An Occupy protester flashes the peace sign to Oakland police officers early Thursday morning.
The day started with a general strike in Oakland, Calif., and by sundown the Occupy movement had scored a symbolic and practical victory in peacefully closing down the busy Port of Oakland. But around midnight and early into Thursday morning, protesters and riot police were clashing at the main encampment by City Hall. What changed?
The Los Angeles Times reported Thursday that several dozen protesters were arrested and three were hospitalized, and some minor injuries were sustained by police officers. Here’s more on the overnight developments, and below the excerpt is video footage from #OakFoSho, the camera-phone-enabled protester mentioned in the L.A. Times’ coverage. Check out his Twitter feed here and his UStream channel here.
—KA
Los Angeles Times:
Demonstrators managed to gain entry to an empty building that had housed the Traveler’s Aid Society, a nonprofit organization that assists the homeless but had suffered funding cuts. Leaflets indicated that protesters had targeted the building for “reuse.” They branded it a new “community center” in Twitter feeds. Video from a local ABC affiliate’s helicopter showed jubilant crowds flowing in and out of the building, where a banner marked “Occupy Everything” hung. Others built a barricade nearby, presumably to discourage police.
Shortly before midnight, local media reported that police officers from various agencies were suiting up in riot gear. Some demonstrators set the barricade aflame. Firefighters doused it. A police statement later said protesters had hurled rocks, explosives, bottles and flaming objects at officers.
A live video from a man who called himself #OakFoSho on Twitter, beamed to thousands of viewers into the early hours Thursday, showed Alameda County sheriff’s deputies and Concord police officers among those authorities who surrounded the crowd on Broadway near Telegraph Avenue. Despite several volleys of tear gas, demonstrators boisterously played guitars and violins and sang classic songs such as Tennessee Ernie Ford’s “Sixteen Tons” and Johnny Cash’s “Folsom Prison Blues.”
If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.
Certain people would like to restrict the flow of information to only OWS friendly sources. That isnt exactly free speech.
Oh dear, OM what has become of your intellect, your sense of self even. as you continue to degrade and defame yourself in public.
You, oh purveyor of unintentional humor, restrict your “flow of information” more than anyone but your evil twin, IMax. You just gotta try harder here , really you do.
YoungGringos. Thanks for the clarification on the number attending the Oakland March, the media is obviously tainted like some of the posters here! If the numbers marching where higher then what I stated, this is good news to me and even more relevant to the lower percentage of violence portrayed by a few provokers. Of course the trolls will not have any of the truth!
The people just called out the Tea Bags in Ohio last evening, hopfully this is just the tip of the iceberg!
Go Occupy Oakland! You speak for the 99 percent, thanks for the feet on the ground updates YoungGringos. Please keep a wary eye out for provocateurs, they are probably some individuals, but I would not be surprised if some were not hired goons, even something about a few Oakland Police. Sounds like firemen lighting fires so they can get some overtime?
Certain people would like to restrict the flow of information to only OWS friendly sources. That isnt exactly free speech.
As to the quality of our sources, we know that Truthdig gave up on objectivity a long long time ago. Yet here you are, soaking it up like a cicada.
I prefer for everyone to obtain information from a wide spectrum of opinion, including Truthdig, and then we sort through it all to get to what is real.
Leefeeler,
“Really, if you allow that 3000 people formed the main march and 70 to 100 after the main march ended participated in the violence, this would be a small minority.”
3000? Yeah. That’s what they’d like you to believe.
Someone else posted this vid:
This is the march to the port, but there were massive PEACEFUL crowds this size all day.
This is only the first group that left at 4. There was another, even larger group that marched at 5:30.
I see why it’s being low-balled. Tens of thousands of “commoners” shut down a major port? That sounds like revolution.
Wall Street Journal has now become a source for social commentary. A news paper, which is named by the way… get this ‘The..Wall..Street…Journal’ owned by Murdoch the phone tapper! Almost as Reliable a source almost as good olboy Fox News, also owned by Murdoch!
Civil disobedience to a conservative means listening to NPR! As for violence, they also actually interviewed the police and 100 percent said they would use violence, especially if they got another bonus from Goldman Slacks!
From the Wall Street Journal, a systematic interview of 200 Occupiers in New York reveals:
Half (52%) have participated in a political movement before, virtually all (98%) say they would support civil disobedience to achieve their goals, and nearly one-third (31%) would support violence to advance their agenda.
Wow! 31% of Occupy Wall Street is agent provocateurs!
Appreciate the comment Hetro! I had misplaced your sentiments! There are those who appear here apparently whose job it seems is to always deviate from topic, basically to gerrymander discussion away from what would be worthwhile interactions.
Thanks, good luck with your nephew, he is learning something and this may be an important time in history!
Leef, i don’t know if we’re entirely in agreement, but I do think that you’ve been
taking me for an opponent of OWS..
I’m generally in agreement with OWS and about wholly in sympathy…. I’m
wishing it well and worrying that it’s making tactical errors.
My nephew lives with us and is down to Zuccotti Park every day. He’s on a
couple of their committees and I’m helping him a little with a presentation that
he’s giving to tomorrow’s General Assembly urging the folks to keep this going
and to broaden their base through exploring ways to interact with other groups
of likeminded folks.
