn't been a national election since OWS was founded.

What is it that you realistically expect to do? When I say you, I mean you -- not OWS as a whole. Realistically, how do you see OWS playing out?
I honestly don't know, maybe some politicians will start paying attention to something other than lobbyists.

If that is ALL that happens, OWS is a success.

I have a feeling it will be more than that.

[Hasbinbad]

As for seceding, no. World revolution dude. 1300 major cities around the world have occupy encampments right now. This is only a couple months old.

[Daldolma]

Politicians already do pay attention to a lot of things other than lobbyists. The ultimate goal of 90% of politicians is to be re-elected. Usually, lobbyists are the most capable of making that happen. Contributions = exposure = votes. But if there's a large voting bloc within a constituency, that precludes the influence of lobbyists. No matter how much a pro-gay marriage lobbyist is willing to spend on a Kentucky Senator, he's not getting a gay marriage vote. It's not a big conspiracy. Plenty of Congressmen are idiots that come from unspectacular backgrounds -- they're not part of some interlocked alliance of elites.

OWS is already capable of making politicians listen to something other than lobbyists. That's my point. OWS, right now, would likely be capable of garnering enough public support to reinstate Glass-Steagall. Or to raise taxes on the wealthy.

When you talk about changing everything, I don't see what you mean or how that's realistic. Banks are still going to be extraordinarily wealthy and influential -- there's no changing that. The rich are still going to wield disproportionate influence. But changes can be made, and OWS needs to narrow their scope if they want to do that.

[Hasbinbad]

When you talk about changing everything, I don't see what you mean or how that's realistic.
One issue, one step at a time.
Banks are still going to be extraordinarily wealthy and influential -- there's no changing that.
I invite you to look up why the French celebrate Bastille Day.
I invite you to look up why the Americans celebrate Independence Day.
The rich are still going to wield disproportionate influence.
They wield exactly the amount of influence we've allowed them to accumulate. It is our mess, and some of us are going to clean it up.

There is an essential disconnect between people of the last generation and people of the emergent generation. It can be summed up with a allegories about trash and amphibians.

Trash:

There is an island of non-biodegradable junk in the pacific ocean which has an area twice the size of Texas. I really don't need to say anything more about this.

Amphibians:

Right now, all amphibians are dying.

That sounds alarmist, unrealistic, and untrue, but it's a fact.

In the 1940's, the African Claw-Toed frog was widely exported because when you inject it with a pregnant female humans urine, it produces eggs. This strange property allowed it to be used as a pregnancy test, in a time before EPT.

What people didn't know then, and what we know now is that the African Claw Toed frog, as part of it's natural flora, harbored a type of fungus called Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (commonly called "the chytrid fungus" after the division name for that type of fungi). As part of this animals natural flora, it helped protect this animal from other pathogens, and was contained within it's natural environment through ecological means. Chytrid grows on the skin of any amphibian, however, and in the absense of natural measures to contain it, has grown rampant worldwide. The problem with chytrid fungus is that when it grows on amphibians other than the African Claw Toed Frog in that animals natural environment, it forms a waxy coat on the skin of the host amphibian. The problem with that is that amphibians breath and drink partially through their skin.

The death rate of inoculated amphibians is 100%.

Do I need to explain the cycle of life?

Now. One option is to throw our hands up in the air and say "what can we do about such a huge problem?" There is no easy way to fix it, and we certainly aren't going to get any major help from governments bent on imperialism. However, the other option is to find a way.

Many older scientists have thrown their hands up in the air, apathized by apathy. This is anecdotal and empirical, but I'm sure there are sources you can find that will give you the same review of some of the older generation of scientists.

There are, however, a new generation of young scientists (lulz) who are unwilling to say "this problem is too big," and they are actively working to find real solutions. Just a couple years ago, there was no feasible solution for the garbage, now there are a dozen - and figuring out which one to implement is now their major task. Similarly, a couple years ago, most people who knew about the chytrid crisis threw their hands up in the air, not seeing a possible solution, as it then and currently affects some groups in every population of every species of amphibian in the world. Some of the new generation have actually started to go into each group in a population and hand-inoculate individuals with an organism that outcompetes chytrid without harming the frogs. These individuals have survived, and their groups have flourished. So there is a solution, it just had to be found.

