2438 replies to this topic

[Tabbooma]

Joker is not a liar,and Tabbooma agrees that violence and breaking shit is lame and does not help... Still think your slanting things Jack

[beerzrkr]

Aren’t cops part of the 99%? Why have they been treated like the enemy since day 1?

[PeaceFrog]

cops as individuals do make up part of the 99%, however their job duty is to put aside their personal feelings and beliefs and act as agents to protect the interests of the 1%.

Additionally, they haven't been treated like the enemy at all protests since day 1.

[Feck]

? they have been protecting me, as part of the 99%, since the start of this type of thing.

[beerzrkr]

It is just that I see an awful lot of taunting going on that I don’t understand.

[PeaceFrog]

Part of their job is to keep the general peace, and that includes protecting you and me.

The point is that they are not acting on their own as soon as they don their badge. They obey orders that they are given to them from above, which ultimately is the 1%.

I don't view them as THE enemy. They're just pawns in the game.

[PeaceFrog]

It is just that I see an awful lot of taunting going on that I don’t understand.

I wonder how much of this taunting is actually incited by undercover officers and paid snitches...

you can't rule out that possibility.

[MeOmYo]

I wonder how much of this taunting is actually incited by undercover officers and paid snitches... you can't rule out that possibility.

based on the amount of it happening, I would guess a very, very small percentage, if any.

[china cat]

http://october2011.o...eful-protestors

[Karen]

Constantly posting negative articles? Please point out the last 5 that you consider to be negative articles about the movement itself rather than being about the negative actions of some bad apples that are making the movement as a whole look bad. Do you consider the articles where I'm pointing out idiots who are breaking laws and instigating confrontations to be negative articles about the movement? I certainly don't. I believe it's those types of assholes that are putting a negative face on the movement.

Perhaps when you post an article, you could take a moment to say why you are posting it? Clearly you have an opinion of the event/article, which is why you post it, but if you just post the article without any explanation of why you find it to be of interest, it can be perceived as you posting all the negative about Occupy and not 'hey, a few bad apples, here is an example of such'.

I often read the articles you post and cannot figure out if you post it as supporting evidence that Occupy is a bad thing OR you post it in support of Occupy...Honestly, most of the time I cannot tell.

Does that make sense?

[vic]

<h1>
Did Jamie Dimon Just Agree with Occupy Wall Street?</h1>
<p> </p>
<p>One thing we did not expect to hear J.P. Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon say is that Occupy Wall Street had &quot;legitimate complaints,&quot; especially given that he thinks the financial industry gets victimized when it comes to placing blame for the world&#39;s problems. And yet that&#39;s just what he said after receiving an Executive of the Year award from the University of Rochester&#39;s Simon Graduate School of Business, Marketwatch&#39;s Polya Lesova reports. What a surreal scene.</p>
<p>Dimon is far from the first rich person to give some credence to Occupy, but seeing as how protesters literally marched to his door demanding economic justice, he&#39;s one of the least likely. Michael Bloomberg once said protesters had legitimate complaints, but he said it as a mayor, not necessarily a billionaire, and in the larger context of &quot;what they&#39;re trying to do is take the jobs away from people working in this city.&quot; Dimon just said it.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, Dimon either didn&#39;t explain what he thought Occupy&#39;s legitimate complaints were, or Lesova didn&#39;t report them. Whatever he thinks Occupy might be right about, he also thinks it&#39;s being unfair -- discriminatory, even. &quot;It was everyone guilty. That’s another form of discrimination,&quot; he said. &quot;When things go wrong, finance gets blamed.&quot; </p>
<p>But perhaps we shouldn&#39;t be so surprised to hear Dimon getting borderline conciliatory about the activists who&#39;ve injected a much more critical tone about guys like him into the national conversation. He&#39;s previously expressed some hurt feelings about being lumped in with the other bad apples: &quot;Acting like everyone who&#39;s been successful is bad and because you’re rich you’re bad, I don’t understand it. Sometimes there’s a bad apple, yet we denigrate the whole.&quot; Must be tough.</p>
<p><!-- Add to this Story --></p>
<p class="add-to-story">Want to add to this story? Let us know in comments or send an email to the author at <a href="mailto:amartin@theatlantic.com">amartin@theatlantic.com</a>. You can share ideas for stories on the Open Wire.</p>
<p class="add-to-story"> </p>
<p class="add-to-story"><a href="http://www.theatlant.../51902/</a></p>

[vic]

ugh this board is disgracefully shitty...

here's the link

http://www.theatlant...l-street/51902/

[Joker]

Perhaps when you post an article, you could take a moment to say why you are posting it? Clearly you have an opinion of the event/article, which is why you post it, but if you just post the article without any explanation of why you find it to be of interest, it can be perceived as you posting all the negative about Occupy and not 'hey, a few bad apples, here is an example of such'. I often read the articles you post and cannot figure out if you post it as supporting evidence that Occupy is a bad thing OR you post it in support of Occupy...Honestly, most of the time I cannot tell. Does that make sense?