I complain a heck of a lot when I see and read things that are poorly thought
out and which i think will hurt OWS rather than help, but that’s what grumpy
uncles do.
Hetero maybe we are really in agreement and I have misprinted your comments? I am not a supporter of violence, if Oakland becomes violent which it has not. Really, if you allow that 3000 people formed the main march and 70 to 100 after the main march ended participated in the violence, this would be a small minority. I perceived your comments appeared to be saying otherwise, me apologies.
Where do you stand on OWS. I am under the impression you do not embrace the OWS premise of unfairness sponsored by the 1 percent promoted on the 99 percent? I will not say the other words because they seem to annoy you.
Violence is a small segment of Occupy, for some it must be all or none? Hetro, you as OM and Imax seem to prefer to lump it as all, the certainty of distorted illusions.
Disenfranchisement and inequality are a 100 years old; according to Hetro; but now people as the 99 percent are fed up,... for the 1 percent has been blatant in its lack of compassion, integrity and accountability, the absurdity of person-hood for corporations may have been the last straw, in your face inequality sponsored by a 1 percent of the purest grade.
As for being purer than actions, I suggest my pureness is like my suggested anger by other posters, the normal convictions as figments of tall tails, which never attempt to touch on reality, hence why they are tall tails! It has been the tired old usual ignoring of the elephant in the room seemingly forever apparent to me! (forever may even be more than a 100 years)?
My nativity and pureness dost not supersede the inkling appearance of trollness! Again disenfranchisement according to Hetro is a 100 years old, disenfranchisement is just an old tired message! Of course divisive instigation is not new either. Divisive polarizations are portrayed not to appear real either in that they are choreographed to as the Robber Barrons said, ‘I can hire half the working class to kill the other half!’ Yes instigating, manipulations and polarizations forever sponsored by those who would have it no other way for this is opportunism of the purest form!
Leef, my message for the morning is that we should
consider things carefully and not avoid accepting
responsibility for our actions by proclaiming that
we’re “purer” than others and thereby allowed actions
that we would consider transgressive if done by others.
“On Saturday November 5, 2011, CBS Affiliate WPRI reports a lone individual wreaked havoc on the Occupy Providence camp in Burnside Park when a man who later identified himself as a college student ran through the camp around 2:30 a.m., vandalizing several tents, shouting obscenities, and even stealing some food. Members of Occupy Providence’s Safety and Support Group eventually apprehended the man with non-violent measures and handed him over to the Providence Police.”
“However, after a unanimous vote by the entire Occupy assembly, the protesters decided not to press charges, but rather voted for him to deal individually with the people whose property he damaged. They also agreed to have the man attend two different Occupy sessions - an orientation workshop and a non-violence training session.”
Then how Representative Fascism works:
Myopic views of the few demanding focused attention on on the negative, creating division, politicization for the 1 percent and cronies must focus the negative as part of its divisive manipulations.
Hetro, speaking of messages, what the hell is yours except seemingly to focus on the negative? Disenfranchisement as a reality or a word, seems to stick in your craw, how do you feel about inequality, does it not exist too, or is it also a hundred years old?
It is interesting, what is happening people are taking care of themselves as community, sort of like the Muslim Religious Law or possibly like Quackers!
Geeze, crocodile tears are everywhere! So we are going to spend time on he said she said, or twitter this! Of course all an attempt to muddy the message of disenfranchisement and inequality! Great plan sorta Fox Newsy!
YoungGringos
Hetero-
Silly, rabbit, it’s a statement of solidarity. And it’s been out for a while.
——-
thanks for the information YG——I have no great outrage over the statement, BUT
the text pf the twitter message was different that your quotation.
“
it said that “Occupy Oakland GA just passed a proposal etc…..
so it really couldn’t have been “out there” for a while as there hasn’t been an OO
GA for all that long.
I applaud the light you shine on the deceptive and outright false posts of this clown prince of deceit. While I realize the need many feel to expose his lies, and he does indeed make it easy to do, I still believe that simply ignoring him and his equally ridiculous cohort,“he who claims to be a progressive but is obviously not” ( an Amerind name perhaps?) is the best way to deal with them.
Hetero-
Silly, rabbit, it’s a statement of solidarity. And it’s been out for a while. Here’s the text if you’re so interested
-
Occupy Oakland, in solidarity with the Occupy movement and with the local community, has established the principle of claiming for open use the open space that has been kept from us. We are committed to helping this practice continue and grow. Here in Oakland, thousands of buildings owned by city, banks, and corporations stand idle and abandoned. At the same time social services such as child and healthcare, education, libraries and community spaces are being defunded and eliminated.
Occupy Oakland supports the efforts of people in all Oakland neighborhoods to reclaim abandoned properties for use to meet their own immediate needs. Such spaces are already being occupied and squatted unofficially by the dispossessed, the marginalized, by many of the very people who have joined together here in Oscar Grant Plaza to make this a powerful and diverse movement.
We commit to providing political and material support to neighborhood reclamations, and supporting them in the face of eviction threats or police harassment. In solidarity with the global occupation movement, we encourage the transformation of abandoned spaces into resource centers toward meeting urgent community needs that the current economic system cannot and will not provide.
There has been much talk about how to implement this statement of solidarity. The focus right now seems to be on helping people resist foreclosure. I’m all for that, but I’m down with direct action. Some people believe if we just hit some critical mass of comments on a message board things will change.
