I agree that Hannity (who I think is a tool)
then why do you post nothing but him, fox, and new york post articles and videos when you're trying to discredit OWS?
matter of fact, why do you still bother? everyone is onto your game.
1 votes
Occupy Wall St.
Started by
vic
, Sep 22 2011 05:18 PM
2438 replies to this topic
#2402
-
- VibeTribe
- 6,110 posts
Posted 08 May 2012 - 06:18 PM
Come on Joker, polls from Nov. and Jan. are sure to show less support due to winter. No?
I don't blame him for interrupting Hannity as he wasn't even given a fair chance before the interview started. Before the interview started, Hannity villified Occupy with pictures that do not depict the movement as a whole. Show all the shit, not the good. Certainly a motive was in place before the interview started and it was not to give Shultz an opportunity to speak.
I'm not going to get into symantics but you did claim it proved something. You claimed Shultz is making people lose interest in Occupy and used the interview as an example of why.
I don't blame him for interrupting Hannity as he wasn't even given a fair chance before the interview started. Before the interview started, Hannity villified Occupy with pictures that do not depict the movement as a whole. Show all the shit, not the good. Certainly a motive was in place before the interview started and it was not to give Shultz an opportunity to speak.
I'm not going to get into symantics but you did claim it proved something. You claimed Shultz is making people lose interest in Occupy and used the interview as an example of why.
#2404
-
- VibeTribe
- 10,422 posts
Posted 08 May 2012 - 06:59 PM
Perhaps if he had pushed the positive aspects of the movement and the good they'd accomplished rather than complaining about something that was said 9 months ago the interview would have gone differently. Perhaps his motive for doing the interview was just to try and stick it to Hannity.
What I said was "People like this are the reason "Occupy" will never be accepted by the actual 99%"
And I'd still bet there's a very large portion of the 99% that won't accept it because of people like him (anarchists) as spokespeople for it.
He seems to be one of the more vocal spokesmen for the movement and has been from the start. Perhaps if he doesn't speak for the movement the movement should make that clear to the public as well as ask him to stop portraying himself as a representative of the movement.
What I said was "People like this are the reason "Occupy" will never be accepted by the actual 99%"
And I'd still bet there's a very large portion of the 99% that won't accept it because of people like him (anarchists) as spokespeople for it.
He seems to be one of the more vocal spokesmen for the movement and has been from the start. Perhaps if he doesn't speak for the movement the movement should make that clear to the public as well as ask him to stop portraying himself as a representative of the movement.
#2408
-
- VibeTribe
- 6,110 posts
Posted 08 May 2012 - 07:31 PM
My guess is he went out the night before and downed a 1.75 of the finest Tennessee Whiskey known to man. His mind started swirling on how he could put down the evil nemesis known as Hannity. Well, then he sobered up and needed the small amount of cash Hannity used to lure him into the den to retrieve another handle of the finest Tennessee Whiskey known to man.
or
Maybe he knew the audience that Hannity has and knows that any press is good press. By making both of them look like asses, he wins.
or
Maybe he knew the audience that Hannity has and knows that any press is good press. By making both of them look like asses, he wins.
#2410
-
- VibeTribe
- 10,422 posts
Posted 08 May 2012 - 07:54 PM
Hannity looks like an ass all the time so all he really did was make it look like Occupy has an anarchist ASS as it's spokesman. Like I said, "people like him..."My guess is he went out the night before and downed a 1.75 of the finest Tennessee Whiskey known to man. His mind started swirling on how he could put down the evil nemesis known as Hannity. Well, then he sobered up and needed the small amount of cash Hannity used to lure him into the den to retrieve another handle of the finest Tennessee Whiskey known to man. or Maybe he knew the audience that Hannity has and knows that any press is good press. By making both of them look like asses, he wins.
IMO the longer he stays in front of the cameras as a spokesman the worse the movement is going to look as a whole to John Q Public
#2411
-
- VibeTribe
- 8,284 posts
- LocationWhisky a Go Go
Posted 08 May 2012 - 07:56 PM
you know what, for the first time (I think) in history, I believe your opinion is correct.
Fortunately, sane people are not anarchists and can see through Hannity for what he is trying to do... He scraped up the most radical person he could find from OWS and then put him on TV...
He's a tool, you are right.