It makes some sense but I've repeatedly stated (and I'm talking dozens of times) that I support the Occupy message but not the violence and instigation used by some members. That hasn't changed from the start and I don't see it changing anytime soon. Is there really a need for me to repeat it every time I post something on the subject?

Unlike others who seem to feel it's acceptable to vilify an entire group for the actions of a few, I've made it quite clear I don't take the wrong actions of a very small minority of a group to be the standard of the group, be it cops or protesters.

We all have different opinions on things and I try to clarify mine whenever needed. I thought I had already done so on this subject (prolly 10 times in this thread alone prolly )

[Karen]

It makes some sense but I've repeatedly stated (and I'm talking dozens of times) that I support the Occupy message but not the violence and instigation used by some members. That hasn't changed from the start and I don't see it changing anytime soon. Is there really a need for me to repeat it every time I post something on the subject? Unlike others who seem to feel it's acceptable to vilify an entire group for the actions of a few, I've made it quite clear I don't take the wrong actions of a very small minority of a group to be the standard of the group, be it cops or protesters. We all have different opinions on things and I try to clarify mine whenever needed. I thought I had already done so on this subject (prolly 10 times in this thread alone prolly )

But still....the issue is that folks aren't clear what your point is when you post sometimes.
I think it's not to much to ask that you clarify when posting an article.

What, are you too lazy?

[Bone Daddy]

[JBetty]

But still....the issue is that folks aren't clear what your point is when you post sometimes. I think it's not to much to ask that you clarify when posting an article. What, are you too lazy?

What she's trying to say is that you're doing it wrong.

[Feck]

a very sad day for America.
i remember my school closing on the 5th and many of the kids were all happy about the day off.
i didn't understand how they could be so happy. 8th grade

[vic]

It makes some sense but I've repeatedly stated (and I'm talking dozens of times) that I support the Occupy message but not the violence and instigation used by some members. That hasn't changed from the start and I don't see it changing anytime soon. Is there really a need for me to repeat it every time I post something on the subject? Unlike others who seem to feel it's acceptable to vilify an entire group for the actions of a few, I've made it quite clear I don't take the wrong actions of a very small minority of a group to be the standard of the group, be it cops or protesters. We all have different opinions on things and I try to clarify mine whenever needed. I thought I had already done so on this subject (prolly 10 times in this thread alone prolly )

you've dodged this question about 7 or 8 times now...WHAT of the occupy message do you support?

[Joker]

But still....the issue is that folks aren't clear what your point is when you post sometimes. I think it's not to much to ask that you clarify when posting an article. What, are you too lazy?

Yes, partly. I'd be totally lazy but it's too much work

I feel that everyone here should know by now that I'm calling attention to the actions I find intolerable when the article contains acts of violence and instigation.

[Joker]

you've dodged this question about 7 or 8 times now...WHAT of the occupy message do you support?

That the Wall St corps have too much power and influence and that things need to change.

[vic]

That the Wall St corps have too much power and influence and that things need to change.

ok...without getting into the protesters and this particular movement, do you feel wall st also has too much power and influence on the NYPD?

[MeOmYo]

Yes, partly. I'd be totally lazy but it's too much work I feel that everyone here should know by now that I'm calling attention to the actions I find intolerable when the article contains acts of violence and instigation.

I could be wrong, but I cannot recall one instance where you've called attention to anything other than occupy pretestors or suspected occupy protestors as being intolerable.

[Joker]

ok...without getting into the protesters and this particular movement, do you feel wall st also has too much power and influence on the NYPD?

I have no idea how much power or influence they have

[vic]

I could be wrong, but I cannot recall one instance where you've called attention to anything other than occupy pretestors or suspected occupy protestors as being intolerable.

only one comes to mind...the silent walk of shame they gave to the chancelor of UC-Davis

of course, that came with a deflection of why they actually did that and denial of any wrongdoing by the police over that incident

other than that, nothing at all comes to mind

[vic]

I have no idea how much power or influence they have

you're lying...this has been discussed before, either in this thread ot the 'vic has arrived at occupy' thread:

http://www.jpmorganc...t=485&width=712


New York City Police Foundation — New York

Beginning in 2010, JPMorgan Chase donated technology, time and resources valued at $4.6 million to the New York City Police Foundation, including 1,000 new patrol car laptops. The gift was the largest in the history of the foundation and will enable the New York City Police Department to strengthen security in the Big Apple.
New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly sent CEO and Chairman Jamie Dimon a note expressing "profound gratitude" for the company's donation.
"These officers put their lives on the line every day to keep us safe," Dimon said. "We're incredibly proud to help them build this program and let them know how much we value their hard work."