I’m not one of them.
And what we’re doing in the park is illegal. We’re already illegally occupying a space. I have no qualms in helping a family “illegally” stay in a home that is being stolen from them.
Occupy Oakland General Assembly Calls For Occupying Foreclosed And
Abandoned Properties
Last night, the Oakland General Assembly — the democratic decision-making
body of the various occupations around the country — passed a proposal
calling on activists to occupy bank-owned, foreclosed, and abandoned
properties across the city. Here’s the announcement of the proposal passing on
Twitter.
One feels forced to comment upon this latest large turd from the usual source:
Last night, the Oakland General Assembly — the democratic decision-making body of the various occupations around the country — passed a proposal calling on activists to occupy bank-owned, foreclosed, and abandoned properties across the city.
Is exactly that, one in a series of large turds OM inflicts upon these threads. Now, this lunatic would have you believe that OO is running the entire show around the nation. What a buffoon!
YoungGringos said: “The full out attack on the OWS movement has begun. We must have struck a nerve.”
What you call a “full out attack” was made by OWS supporters! Think Progress is not conservative, they are backing the OWS movement.
The “99%” webpage supports OWS. For you to say that “99%” are generating a “full out attack on the OWS movement” is typical Leftist smokescreen.
Furthermore, @occupyoakland sent the message. @occupyoakland cannot possibly be “full out” attacking itself. You arent making any sense.
Thay all said the same thing supporting OWS in Oakland and i quote:
Last night, the Oakland General Assembly — the democratic decision-making body of the various occupations around the country — passed a proposal calling on activists to occupy bank-owned, foreclosed, and abandoned properties across the city.
You may want to claim that @occupyoakland is smearing itself! Then Think Progress is spreading the smear, and that the 99% webpage is actually run by conservative agents.
But its safer to assume that the Oakland General Assembly passed the resolution and caused yet another confrontation.
Looking at the many comments here over the past week I see that I state my opinions and prediction with no more absolutism than anyone else. In fact, I believe, I state my opinions far less forcefully than most.
With that said; I can understand if you take exception with both my opinion of the Tea Party and my predictions. Yet I’m still baffled by so many angry comments for sharing an opinion, it seems, which is not in the majority on this site.
I assure you, you will have no need to decipher my comments. Is this the problem here? Are most here less than honest? Is no one here plain spoken?
“My concerns are for the 2012 elections. These idiot children, directly seeded and cheered-on by the ‘Occupy’ crowd, will prove one thing in the next year. The power of the Tea vote.”
“If this wide-spread violence does not end, and I believe it will, the Tea vote, correctly described as a tsunami in 2010, will turn out in epic proportions.”
After rereading your comments, I have discovered I have a problem with premonitions as absolutism’s in your comments. We may agree, but I find the comment ‘will prove’ and ‘will turnout in epic proportions’ resonate as certainty’s!
One thing Imax, I will attempt to scrutinize and decipher your future comments as to their real intent and not a perceived one!
Why do so many here have such a difficult time even imagining someone who thinks and feels differently? You seem to have taken everything I write and turned my words into something unrecognizable.
Do you really have a hard time imagining how or why I can support the Occupy message but detest the violence we’re seeing all over the nation? Do you honestly have no idea how I can disagree with the Tea Movement’s underlying message but defend their collective right to protest? Have you any evidence of the Tea people displaying any of the destruction and violence on display within the Occupy protests?
You act as if you hate everything I write and we’re, I think, on the same side of the isle.
I am baffled by so many outward displays of hatred for diversity on this site.
Disfranchisement and Inequality is alienating, not the OWS or its message. The only thing I see is OM and Imax talking to themselves pumping up the tea party, now the alienating is in the messages of deception as the manipulators and provocateurs are doing their vaudeville song and dance routine.
Tea Party obviously feels threatened, just from the constant harping on anything but the message sponsored by OWS, disenfranchisement and inequality.
I see crocodile tears while rubbing of hands and phoney worry which is really glee,... not concern for OWS, but the usual Republican Tea Baggery!
I believe I do understand you. And as much as we may be on opposite ends of the political spectrum I’m certain, based on the tone and flavor of your writings, that we would often come to lasting agreements.
I have no fear of the Tea Movement. As raucous as protesters always get in large numbers (there are idiots in all crowds), I’ve seen zero evidence of violence or destruction from the movement as a whole. - Carrying a gun, or a printed sign of a gun, is not violent. Throwing explosives and chucks of cement is, by definition, violence.
My concerns are for the 2012 elections. These idiot children, directly seeded and cheered-on by the ‘Occupy’ crowd, will prove one thing in the next year. The power of the Tea vote.
If this wide-spread violence does not end, and I believe it will, the Tea vote, correctly described as a tsunami in 2010, will turn out in epic proportions.
The hubris is becoming deafening,... can you hear me now?
Once more, the violence was perpetrated by a small splinter group of 70 or so whom no more represents the Occupy Oakland then the the brother from another mother does. It is only for the convenience of those all so happy, horn blowing critics…. Bone appetite!
The hubris is becoming deafing,... can you hear me now?
Once more, the violence was perpetrated by a small splinter group of 70 or so whom no more represents the Occupy Oakland then the the brother from another mother does. It is only for the convenience of those all so happy, horn blowing critics…. Bone appetite!