And Rupert Murdoch wasn't even born in America... so why would you trust his news network? He's an Australian.
Fortunately, sane people are not anarchists and can see through Hannity for what he is trying to do... He scraped up the most radical person he could find from OWS and then put him on TV...
He's a tool, you are right.
And Rupert Murdoch wasn't even born in America... so why would you trust his news network? He's an Australian.
#2413
-
- VibeTribe
- 10,422 posts
Posted 09 May 2012 - 09:54 PM
Occupy Wall Street members making Brooklyn their economic hub
Shops running coop style in Boerum Hill without a boss
Occupy Wall Street protesters may be marching for change in Manhattan, but they’re making money in Brooklyn.
More than a dozen savvy OWS entrepreneurs have opened a printing shop, a T-shirt operation and a tech venture - all running coop style without a boss.
“OWS has different sides. There are the kids who drum all day and piss people off. But we are trying to show people that a democratic economy can work,” said Dale Luce, 25, cofounder of OccuCopy print shop at 388 Atlantic Avenue.
Two of the businesses got their start last fall in Zuccotti Park where OWS set up camp.
Now, the budding businesses are based on or near trendy Atlantic Avenue in Boerum Hill with more in the works - many stashing cash aside to loan to other start-ups.
Read more: http://www.nydailyne...2#ixzz1uPbYBBv3
Shops running coop style in Boerum Hill without a boss
Occupy Wall Street protesters may be marching for change in Manhattan, but they’re making money in Brooklyn.
More than a dozen savvy OWS entrepreneurs have opened a printing shop, a T-shirt operation and a tech venture - all running coop style without a boss.
“OWS has different sides. There are the kids who drum all day and piss people off. But we are trying to show people that a democratic economy can work,” said Dale Luce, 25, cofounder of OccuCopy print shop at 388 Atlantic Avenue.
Two of the businesses got their start last fall in Zuccotti Park where OWS set up camp.
Now, the budding businesses are based on or near trendy Atlantic Avenue in Boerum Hill with more in the works - many stashing cash aside to loan to other start-ups.
Read more: http://www.nydailyne...2#ixzz1uPbYBBv3
#2415
-
- VibeTribe
- 10,422 posts
Posted 10 May 2012 - 07:17 PM
UC sues over Occupy the Farm protest in Albany
A standoff between UC Berkeley and Occupy activists who planted renegade crops on university land is headed from the farm to the courts.
The University of California Board of Regents filed a lawsuit Wednesday against 14 protesters, claiming they and others conspired to cut through chains that secured gates and trespass onto the Gill Tract, a patch of land along bustling San Pablo Avenue in Albany.
The activists, who call themselves Occupy the Farm, moved onto the tract April 22. They are pressuring the university to preserve part of the tract, which has been the subject of development debates for years, for agricultural study and urban farming.
The protesters tilled 2 acres on a site used by the College of Natural Resources for research. They planted vegetables, set up a drip system and pitched tents. Ever since, the two sides have been trading demands.
When UC turned off the water, the protesters began hauling in 30-gallon tanks. On Wednesday, the university put in concrete barricades to cut off vehicle traffic, so demonstrators began bringing in water by the jug.
Police officers were on hand and read a statement warning people not to interfere with them, but they did not prevent activists from coming and going.
With the lawsuit, UC is trying to ratchet up the pressure further. The civil action, filed in Alameda County Superior Court, seeks a restraining order and an injunction against the pitchfork protesters, with violations punishable by up to six months in jail.
The suit says that a 24-hour-a-day encampment is not consistent with agricultural experiments, and that the demonstrators are delaying an annual corn planting.
"We're happy to have a conversation about both the short- and long-term future of the Gill Tract," said Dan Mogulof, a UC Berkeley spokesman. "But that conversation must include members of the Albany community who have been involved with us in a collaborative planning process for more than eight years."
A UC master plan adopted in 2004 called for the land to be used for recreational and open space if the university halts agricultural research, Mogulof said.
One of the protesters named in the lawsuit, UC Berkeley alumna Anya Kamenskaya, gave a reporter a tour of the property Wednesday. Beyond signs reading, "Resistance is fertile" and "Free the land," activists had set up a kitchen tent, brought in five portable bathrooms and arranged a "youth educational garden."