The problem with our government is not too big of a problem. They are not too powerful. Their power flows from us. They have forgotten this and need to be reinformed. If that requires that we fire each and every individual in public service, and rip up centuries of bullshit laws fought for by lobbyists of the powerful, then so be it.

One step at a time.

[Humerox]

Well...the first job is to change the process in electing government, and take the corporate lackey out of the picture. Hence my long-lost post about http://beyourgovernment.com/.

It's a wickedly easy way of effecting change, and social media is powerful enough to drive it.

[Hasbinbad]

Just trying to change that one thing is like fixing the garbage output problem from new zealand while allowing america and china to keep dumping into the ocean.

[Daldolma]

One issue, one step at a time.

I invite you to look up why the French celebrate Bastille Day.
I invite you to look up why the Americans celebrate Independence Day.

They wield exactly the amount of influence we've allowed them to accumulate. It is our mess, and some of us are going to clean it up.

There is an essential disconnect between people of the last generation and people of the emergent generation. It can be summed up with a allegories about trash and amphibians.

Trash:

There is an island of non-biodegradable junk in the pacific ocean which has an area twice the size of Texas. I really don't need to say anything more about this.

Amphibians:

Right now, all amphibians are dying.

That sounds alarmist, unrealistic, and untrue, but it's a fact.

In the 1940's, the African Claw-Toed frog was widely exported because when you inject it with a pregnant female humans urine, it produces eggs. This strange property allowed it to be used as a pregnancy test, in a time before EPT.

What people didn't know then, and what we know now is that the African Claw Toed frog, as part of it's natural flora, harbored a type of fungus called Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis (commonly called "the chytrid fungus" after the division name for that type of fungi). As part of this animals natural flora, it helped protect this animal from other pathogens, and was contained within it's natural environment through ecological means. Chytrid grows on the skin of any amphibian, however, and in the absense of natural measures to contain it, has grown rampant worldwide. The problem with chytrid fungus is that when it grows on amphibians other than the African Claw Toed Frog in that animals natural environment, it forms a waxy coat on the skin of the host amphibian. The problem with that is that amphibians breath and drink partially through their skin.

The death rate of inoculated amphibians is 100%.

Do I need to explain the cycle of life?

Now. One option is to throw our hands up in the air and say "what can we do about such a huge problem?" There is no easy way to fix it, and we certainly aren't going to get any major help from governments bent on imperialism. However, the other option is to find a way.

Many older scientists have thrown their hands up in the air, apathized by apathy. This is anecdotal and empirical, but I'm sure there are sources you can find that will give you the same review of some of the older generation of scientists.

There are, however, a new generation of young scientists (lulz) who are unwilling to say "this problem is too big," and they are actively working to find real solutions. Just a couple years ago, there was no feasible solution for the garbage, now there are a dozen - and figuring out which one to implement is now their major task. Similarly, a couple years ago, most people who knew about the chytrid crisis threw their hands up in the air, not seeing a possible solution, as it then and currently affects some groups in every population of every species of amphibian in the world. Some of the new generation have actually started to go into each group in a population and hand-inoculate individuals with an organism that outcompetes chytrid without harming the frogs. These individuals have survived, and their groups have flourished. So there is a solution, it just had to be found.

The problem with our government is not too big of a problem. They are not too powerful. Their power flows from us. They have forgotten this and need to be reinformed. If that requires that we fire each and every individual in public service, and rip up centuries of bullshit laws fought for by lobbyists of the powerful, then so be it.

One step at a time.

Rebels from Bastille Day and Independence Day are not comparable to OWS protesters. It's a delusional comparison. OWS is not an armed rebellion. It's not an attempt to overthrow government. It's a social movement that doesn't even have broad popular support yet. As of November 16th, 33% of Americans support the goals of OWS; 45% oppose them. The Tea Party has greater support. That's not meant to degrade OWS; it's meant to put it in perspective.