This concerted violence and destruction must end. These things will only embolden the Tea vote twelve months from now!
IMax
Well, lets be careful here. If by “embolden” you mean “get energized, organized, and vote” then yes I will be very happy to see it. i understand that as a liberal you would be a little dismayed to lose elections.
IMax, i am a little worried about the other type of “emboldened”. Occupy uses direct action to accomplish goals, and if it succeeds then voting doesnt matter much. i really dont know what will happen here. I would like to think that the Tea Party would stick to constitutional principles, but I fear that some or many conservatives might be “emboldened” to take direct action of their own. In which case I will be very dismayed to the point of tears. So will you.
I dont like the idea of using violence to restore the system, fro Left or from Right. Violence degrades(decays) a democratic system, so the odds are against any success of restoring it. Its like Octavian ‘restoring’ the Roman Republic. In the end Rome got the stability it desired but lost the Republic forever.
That is why i would much rather see OWS win the change they want by campaigning and voting. Oh, i would be a little dismayed at some parts of their agenda, but it wouldnt be so bad. As a conservative i celebrate the sytem working better(even changes i dont want) and prefer that by far to tossing the dice with violence and revolution.
There are many Leftists who hope for that very thing. Which is foolish because in an armed clash against Rightists they would lose even worse than they do in the polls. Violence is stupid all by itself, but provoking a fight when you are outnumbered is stupid. Initiating an armed struggle when you are not only outnumbered but also outgunned is world class stupid. Risking that to “restore democracy” is a stupidity of Olympic proportions.
People on the East and West coast have no idea how idealistic, armed, and fiercely old-fashioned Americans in fly-over country are. As Obama said, we cling to our Bibles and our guns.
If OWS manages to negate their vote, the Independent voters out here will not support them, even if they liked OWS political goals. As you say, OWS is alienating, not uniting.
personally, i would support some of OWS agenda, but i cannot wish them an ounce of success with their current method.
I hope you understand me IMax. Although I dont understand you yet.
Murdoch isn’t attacking OWS because we smashed some windows or burned some trash.
What do you think the power structure is more worried about-
windows smashed by a handful of kids
or
the profit lost by the shutdown of a major port by tens of thousands of “commoners”?
“The full out attack on the OWS movement has begun. - We must have struck a nerve.”
-
That nerve has a name. Sanity.
I believe it’s insane to do battle with firemen, policemen, and EMT’s and expect 99% of Americans to follow. These full-on attacks are coming from the 99% OWS is attempting to appeal to.
99% of Americans are passionately against petulant children breaking things, fighting amongst themselves, and “occupying” abandoned buildings to make a point. 99% of American parents will verbally smack-down their child for displaying such adolescent behavior.
-
One commenter here believes occupying an abandoned building is a crime of sorts.
No. Occupying an abandoned building is a crime in every state, every county, every city and every hamlet in the United States. 99% of Americans understand and support laws which make occupying abandoned buildings a crime. I would suggest only petulant, tantrum-throwing, children fail to grasp this reality.
That’s Bullchit. The GA didn’t vote on occupying foreclosed homes. Someone got up and talked about it- it’s a democratic forum and people can talk about just about anything. That guy would still need to form a working group and then we would vote on his proposal- kinda like a Democracy.
Not that I’m against his proposal, but we didn’t vote on it and we didn’t sanction it.
By Marian Griffith, November 5, 2011 at 5:56 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
@FRToThus —-Two words: agents provocateurs. I’d bet they have badges sitting at home on their dresser, or maybe hidden in their back pockets.—-
Possibly, but more likey (unfortunately) is that some of the existing radical anti-government groups (or anti-globalists) is using the OWS to stage their own brand of protests. And many of these groups have long ago given up on peaceful protests and feel that only violence is going to get the results they are looking for.
Groups like these have instigated riots at G7 and G20 summits for many years now, and the OWS is protesting against the same kind of things they have been protesting for years.
OzarkMichael, - “And most people believe it. How long can this go on?”
-
L.A. Times - “Demonstrators ‘managed’ to gain entry to an empty building”...Which means protesters “broke into” an empty building under the direction of OWS leadership.
-
The answer to your question: A very long time. As a liberal-minded individual I am thoroughly embarrassed by these violent protests and the lack of independent critical thinking on display on this and other Web sites.
This concerted violence and destruction must end. These things will only embolden the Tea vote twelve months from now!
And when the police react, if someone gets hurt, its the police at fault? Really?
Enough with phony Occupy ‘victimhood’, and phony ‘non-violence’. Occupations are contrived to be confrontations. This time we have evidence if you read their own “General Assembly” announcement. There is no question now that some hooligans did that on their own, they were told to take over buildings.
It is so bloody convenient that whenever Occupy followers cause mayhem, the ‘leaderless’ movement simply shrugs its shoulders, and as a result the MSM reports to us dullards that Occupy is peaceful.
And most people believe it. How long can this go on?
a better job of proclaiming their disavowal of violence and expelling people who
are perpetuating it would go a long,long way toward shutting off the perception
that it’s part of the Occupation movement.
yesterday’s statement from the media committee in Oakland was an excellent first
step.
I must, as a strong supporter of the OWS movement, rise to refuse your contentions that:
Occupying a building is not ‘violent’. Property damage, assuming their is no human harm that comes of it, ought not to be considered violent either.