The interlopers took away chickens they had brought to the land Wednesday morning, fearing they would be seized in a police sweep.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.co...L#ixzz1uUoOrmsY
A standoff between UC Berkeley and Occupy activists who planted renegade crops on university land is headed from the farm to the courts.
The University of California Board of Regents filed a lawsuit Wednesday against 14 protesters, claiming they and others conspired to cut through chains that secured gates and trespass onto the Gill Tract, a patch of land along bustling San Pablo Avenue in Albany.
The activists, who call themselves Occupy the Farm, moved onto the tract April 22. They are pressuring the university to preserve part of the tract, which has been the subject of development debates for years, for agricultural study and urban farming.
The protesters tilled 2 acres on a site used by the College of Natural Resources for research. They planted vegetables, set up a drip system and pitched tents. Ever since, the two sides have been trading demands.
When UC turned off the water, the protesters began hauling in 30-gallon tanks. On Wednesday, the university put in concrete barricades to cut off vehicle traffic, so demonstrators began bringing in water by the jug.
Police officers were on hand and read a statement warning people not to interfere with them, but they did not prevent activists from coming and going.
With the lawsuit, UC is trying to ratchet up the pressure further. The civil action, filed in Alameda County Superior Court, seeks a restraining order and an injunction against the pitchfork protesters, with violations punishable by up to six months in jail.
The suit says that a 24-hour-a-day encampment is not consistent with agricultural experiments, and that the demonstrators are delaying an annual corn planting.
"We're happy to have a conversation about both the short- and long-term future of the Gill Tract," said Dan Mogulof, a UC Berkeley spokesman. "But that conversation must include members of the Albany community who have been involved with us in a collaborative planning process for more than eight years."
A UC master plan adopted in 2004 called for the land to be used for recreational and open space if the university halts agricultural research, Mogulof said.
One of the protesters named in the lawsuit, UC Berkeley alumna Anya Kamenskaya, gave a reporter a tour of the property Wednesday. Beyond signs reading, "Resistance is fertile" and "Free the land," activists had set up a kitchen tent, brought in five portable bathrooms and arranged a "youth educational garden."
The interlopers took away chickens they had brought to the land Wednesday morning, fearing they would be seized in a police sweep.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.co...L#ixzz1uUoOrmsY
#2416
-
- VibeTribe
- 10,422 posts
Posted 25 May 2012 - 01:37 PM
Occupy Wall Street: Disturbing New Black Bloc Video
May 25, 2012 12:20 AM EDT
3 people recommend this | comments: 1
The Occupy Wall Street has proven to be an opportune forum for a dangerous faction called the Black Bloc. Although Black Bloc is not the only militant faction in the OWS movement, the Black Bloc is the most prominent and has been around for years. There is dispute within OWS as to whether the various militant factions are helpful or harmful to the OWS anti-capitalist message. The Black bloc thugs are self-described anarchists and they like to create havoc. Although they are also anti-capitalist and closely associated with the OWS movement, their tactics are violent.
On April 30, the Black Bloc trashed the Mission District in San Francisco. They defaced property, smashed windows, vandalized vehicles and basically destroyed everything in their path. They posted themselves causing the destruction online, where one can hear them scream, "F**k the Police" and "Occupy will not be stopped, especially by some f**king cop!" and "What do we want? Dead Cops!" As much as the Occupy movement seeks to distance themselves from violence, many of the Black Bloc group are active in the Occupy Movement.
Watch the video here (graphic language):
The "Ruckus Party" was advertised on a since-scrubbed invitation on the Occupy Oakland Website. "We call upon all of our comrades from every corner of the Bay to descend upon Dolores Park for a ruckus street party to counter gentrification, capitalism, and the policing of our communities."
Regarding the criminal destruction, the local San Francisco news reported, "100-150 people were involved and that the police station was also a target. "At the Mission police station at 17th and Valencia streets, pink and yellow paint was thrown on the barricaded glass doors, which someone cracked with a hammer or similar weapon." One person surveyed the smashed window at her business said, "Occupy is saying it's not them, but we wouldn't be here if it wasn't for Occupy, now would we?" The Occupy Wall Street movement has mixed feelings on the militant faction of the movement, but that a radical element exists is not in question.