[vic]

<ul>
<li>now i ask, how is this donation any different from campaign donations to political candidates?</li>
</ul>

[Tabbooma]

Farts are funny

[TakeAStepBack]

NYPDs biggest donator is the US military.

[Joker]

you're lying...this has been discussed before, either in this thread ot the 'vic has arrived at occupy' thread: http://www.jpmorganc...t=485&width=712 New York City Police Foundation — New York Beginning in 2010, JPMorgan Chase donated technology, time and resources valued at $4.6 million to the New York City Police Foundation, including 1,000 new patrol car laptops. The gift was the largest in the history of the foundation and will enable the New York City Police Department to strengthen security in the Big Apple. New York City Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly sent CEO and Chairman Jamie Dimon a note expressing "profound gratitude" for the company's donation. "These officers put their lives on the line every day to keep us safe," Dimon said. "We're incredibly proud to help them build this program and let them know how much we value their hard work."

So they've made donations.

That doesn't tell anyone what kind of power or influence they have

[vic]

So they've made donations. That doesn't tell anyone what kind of power or influence they have

now i ask, how is this donation any different from campaign donations to political candidates?

[Joker]

I didn't say they were different, in fact, I didn't mention donations at all. Are you trying to make some sort of point here?

[vic]

I didn't say you said they're different I asked you a question

[Joker]

Yeah and when I answered your question, you accused me of lying and posted a link to an article about donations.

[Joker]

"Black Bloc" Occupiers Turn On Media

Protesters attacked photographers, and sought to seize their cameras, during May Day protests, journalists say. “One girl walks up to one of the photogs and nailed him right in the face,” says Village Voice's Muncy.


Occupy Wall Street protesters attacked some photographers covering the May Day protests today in New York, trying to damage or seize their cameras. There are no reported injuries but one photographer was hit in the face, another got in a "tug-of-war" with a protester over her camera, and another had her camera smashed into her face by a protesters, according to those at the scene.

"The black bloc crowd has been making grabs for cameras," C.S. Muncy, a freelance photographer on assignment for the Village Voice, told BuzzFeed. The "black bloc" is a group of protesters all dressed in black, wearing masks.

"I had a couple people make grabs for my gear," Muncy said. "They just didn't want their pictures taken."

"One girl walks up to one of the photogs and nailed him right in the face," Muncy said. "He popped her right back." Muncy said the photographer was Lucas Jackson of Reuters.

Stephanie Keith, a freelance photographer, said that a black bloc protester tried to forcibly take her camera out of her hands. It happened around 1 p.m. at the beginning of the "Wildcat March" leaving from a park in Lower Manhattan.

Keith said that she was holding her camera up above her head to take photos of a confrontation between protesters and police when "all of a sudden this guy, who was way bigger than me, grabs my camera." Keith said the protester was yelling at her, "No cameras, no cameras, no cameras."

"We were having a fucking tug of war over my camera," Keith told BuzzFeed. "It's a four thousand dollar camera."

Keith said she tried to bite the protester's hand to repel him, and "just before I connected with his skin he let go. The guy had a mask on so I couldn't even identify him."

Muncy said he saw a protester throw a "black paint bomb" at a photographer, and several on the scene say that another photographer was approached by a protester who pushed her camera into her face as she was lifting it up to take a photo.

http://www.buzzfeed....loc-occupy-prot

[PeaceFrog]

That's fair Joke, you have no idea how much power or influence JP Morgan has over the NYPD.

The only question that leaves me wondering is how then do you know how much power and influence Wall Street has over Obama? And, exactly how much power does Wall Street have over Obama? Please enlighten me! Because honestly I have no idea. I need your help in understanding.

[Feck]

JP Morgan's donations were about 0.10% of the 2012 NYPD budget.
1 tenth of 1%.
i can see how some people could say that buys a lot of influence, more than the average member of the 99%, but then again, aren't we the ones mostly supplying the tax $$ for the budget in the first place ?

living here as long as i have, i don't buy into that idea that Morgan, Goldsman, BoA buy all that much.

[Joker]

People like this are the reason "Occupy" will never be accepted by the actual 99% (no not Hannity )

[MeOmYo]

Well, that was a waste of 10 minutes. How anyone can draw conclusions from that waste of tape is beyond me.