Occupying an abandoned building is still a crime but one that any reasonable police force might consider waiting out and refraining from violence of their own. Vandalism is absolutely counter productive and both weakens the movement in the eyes of the public still processing this new movement and opens us all up to violent responses from law enforcement.
I give you, as example, both the use of agitators to invoke violence within a movement, as was experienced during the protests against the Vietnam War and our current propagandists who came immediately out of their usual dark and dank hiding places to spout, distort and overstate the supposed violence of the movement itself when it is obvious to any sane person that said violence comes from the fringe and is immediately and consistently refused by the movement spokespersons.
Occupying a building is not ‘violent’. Property damage, assuming their is no human harm that comes of it, ought not to be considered violent either. Kicking families out of their homes due to foreclosures to live on the streets is a form of structural violence.
Narrow definitions of violence assumed by many in US public discourse basically anesthetize possible escalations of tactics in a social movement. Occupy Oakland is spot on by a) physically forcing the shut down of business for the day throughout the city and b)pushing for a building occupation. You can be sure that the fight for child labor laws, the 8 hour day, basic work safety laws, women’s suffrage, the legality of unions, all of the New Deal legislation, the civil rights movement, and the anti-war movement against Vietnam never functioned on the narrow definition of what is considered ‘violent’ in current US public discourse.
Once again it’s obvious that the majority of ‘Occupy’ demonstrators can protest peacefully. Once again it’s obvious that Oakland police have no interest in preventing peaceful, lawful, protests. And, once again, we see that all of this can and will change when many amongst the Occupy crowd are bent on putting people in danger and causing mayhem for everyone.
Breaking and taunting the law by “Occupying” a building is the most disruptive and dangerous thing that can happen at this point. What it amounts to is an action, by those causing these escalating violent incidences, designed to dig in and “barricade” themselves. - Very dangerous!
Taking any building or structure in this manner is the surest way to escalate these violent incidents. No City Council, no Mayor, no City Administrator can allow anyone to “take control” of a building (that does not belong to them) by way of violence.
-
I wonder if anyone here would sit back quietly, or stand before the police, and argue all the reasons why it’s OK for bands of proven destructive hoodlums to “Occupy” their homes or businesses. It seems much more likely that most here would call on those they now enjoy vilifying to remove these violent criminals who broke into their home (I doubt it was peaceful protesters took control of this building). - It’s OK to break and enter. It’s for a good cause?
The success of the General Strike is apparent and important, only to be superseded by 70 or so people who splintered off after the strike this is important only in its successful ability to trash the 3000 plus people who participated in the peaceful statement. Maybe the splinter folks can become part of the 1 percent?
The same thing happened in Rome after the majority of the people were successful in their huge march, a splinter group went off and caused violence.
In Rome some peaceful protesters attempted to stop the violence only to feel threatened themselves. It seems there will be instigators and provocateurs who will attempt to circumvent any movement.
Who is instigating and provoking these splinter groups? Your guess is as good as mine. Some people may say it is the police or the Tea Party or the establishment. I do not know who or care, but the police, the media and the establishment should be able to tell the clear difference from the real Occupy Wall Street peaceful from the degenerates. But of course we can be fairly sure they do not want to know the difference. The LA article substantiates a case in point!
After the world economy crashes and the police state tightens its grip everyone will be smashing windows. Then we’ll all look back on this moment and laugh.
MeHere—-the people infiltrating OWS and acting violently aren’t doing it ‘cause
they can’t feed their children…let’s put that bag of wind off to the side.
Nothing changed, idiot! The usual casual clash became an opportunity for the Los Angeles Times and other idiot media outlets to distract attention from the stunning fact that the Occupy movement managed yesterday to close down a city. Whether it was an agent provacateur or a raging protester who provoked the police encounter is irrelevant. The whole incident is a distraction.
What matters is that the movement has taken a new step. Like Seattle, the step is a tactic: close down business as usual as a protest against business as usual. So let’s join in, why don’t we? and close down the game of playing non-violence vs. violence while the violence of the system rages all around us.
Huge difference between a movement that spouses violence and random acts of
violence which, by the way, happen every day in major cities.
Violence is far from ideal but it seems inevitable. When people get pushed enough
to the point they can’t feed their children, they often resort to violence. Whatever
the reason -genetic makeup, lack of spiritual development, absence of political wisdom, mental illness, greed, etc.- we haven’t succeeded in eradicating violence. However, let’s not confuse wishful thinking with reality….and let’s not promote violence which includes the way we talk to each other.
Groups need to get smaller, more focused, and relocate to neighboring communities where people
actually reside and vote. Consider just marching
during the day and not disturb the peace or the
establishment that we hope to enhance with the
goals we want to accomplish.
Nothing personal here, Robespierre. We are coming at problems from opposite poles. It may irk you that I am forever coming down hard on violence, no matter where, why or in whose hands. The perpetrators’ intentions are bound to get lost in the escalating results. That’s the similarity between Oakland, Yemen and Podunk—only that. But there’s evidence enough of the truth, without even mentioning names of people or places.
@gerard, kind of hard to compare Oakland to YEMEN you clown. In Oakland a brutal dictator isn’t carrying out air raids and literally, military assaults. If Oakland had been invaded with army then it would be hard to condemn violence in self-defense, but in the case of the general strike being carried out violence was indeed uncalled for.