Sfgate reported that people wondered why this gang was not stopped by police; "protesters damaged more than 30 stores and restaurants and vandalized cars, questioned Tuesday why activists had singled them out and why police hadn't done more to halt the rampage." No arrests were made, except for one, who was cited and released for a "vehicle code violation" and resisting arrest. "Some business owners said that given the extent of the damage, the arrest total should have been far higher."
Reporter Wendell Goler asked White House Press Secretary Jay Carney this week, "The President has voiced support for the Occupy folks in the past. Did their actions in Chicago sour his support?" Carney is clearly uncomfortable, shown by his body language and dancing between expressing support and disapproval can be seen here:
http://news.gather.c...281474981354618
May 25, 2012 12:20 AM EDT
3 people recommend this | comments: 1
The Occupy Wall Street has proven to be an opportune forum for a dangerous faction called the Black Bloc. Although Black Bloc is not the only militant faction in the OWS movement, the Black Bloc is the most prominent and has been around for years. There is dispute within OWS as to whether the various militant factions are helpful or harmful to the OWS anti-capitalist message. The Black bloc thugs are self-described anarchists and they like to create havoc. Although they are also anti-capitalist and closely associated with the OWS movement, their tactics are violent.
On April 30, the Black Bloc trashed the Mission District in San Francisco. They defaced property, smashed windows, vandalized vehicles and basically destroyed everything in their path. They posted themselves causing the destruction online, where one can hear them scream, "F**k the Police" and "Occupy will not be stopped, especially by some f**king cop!" and "What do we want? Dead Cops!" As much as the Occupy movement seeks to distance themselves from violence, many of the Black Bloc group are active in the Occupy Movement.
Watch the video here (graphic language):
The "Ruckus Party" was advertised on a since-scrubbed invitation on the Occupy Oakland Website. "We call upon all of our comrades from every corner of the Bay to descend upon Dolores Park for a ruckus street party to counter gentrification, capitalism, and the policing of our communities."
Regarding the criminal destruction, the local San Francisco news reported, "100-150 people were involved and that the police station was also a target. "At the Mission police station at 17th and Valencia streets, pink and yellow paint was thrown on the barricaded glass doors, which someone cracked with a hammer or similar weapon." One person surveyed the smashed window at her business said, "Occupy is saying it's not them, but we wouldn't be here if it wasn't for Occupy, now would we?" The Occupy Wall Street movement has mixed feelings on the militant faction of the movement, but that a radical element exists is not in question.
Sfgate reported that people wondered why this gang was not stopped by police; "protesters damaged more than 30 stores and restaurants and vandalized cars, questioned Tuesday why activists had singled them out and why police hadn't done more to halt the rampage." No arrests were made, except for one, who was cited and released for a "vehicle code violation" and resisting arrest. "Some business owners said that given the extent of the damage, the arrest total should have been far higher."
Reporter Wendell Goler asked White House Press Secretary Jay Carney this week, "The President has voiced support for the Occupy folks in the past. Did their actions in Chicago sour his support?" Carney is clearly uncomfortable, shown by his body language and dancing between expressing support and disapproval can be seen here:
http://news.gather.c...281474981354618
#2417
-
- VibeTribe
- 8,284 posts
- LocationWhisky a Go Go
Posted 25 May 2012 - 07:30 PM
"dancing" between expressing support and disapproval...
that's no kind of dancing I've ever seen... not sure about anyone else. I didn't see any dancing at all matter of fact.
Why didn't the cop get out of the car and arrest the guy banging on it?
How much of this shit is caused by agent provocateurs in a direct effort to discredit the movement?
that's no kind of dancing I've ever seen... not sure about anyone else. I didn't see any dancing at all matter of fact.
Why didn't the cop get out of the car and arrest the guy banging on it?
How much of this shit is caused by agent provocateurs in a direct effort to discredit the movement?
#2419
-
- VibeTribe
- 6,760 posts
Posted 05 June 2012 - 03:53 PM
have not seen anyone down here for weeks.
not one Friday afternoon march or anything.
5/1 + done ?
they even gave them 1/2 of the steps of Federal Hall to use for debate, etc.
i can't remember even one person using it.
takes away from the amount of people that can eat lunch there like we use to, but that's another story.
not one Friday afternoon march or anything.
5/1 + done ?
they even gave them 1/2 of the steps of Federal Hall to use for debate, etc.
i can't remember even one person using it.
takes away from the amount of people that can eat lunch there like we use to, but that's another story.