You act as if the wealthy are at the mercy of the masses. That's not the way the world works, and it's not the way it's worked in a long time. Rich people don't need to stay in America. Or at least, they don't need to keep their money in America. In a globalized world, all the leverage is with the wealthy. If your laws aren't favorable, they'll find a country with favorable laws and stash their money there. If you eliminate private campaign funding, you're simply passing the buck. Instead of a system corrupted by the wealthy, you'll have a system corrupted by political parties -- which will be corrupted by the wealthy. Look at Italy and Berlusconi. Money talks. It always has. You like Bastille Day and Independence Day. Who were the kingmakers in post-Revolution America and France? The wealthy; the landowners.

I get your point, but your rhetoric doesn't match reality. Reality is that OWS is a significant social movement with enough public influence to swing certain contested political issues. It's not a brewing revolution that's going to change the dynamics of American government. There are things OWS can accomplish, but if the movement as a whole is foolish enough to refuse to adopt a set of achievable goals, it will result in a lot of wasted enthusiasm.

[Hasbinbad]

I understand what you're saying, and I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on the potential of Occupy.

Based on this statement, however, I don't think you understand..
Rich people don't need to stay in America.
1300 major cities worldwide.
Global revolution.
It has only just begun.

-

Also, they are only as rich as we let them be due to their own machinations. All of their power, money, and wealth is on paper. In computers. Those things are very vulnerable.

Actual assets can be seized, by whatever means necessary.

Right now, we don't have that power, but only because we've let them take it from us. Only time will tell if that will change, and neither of us is so prescient to be able to conjure images of the future.

[Harrison]

Rofl now you want to legalize theft, outright? You are so fucking painfully dumb.

[Aruden]

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?p=486195#post486195

[Hasbinbad]

Rofl now you want to legalize theft, outright? You are so fucking painfully dumb.
You think we still live in a nation of laws, and call me dumb?

*deep breath, remember Amelindas request*

Considering the source, I'm somehow not feeling insulted.

[Hasbinbad]

Daldoma:
https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/

[Humerox]

when did that go live?

reading thru it atm

[Humerox]

nvm...October 7th.

[Daldolma]

Good for you all. That's a big step. The suggested content is still far too broad and some of it is very poorly conceived, but it's a start. Identifying official leadership and drafting a concrete set of goals is essential, and things will likely further narrow themselves from there.

[vitalious]

I understand what you're saying, and I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on the potential of Occupy.

Based on this statement, however, I don't think you understand..

1300 major cities worldwide.
Global revolution.
It has only just begun.

-

Also, they are only as rich as we let them be due to their own machinations. All of their power, money, and wealth is on paper. In computers. Those things are very vulnerable.

Actual assets can be seized, by whatever means necessary.

Right now, we don't have that power, but only because we've let them take it from us. Only time will tell if that will change, and neither of us is so prescient to be able to conjure images of the future.

I see someone watched Fightclub.

[Hasbinbad]

I see someone watched Fightclub.
I didn't draw on Fight Club when I wrote that, but I see and appreciate your point. :)

[Humerox]

Hey...the Huffington Post chimes in:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-pace/occupy-wall-street-search_b_1126617.html?ref=media&ir=Media

[vaylorie]

Hey...the Huffington Post chimes in:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/natalie-pace/occupy-wall-street-search_b_1126617.html?ref=media&ir=Media

Yeah, here are the other top news stories.... People like to watch a car wreck..

News

Casey Anthony Trial
Gabrielle Giffords Shooting
Royal Wedding
Japan Earthquake
Arab Spring
Penn State Scandal
Osama bin Laden Death
Occupy Wall Street
Debt Ceiling Debate
European Debt Crisis

[Humerox]

Nah...I'm not a Enquirer style reader. I'll stick to the Post for now, but you go ahead!

:)