I think I agree with Jimnp here - this seems all too staged to me. Last night it was reliably reported that the “only” remaining group left in the area after all the PEACEFUL protestors had left (the real OCCUPY members ARE peaceful)- was about “150-200” anarchists who had been vandalizing places throughout the day -and were even stopped sometimes by the real occupy protestors.
So what we’re seeing here is a small group of wannabe criminals whose whole idea of OCCUPY is that it gives them an excuse to fire themselves up on drugs and destroy property, and be violent with police. They prominently display the Occupy banner to place the blame on others- these are not real OCCUPY people at all, just a bunch of vandals.
So much for the violent approach. It destroys whatever it touches—Oakland, Yemen, Podunk—no matter what the intentions behind it are. Yet some people of all political persuasions everywhere still “believe in” its efficacy, inevitability, etc., no matter how much evidence disproves that.
Deep personal opinions about what “being human”
means are now being re-evaluated from minute to minute, all over the world. The question is probably not so much “How will it all end?” as “Where do you stand?”
Thus we see any excuse for a police riot. Even the guys from adjoining cities came to join in on all the “fun”.
Certainly occupying an abandoned building is a crime of sorts. But, considering the situation, considering all the ,apparently bullshit, statements from the OPD about them being a part of the 99%, when the shite comes down these cops side with the 1%.
Would it not have been far easier to simply allow the occupation of that empty building at least for the time being?
The video shows an impending police riot against people in a public street. As the narrator noted, the police riots are a wonderful tool to energize and educate the public.
Again, that corporate tool, IMax, will see protestor violence where none is shown. But then, by now, we all should understand the contemptible motives that drive he and his compatriot,OM.
Three Questions Left Unanswered by Obama’s Counterterrorism Speech
 . '/' . substr('9781888996623',-6,3) . '/' . '9781888996623' . '.jpg'; ?>)
Email 
Print
Share
Email to a friend
Newsletter 
Like Us
Follow Us
Get Our Feed
By ardee, November 16, 2011 at 3:42 am Link to this comment
IMax, November 15 at 10:53 am Link to this comment
ardee-full-of-hate,
What prevents you from simply making your point without being a total a$$?
Why, liars and frauds like you of course.
Report thisBy IMax, November 15, 2011 at 10:53 am Link to this comment
ardee-full-of-hate,
What prevents you from simply making your point without being a total a$$?
Report thisBy ardee, November 10, 2011 at 12:14 pm Link to this comment
Certain people would like to restrict the flow of information to only OWS friendly sources. That isnt exactly free speech.
Oh dear, OM what has become of your intellect, your sense of self even. as you continue to degrade and defame yourself in public.
You, oh purveyor of unintentional humor, restrict your “flow of information” more than anyone but your evil twin, IMax. You just gotta try harder here , really you do.
Report thisBy Leefeller, November 9, 2011 at 9:27 am Link to this comment
YoungGringos. Thanks for the clarification on the number attending the Oakland March, the media is obviously tainted like some of the posters here! If the numbers marching where higher then what I stated, this is good news to me and even more relevant to the lower percentage of violence portrayed by a few provokers. Of course the trolls will not have any of the truth!
The people just called out the Tea Bags in Ohio last evening, hopfully this is just the tip of the iceberg!
Go Occupy Oakland! You speak for the 99 percent, thanks for the feet on the ground updates YoungGringos. Please keep a wary eye out for provocateurs, they are probably some individuals, but I would not be surprised if some were not hired goons, even something about a few Oakland Police. Sounds like firemen lighting fires so they can get some overtime?
Report thisBy OzarkMichael, November 9, 2011 at 6:24 am Link to this comment
Certain people would like to restrict the flow of information to only OWS friendly sources. That isnt exactly free speech.
As to the quality of our sources, we know that Truthdig gave up on objectivity a long long time ago. Yet here you are, soaking it up like a cicada.
I prefer for everyone to obtain information from a wide spectrum of opinion, including Truthdig, and then we sort through it all to get to what is real.
But thats just me.
Report thisBy YoungGringos, November 9, 2011 at 1:40 am Link to this comment
Leefeeler,
“Really, if you allow that 3000 people formed the main march and 70 to 100 after the main march ended participated in the violence, this would be a small minority.”
3000? Yeah. That’s what they’d like you to believe.
Someone else posted this vid:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4jYdCaHrjQ
This is the march to the port, but there were massive PEACEFUL crowds this size all day.
Report thisThis is only the first group that left at 4. There was another, even larger group that marched at 5:30.
I see why it’s being low-balled. Tens of thousands of “commoners” shut down a major port? That sounds like revolution.
By Leefeller, November 8, 2011 at 10:37 pm Link to this comment
Wall Street Journal has now become a source for social commentary. A news paper, which is named by the way… get this ‘The..Wall..Street…Journal’ owned by Murdoch the phone tapper! Almost as Reliable a source almost as good olboy Fox News, also owned by Murdoch!
Civil disobedience to a conservative means listening to NPR! As for violence, they also actually interviewed the police and 100 percent said they would use violence, especially if they got another bonus from Goldman Slacks!