#2420
-
- VibeTribe
- 8,284 posts
- LocationWhisky a Go Go
Posted 05 June 2012 - 08:23 PM
Didn't hear a thing about any kind of Occupy protest of Obama when he was in NYC for fundraisers with the fat cats yesterday. Did they even bother or was it another free pass for their man?
why didn't you organize something? You'd rather just sit on your couch and complain?
I, personally, see no gains to be had by protesting Obama at this point. After he gets elected again, that's a different story.
Right now it would cause more harm than good, and that is only my personal opinion, though if others feel the same way I wouldn't be surprised.
#2421
-
- VibeTribe
- 6,760 posts
Posted 08 June 2012 - 02:30 PM
http://www.silive.co...wsuit_proc.html
Judge lets Occupy lawsuit proceed against cops
A judge gave the green light Thursday to a lawsuit against police officers in the arrests of 700 Occupy Wall Street protesters last year on the Brooklyn Bridge, but he dismissed the city and its top officials from liability.
U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff in Manhattan said in a written ruling that the marchers had adequately backed up their claims at this stage of the litigation that they were not properly warned by officers that they would be arrested on the bridge Oct. 1.
But the judge tossed out as defendants the city, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, rejecting the argument that the city and its top officials had a policy of making false arrests designed to discourage protesting.
City lawyer Arthur Larkin said the city was pleased that the judge found neither the mayor nor the police commissioner was liable. He said the city was considering its legal options, including appeal, regarding the remainder of the decision.
The judge began his decision by citing the contributions of people such as Thomas Paine and Martin Luther King Jr., saying "what a huge debt this nation owes to its 'troublemakers.'"
"They have forced us to focus on problems we would prefer to downplay or ignore," he said. "Yet, it is often only with hindsight that we can distinguish those troublemakers who brought us to our senses from those who were simply -- troublemakers. Prudence, and respect for the constitutional rights to free speech and free association, therefore dictate that the legal system cut all non-violent protesters a fair amount of slack."
The ruling came in one of several lawsuits that resulted from the protest in which protesters were surrounded by officers in the middle of the bridge and arrested.
The protesters were demonstrating against financial inequality. Their lawsuit seeks a judgment declaring their arrests were unconstitutional and unspecified damages.
Police said the protesters were arrested and given disorderly conduct summonses for spilling into a roadway despite warnings.
The judge, in his ruling, said the plaintiffs had made an adequate showing that police failed to give fair warning to the majority of protesters that they would be arrested if they marched in traffic lanes on the bridge. He said the protesters were further confused when police officers walked into the lanes themselves and stopped traffic, making it seem as if it was all right to be there.
The judge said the videos offered by both sides show that the police officers "exercised some degree of control over the marchers, defining their route and directing them, at times, to follow certain rules."
He said the use of one bull horn to warn demonstrators where to go was clearly inadequate because "no reasonable officer could imagine, in these circumstances, that this warning was heard by more than a small fraction of the gathered multitude."
"Indeed, the plaintiffs' video shows what should have been obvious to any reasonable officer, namely, that the surrounding clamor interfered with the ability of demonstrators as few as 15 feet away from the bull horn to understand the officer's instructions," the judge added.
Judge lets Occupy lawsuit proceed against cops
A judge gave the green light Thursday to a lawsuit against police officers in the arrests of 700 Occupy Wall Street protesters last year on the Brooklyn Bridge, but he dismissed the city and its top officials from liability.
U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff in Manhattan said in a written ruling that the marchers had adequately backed up their claims at this stage of the litigation that they were not properly warned by officers that they would be arrested on the bridge Oct. 1.
But the judge tossed out as defendants the city, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and police Commissioner Raymond Kelly, rejecting the argument that the city and its top officials had a policy of making false arrests designed to discourage protesting.
City lawyer Arthur Larkin said the city was pleased that the judge found neither the mayor nor the police commissioner was liable. He said the city was considering its legal options, including appeal, regarding the remainder of the decision.
The judge began his decision by citing the contributions of people such as Thomas Paine and Martin Luther King Jr., saying "what a huge debt this nation owes to its 'troublemakers.'"
"They have forced us to focus on problems we would prefer to downplay or ignore," he said. "Yet, it is often only with hindsight that we can distinguish those troublemakers who brought us to our senses from those who were simply -- troublemakers. Prudence, and respect for the constitutional rights to free speech and free association, therefore dictate that the legal system cut all non-violent protesters a fair amount of slack."