[PeaceFrog]

well you were right by saying that because of Hannity, OWS will never be accepted by the actual 99%

but it's not just Hannity...it's life. You probably can't get 99% of the people to agree that the sky is blue.

[PeaceFrog]

Well, that was a waste of 10 minutes. How anyone can draw conclusions from that waste of tape is beyond me.

I think we agree on a lot more than you maybe realize.

[MeOmYo]

I think we agree on a lot more than you maybe realize.

Possibly, but until you can figure out how to have an intelligent conversation without just trying to get a rise out of people, we'll probably never know.

[PeaceFrog]

I'm expressing my thoughts and opinions. If someone gets a rise out of it, then so be it.

not sure why you would question my motive for posting.

If you could drop your preconception of my motive and intention, then we probably could have a decent discussion.

[Joker]

Well, that was a waste of 10 minutes. How anyone can draw conclusions from that waste of tape is beyond me.

He's supposedly one of the organizers and a spokesman for the group. Beside the fact that he's a self proclaimed anarchist, I'd bet a lot of people don't agree with a lot of what he was saying, from the unfounded accusations against the police to saying "But I am looking at far, far more radical alternatives than political alternatives. I would like to actually see a new form of politics entirely." Then on to his ramblings about getting all those things for free and nobody having to pay for it.


You really don't see how anyone could draw a conclusion that they might not want to be associated with a group like that?

[MeOmYo]

I do, but I also see how the point of the interview was to berate and mock him from the beginning. Granted, Hannity didn't have to work that hard at it but to fully understand this guys intentions from one tv interwiew is naive. I see a nervous then frustrated person being drilled, mocked and berated by a person with an agenda. So, I don't really see any of it as anything other than 2 people trying to offend each other.

[PeaceFrog]

you're going to base your opinion of a worldwide movement on a Hannity interview, and you think most other people do the same??

wow... that's called living in a bubble.

[Joker]

I do, but I also see how the point of the interview was to berate and mock him from the beginning. Granted, Hannity didn't have to work that hard at it but to fully understand this guys intentions from one tv interwiew is naive. I see a nervous then frustrated person being drilled, mocked and berated by a person with an agenda. So, I don't really see any of it as anything other than 2 people trying to offend each other.

Nervous and frustrated? He started throwing jabs at Hannity right from the moment he was introduced.

This isn't a guy who has only done one interview. He's been doing them since Sept.

It just doesn't seem to make any sense having a self proclaimed anarchist as a spokesman for the movement if you're trying to get support from the average American. Once he starts running his mouth he loses all credibility.

I agree this interview seems to be all about the two of them attacking each other which just adds another reason as to why this kid is part of the reason people have been turning away from Occupy.

[PeaceFrog]

You're talking shit again. People have not been turning away Occupy.

If that were true, Hannity wouldn't be wasting his time trying to discredit the movement.

[MeOmYo]

Nervous and frustrated? He started throwing jabs at Hannity right from the moment he was introduced. This isn't a guy who has only done one interview. He's been doing them since Sept. It just doesn't seem to make any sense having a self proclaimed anarchist as a spokesman for the movement if you're trying to get support from the average American. Once he starts running his mouth he loses all credibility. I agree this interview seems to be all about the two of them attacking each other which just adds another reason as to why this kid is part of the reason people have been turning away from Occupy.

They both threw jabs from the beginning.

How do you know that people have been turning away from Occupy? Do you have facts or is that your own judgement?

It was a horrible interview that made Hannity look like an ass just as much as the other guy. Proclaiming anarchy as the intent of Occupy probably isn't the best thing to say on national tv, in fact, it's probably the worst but Hannity never even gave him a chance to talk or explain anything. Shitty interview all around that proved nothing IMO.

[Joker]

Hannity hadn't even finished introducing him and Shultz was attacking. It appeared he was in the middle of saying something along the lines of I appreciate you being here (Shultz interrupts him after he says "I appreciate") and starts in about something that was said about his friends back in August)

The last couple of polls I've seen were from over the winter (Nov, and Jan.) both showed the movement losing support

I agree that Hannity (who I think is a tool) didn't give him much of a chance but that might not have been the case if Shultz doesn't go on the offensive right from the very start. It was a shitty interview and I agree it didn't really prove anything, I never claimed it did.

What I stated, and what I still believe, is that this guy Shultz is doing more to push support away from Occupy than he is to getting people to accept it.

[PeaceFrog]

"thanks for letting a dirty hippy come on the show"

What is offensive about that?