Report thisBy OzarkMichael, November 8, 2011 at 8:09 pm Link to this comment
ya, thats a bad habit of mine. Sorry.:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204479504576637082965745362.html
Report thisBy heterochromatic, November 8, 2011 at 7:41 pm Link to this comment
Oz, if you put up the links along with the quotes, it
would be both helpful and appreciated.
thx.
Report thisBy OzarkMichael, November 8, 2011 at 7:30 pm Link to this comment
From the Wall Street Journal, a systematic interview of 200 Occupiers in New York reveals:
Wow! 31% of Occupy Wall Street is agent provocateurs!
Report thisBy Leefeller, November 8, 2011 at 3:17 pm Link to this comment
Appreciate the comment Hetro! I had misplaced your sentiments! There are those who appear here apparently whose job it seems is to always deviate from topic, basically to gerrymander discussion away from what would be worthwhile interactions.
Thanks, good luck with your nephew, he is learning something and this may be an important time in history!
Report thisBy heterochromatic, November 8, 2011 at 3:04 pm Link to this comment
Leef, i don’t know if we’re entirely in agreement, but I do think that you’ve been
taking me for an opponent of OWS..
I’m generally in agreement with OWS and about wholly in sympathy…. I’m
wishing it well and worrying that it’s making tactical errors.
My nephew lives with us and is down to Zuccotti Park every day. He’s on a
couple of their committees and I’m helping him a little with a presentation that
he’s giving to tomorrow’s General Assembly urging the folks to keep this going
and to broaden their base through exploring ways to interact with other groups
of likeminded folks.
Report thisI complain a heck of a lot when I see and read things that are poorly thought
out and which i think will hurt OWS rather than help, but that’s what grumpy
uncles do.
By Leefeller, November 8, 2011 at 2:28 pm Link to this comment
Hetero maybe we are really in agreement and I have misprinted your comments? I am not a supporter of violence, if Oakland becomes violent which it has not. Really, if you allow that 3000 people formed the main march and 70 to 100 after the main march ended participated in the violence, this would be a small minority. I perceived your comments appeared to be saying otherwise, me apologies.
Where do you stand on OWS. I am under the impression you do not embrace the OWS premise of unfairness sponsored by the 1 percent promoted on the 99 percent? I will not say the other words because they seem to annoy you.
Report thisBy heterochromatic, November 8, 2011 at 12:58 pm Link to this comment
Leef, I’m a person who insists that violence IS a small segment of it there’s about
zero violence from protesters at OWS here in NYC.
Report thisOakland seems a little more violent…..but I’m not on board with defining Oakland
as pro-violence as of yet.
By Leefeller, November 8, 2011 at 12:25 pm Link to this comment
Violence is a small segment of Occupy, for some it must be all or none? Hetro, you as OM and Imax seem to prefer to lump it as all, the certainty of distorted illusions.
Disenfranchisement and inequality are a 100 years old; according to Hetro; but now people as the 99 percent are fed up,... for the 1 percent has been blatant in its lack of compassion, integrity and accountability, the absurdity of person-hood for corporations may have been the last straw, in your face inequality sponsored by a 1 percent of the purest grade.
As for being purer than actions, I suggest my pureness is like my suggested anger by other posters, the normal convictions as figments of tall tails, which never attempt to touch on reality, hence why they are tall tails! It has been the tired old usual ignoring of the elephant in the room seemingly forever apparent to me! (forever may even be more than a 100 years)?
My nativity and pureness dost not supersede the inkling appearance of trollness! Again disenfranchisement according to Hetro is a 100 years old, disenfranchisement is just an old tired message! Of course divisive instigation is not new either. Divisive polarizations are portrayed not to appear real either in that they are choreographed to as the Robber Barrons said, ‘I can hire half the working class to kill the other half!’ Yes instigating, manipulations and polarizations forever sponsored by those who would have it no other way for this is opportunism of the purest form!
Report thisBy heterochromatic, November 8, 2011 at 11:23 am Link to this comment
Leef, my message for the morning is that we should
Report thisconsider things carefully and not avoid accepting
responsibility for our actions by proclaiming that
we’re “purer” than others and thereby allowed actions
that we would consider transgressive if done by others.
By Leefeller, November 8, 2011 at 11:00 am Link to this comment
Interesting how real Democracy works!
“On Saturday November 5, 2011, CBS Affiliate WPRI reports a lone individual wreaked havoc on the Occupy Providence camp in Burnside Park when a man who later identified himself as a college student ran through the camp around 2:30 a.m., vandalizing several tents, shouting obscenities, and even stealing some food. Members of Occupy Providence’s Safety and Support Group eventually apprehended the man with non-violent measures and handed him over to the Providence Police.”
“However, after a unanimous vote by the entire Occupy assembly, the protesters decided not to press charges, but rather voted for him to deal individually with the people whose property he damaged. They also agreed to have the man attend two different Occupy sessions - an orientation workshop and a non-violence training session.”
Then how Representative Fascism works:
Myopic views of the few demanding focused attention on on the negative, creating division, politicization for the 1 percent and cronies must focus the negative as part of its divisive manipulations.
Hetro, speaking of messages, what the hell is yours except seemingly to focus on the negative? Disenfranchisement as a reality or a word, seems to stick in your craw, how do you feel about inequality, does it not exist too, or is it also a hundred years old?
It is interesting, what is happening people are taking care of themselves as community, sort of like the Muslim Religious Law or possibly like Quackers!