The ruling came in one of several lawsuits that resulted from the protest in which protesters were surrounded by officers in the middle of the bridge and arrested.
The protesters were demonstrating against financial inequality. Their lawsuit seeks a judgment declaring their arrests were unconstitutional and unspecified damages.
Police said the protesters were arrested and given disorderly conduct summonses for spilling into a roadway despite warnings.
The judge, in his ruling, said the plaintiffs had made an adequate showing that police failed to give fair warning to the majority of protesters that they would be arrested if they marched in traffic lanes on the bridge. He said the protesters were further confused when police officers walked into the lanes themselves and stopped traffic, making it seem as if it was all right to be there.
The judge said the videos offered by both sides show that the police officers "exercised some degree of control over the marchers, defining their route and directing them, at times, to follow certain rules."
He said the use of one bull horn to warn demonstrators where to go was clearly inadequate because "no reasonable officer could imagine, in these circumstances, that this warning was heard by more than a small fraction of the gathered multitude."
"Indeed, the plaintiffs' video shows what should have been obvious to any reasonable officer, namely, that the surrounding clamor interfered with the ability of demonstrators as few as 15 feet away from the bull horn to understand the officer's instructions," the judge added.
#2423
-
- VibeTribe
- 8,284 posts
- LocationWhisky a Go Go
Posted 14 June 2012 - 08:10 PM
Even when I agree with this guy I still want to slap the smug off his face
only further evidence that you may be bigoted (wanting to inflict violence upon somebody based upon their facial expression) and have violent tendencies (imagining that you can slap, or shoot, or stun gun somebody).
#2427
-
- VibeTribe
- 10,422 posts
Posted 18 June 2012 - 08:17 PM
Attention, Occupy: police use YouTube too
More
http://www.cbsnews.c...se-youtube-too/
After a dozen Occupy Minnesota protesters were arrested at a downtown demonstration, the group quickly took to the Internet, posting video that activists said showed police treating them roughly and never warning them to leave.
But Minneapolis police knew warnings had been given. And they had their own video to prove it. So they posted the footage on YouTube, an example of how law enforcement agencies nationwide are embracing online video to cast doubt on false claims and offer their own perspective to the public.
"It certainly frustrates the street officers to see their work being twisted into something that didn't happen or things being taken out of context," said Minneapolis police Sgt. Bill Palmer. "Frankly, the use of force, which is what most people want to film, is never going to look good, and the context can easily be twisted."
After years of seeing officers' misconduct captured on video, police departments across the nation are trying to use the medium to their advantage, releasing footage of their own to rebut allegations and to build trust within communities. One department even posted video of an officer punching a woman to show why he was fired.
Weeks before the Occupy demonstration in April, Minneapolis police created their own YouTube channel to give officers a venue to tell their own stories.
"We want to be transparent," Assistant Chief Janee Harteau said. "Here is what we did. You can see for yourself and be your own judge."
Larger departments in cities such as Boston, Baltimore and Milwaukee have had YouTube channels for years. They often post surveillance video, updates on cases, messages from the chief and public-service announcements.
Some agencies don't rely on YouTube. After Oakland, Calif., officers were criticized for the way they handled an Occupy protest in October, police there released four videos on their website showing hostile protesters surrounding police and throwing paint at them. Officers later resorted to tear gas.
More
http://www.cbsnews.c...se-youtube-too/
#2432
-
- VibeTribe
- 10,422 posts
Posted 03 July 2012 - 11:34 AM
Here's a follow up to an earlier post. Be careful with those tweets
DA Gets to See Occupy Tweets
In April, Judge Sciarrino ruled Malcolm Harris, a 23-year-old writer charged with disorderly conduct during an Oct. 1 protest on the Brooklyn Bridge, couldn't quash the Manhattan district attorney's office's subpoena to Twitter.
http://online.wsj.co...1484529174.html
DA Gets to See Occupy Tweets
Twitter Inc. must turn over messages posted by an Occupy Wall Street protester, a Manhattan judge ruled on Monday, another move toward giving law-enforcement agencies broad access to comments made on social media.
Monday's order was the second time Manhattan Criminal Court Judge Matthew Sciarrino Jr. has ruled that law-enforcement agencies can subpoena messages posted on Twitter.
In April, Judge Sciarrino ruled Malcolm Harris, a 23-year-old writer charged with disorderly conduct during an Oct. 1 protest on the Brooklyn Bridge, couldn't quash the Manhattan district attorney's office's subpoena to Twitter.
On Monday, the judge rejected Twitter's argument that its users have a reasonable expectation of privacy under the Fourth Amendment, much as people who write emails do.
He acknowledged that legal interpretations of the First Amendment and Fourth Amendment's protection of online commentary are still evolving. But the judge ruled that Mr. Harris had "no reasonable expectation of privacy for tweets," comparing the posting to screaming out of a window.
"The Constitution gives you the right to post, but as numerous people have learned, there are still consequences for your public posts," the judge wrote in an 11-page decision. "What you give to the public belongs to the public. What you keep to yourself belongs only to you."
A Twitter spokeswoman said in a statement that the company was "disappointed" and is reviewing its options.
Mr. Harris's attorney, Martin Stolar, called the judge's decision "not very 21st century."
"It's rooted in old law," he said.
The Occupy Wall Street protests last fall brought to the surface a growing debate in legal circles over how much access law-enforcement agencies should have to statements made on social media websites. Protesters used Twitter to communicate, often publicly acknowledging they were breaking the law, prosecutors said.
"It's sort of the modern equivalent of asking a witness, 'What did he say?' It's just a shift from asking witnesses to asking Twitter. It's the new version of an old problem,'" said Orin Kerr, a George Washington University law professor who specializes in electronic evidence and Internet law.
Mr. Harris was one of 700 people arrested for allegedly marching in the roadway of the Brooklyn Bridge on Oct. 1. Prosecutors have said in a court filing that Mr. Harris's tweets, under the handle @destructuremal, "made clear…that he was well aware of the police instructions that day, and acted with the intent of obstructing traffic on the bridge."
Prosecutors subpoenaed Twitter on Jan. 26, after Mr. Harris's tweets disappeared.
Mr. Harris is set to go to trial on Dec. 12 for disorderly conduct, a violation. He contends police directed him and others onto the bridge.
Mr. Stolar, who is representing several Occupy protesters, said Manhattan prosecutors have subpoenaed tweets in at least four criminal cases related to the demonstrations. In two of those matters, the subpoenas were dropped when defendants accepted deals that would expunge the charges after six months without criminal charges, said Mr. Stolar, who isn't representing the other defendants whose tweets are being sought.
Another protester Jeff Rae, 31, whose tweets were subpoenaed until he accepted a deal for six months probation, said he wants Twitter to file an appeal.
The Manhattan district attorney's office wouldn't discuss how many times it has subpoenaed Twitter.
Under Monday's order, Twitter must turn over Mr. Harris's tweets between Sept. 15, 2011, and Dec. 30, 2011, to the court.
The judge will inspect the messages and turn over "relevant portions" to the district attorney's office. Any tweets after Dec. 30 would have to be obtained using a search warrant.
"We are pleased that the court has ruled for a second time that the tweets at issue must be turned over," Chief Assistant District Attorney Daniel Alonso said. "We look forward to Twitter's complying and to moving forward with the trial."
Drew Hornbein, an Occupy protester who works with its technology operations group, said he appreciates how Twitter has tried to fend off prosecutors' subpoena requests.
"I think they're doing a great job, but they are still a business," he said. "They can't fight if it means they're going to get cut off. I think they want to do the right thing."
Occupy protesters have tried to create communication networks that can't be seen by outsiders.
http://online.wsj.co...1484529174.html
#2433
-
- VibeTribe
- 6,760 posts
Posted 12 July 2012 - 04:47 PM
i think we all pretty much agree that the City & NYPD have leaked false stories about OWS.
I found it very cusious that almost every paper ran the Subway Chain DNA link to an Unsovled Murder story on the front page, but chose to burry the retaction somewhere in the middle.
no one rembers the retraction/aquitals.
papers don't like to show their mistakes
A day after reports that DNA found at an Occupy Wall Street-affiliated protest had been matched to an unsolved murder case, a law enforcement official said the link was a lab mistake—and not a break
http://news.yahoo.co...-130802454.html
I found it very cusious that almost every paper ran the Subway Chain DNA link to an Unsovled Murder story on the front page, but chose to burry the retaction somewhere in the middle.
no one rembers the retraction/aquitals.
papers don't like to show their mistakes
A day after reports that DNA found at an Occupy Wall Street-affiliated protest had been matched to an unsolved murder case, a law enforcement official said the link was a lab mistake—and not a break
http://news.yahoo.co...-130802454.html
#2435
-
- VibeTribe
- 10,422 posts
Posted 12 July 2012 - 09:10 PM
From what I'm seeing the cops never said anything about it being from someone affiliated to OWS, only that it matched DNA found at the scene and they specifically stated that it could just be a coincidence.i think we all pretty much agree that the City & NYPD have leaked false stories about OWS.
I found it very cusious that almost every paper ran the Subway Chain DNA link to an Unsovled Murder story on the front page, but chose to burry the retaction somewhere in the middle.
no one rembers the retraction/aquitals.
papers don't like to show their mistakes
A day after reports that DNA found at an Occupy Wall Street-affiliated protest had been matched to an unsolved murder case, a law enforcement official said the link was a lab mistake—and not a break
http://news.yahoo.co...-130802454.html
Seems this was more of a case of the press blowing it all out of proportion rather than the city/cops leaking a false story.
#2436
-
- VibeTribe
- 10,422 posts
Posted 13 July 2012 - 03:39 PM
Riot police, Occupy protesters clash in Los Angeles
Police clad in riot gear skirmished with protesters, including Occupy demonstrators, in downtown Los Angeles late Thursday, leaving two officers injured and an estimated dozens of people arrested, local media reported. At least one man, who said he was not part of the protest, reported being struck by a rubber bullet.
A woman who said she was an Occupy member told the Los Angeles Times that protesters attended the monthly “ArtWalk” on Thursday to give support to those who had previously been arrested for writing on the sidewalk with chalk.
The demonstration started at about 8:40 p.m. (11:40 p.m. ET) Thursday, when protesters began taking over the intersection of Fifth and Spring streets, Officer Karen Rayner of the police department said. At times during the first hours of the protest, crowds and police could be seen running from the area. Police ordered the crowd to leave around 11 p.m., and a few skirmishes appeared to break out as officers tried to move the protesters.
At least two officers were injured in the skirmishes, the LA Times reported, and dozens of arrests were believed to have been made, though exact numbers were not available, Rayner said.
More
http://usnews.msnbc....os-angeles?lite
Police clad in riot gear skirmished with protesters, including Occupy demonstrators, in downtown Los Angeles late Thursday, leaving two officers injured and an estimated dozens of people arrested, local media reported. At least one man, who said he was not part of the protest, reported being struck by a rubber bullet.
A woman who said she was an Occupy member told the Los Angeles Times that protesters attended the monthly “ArtWalk” on Thursday to give support to those who had previously been arrested for writing on the sidewalk with chalk.
The demonstration started at about 8:40 p.m. (11:40 p.m. ET) Thursday, when protesters began taking over the intersection of Fifth and Spring streets, Officer Karen Rayner of the police department said. At times during the first hours of the protest, crowds and police could be seen running from the area. Police ordered the crowd to leave around 11 p.m., and a few skirmishes appeared to break out as officers tried to move the protesters.
At least two officers were injured in the skirmishes, the LA Times reported, and dozens of arrests were believed to have been made, though exact numbers were not available, Rayner said.
More
http://usnews.msnbc....os-angeles?lite
#2438
-
- VibeTribe
- 4,913 posts
#2439
-
- VibeTribe
- 6,760 posts
Posted 03 August 2012 - 02:15 PM
i hate to say it but why do i have a feeling the "group of legal experts" were not unbiased.
the problems with the NYPD go back to when Rudy had is thug squads that were shut down bythe feds.
that was replaced by "stop & frisk" which quicky went to we can get away with anything.
i am glad to see the officer that sprayed the women in the oragne fencing now has 2 federal law suits against him.
http://www.silive.co...taten_isla.html
the problems with the NYPD go back to when Rudy had is thug squads that were shut down bythe feds.
that was replaced by "stop & frisk" which quicky went to we can get away with anything.
i am glad to see the officer that sprayed the women in the oragne fencing now has 2 federal law suits against him.
http://www.silive.co...taten_isla.html