Report thisBy heterochromatic, November 8, 2011 at 9:17 am Link to this comment
Leef, the message about inequality is out there….has been for more than 100
years.
you have a list of approved topics that may be discussed or what?
Report thisBy Leefeller, November 8, 2011 at 8:54 am Link to this comment
Geeze, crocodile tears are everywhere! So we are going to spend time on he said she said, or twitter this! Of course all an attempt to muddy the message of disenfranchisement and inequality! Great plan sorta Fox Newsy!
Report thisBy heterochromatic, November 8, 2011 at 8:17 am Link to this comment
YoungGringos
Hetero-
Silly, rabbit, it’s a statement of solidarity. And it’s been out for a while.
——-
thanks for the information YG——I have no great outrage over the statement, BUT
the text pf the twitter message was different that your quotation.
“
it said that “Occupy Oakland GA just passed a proposal etc…..
so it really couldn’t have been “out there” for a while as there hasn’t been an OO
Report thisGA for all that long.
By ardee, November 8, 2011 at 6:36 am Link to this comment
YoungGringos, November 8 at 3:00 am
I applaud the light you shine on the deceptive and outright false posts of this clown prince of deceit. While I realize the need many feel to expose his lies, and he does indeed make it easy to do, I still believe that simply ignoring him and his equally ridiculous cohort,“he who claims to be a progressive but is obviously not” ( an Amerind name perhaps?) is the best way to deal with them.
Report thisBy YoungGringos, November 8, 2011 at 3:00 am Link to this comment
Hetero-
Silly, rabbit, it’s a statement of solidarity. And it’s been out for a while. Here’s the text if you’re so interested
-
Occupy Oakland, in solidarity with the Occupy movement and with the local community, has established the principle of claiming for open use the open space that has been kept from us. We are committed to helping this practice continue and grow. Here in Oakland, thousands of buildings owned by city, banks, and corporations stand idle and abandoned. At the same time social services such as child and healthcare, education, libraries and community spaces are being defunded and eliminated.
Occupy Oakland supports the efforts of people in all Oakland neighborhoods to reclaim abandoned properties for use to meet their own immediate needs. Such spaces are already being occupied and squatted unofficially by the dispossessed, the marginalized, by many of the very people who have joined together here in Oscar Grant Plaza to make this a powerful and diverse movement.
We commit to providing political and material support to neighborhood reclamations, and supporting them in the face of eviction threats or police harassment. In solidarity with the global occupation movement, we encourage the transformation of abandoned spaces into resource centers toward meeting urgent community needs that the current economic system cannot and will not provide.
There has been much talk about how to implement this statement of solidarity. The focus right now seems to be on helping people resist foreclosure. I’m all for that, but I’m down with direct action. Some people believe if we just hit some critical mass of comments on a message board things will change.
I’m not one of them.
And what we’re doing in the park is illegal. We’re already illegally occupying a space. I have no qualms in helping a family “illegally” stay in a home that is being stolen from them.
Report thisBy heterochromatic, November 7, 2011 at 8:01 pm Link to this comment
November 3, 2011
cultureofresistance:
Occupy Oakland General Assembly Calls For Occupying Foreclosed And
Abandoned Properties
Last night, the Oakland General Assembly — the democratic decision-making
body of the various occupations around the country — passed a proposal
calling on activists to occupy bank-owned, foreclosed, and abandoned
properties across the city. Here’s the announcement of the proposal passing on
Twitter.
——————-
http://anarchisticthoughtexperiment.tumblr.com/
———————
Report thistime to take a step back, ardee.
By ardee, November 7, 2011 at 7:40 pm Link to this comment
One feels forced to comment upon this latest large turd from the usual source:
Last night, the Oakland General Assembly — the democratic decision-making body of the various occupations around the country — passed a proposal calling on activists to occupy bank-owned, foreclosed, and abandoned properties across the city.
Is exactly that, one in a series of large turds OM inflicts upon these threads. Now, this lunatic would have you believe that OO is running the entire show around the nation. What a buffoon!
Report thisBy OzarkMichael, November 7, 2011 at 10:43 am Link to this comment
YoungGringos said: “The full out attack on the OWS movement has begun. We must have struck a nerve.”
What you call a “full out attack” was made by OWS supporters! Think Progress is not conservative, they are backing the OWS movement.
The “99%” webpage supports OWS. For you to say that “99%” are generating a “full out attack on the OWS movement” is typical Leftist smokescreen.
Furthermore, @occupyoakland sent the message. @occupyoakland cannot possibly be “full out” attacking itself. You arent making any sense.
Thay all said the same thing supporting OWS in Oakland and i quote:
You may want to claim that @occupyoakland is smearing itself! Then Think Progress is spreading the smear, and that the 99% webpage is actually run by conservative agents.
But its safer to assume that the Oakland General Assembly passed the resolution and caused yet another confrontation.
Report thisBy IMax, November 7, 2011 at 10:31 am Link to this comment
Leefeller,
Looking at the many comments here over the past week I see that I state my opinions and prediction with no more absolutism than anyone else. In fact, I believe, I state my opinions far less forcefully than most.
With that said; I can understand if you take exception with both my opinion of the Tea Party and my predictions. Yet I’m still baffled by so many angry comments for sharing an opinion, it seems, which is not in the majority on this site.
I assure you, you will have no need to decipher my comments. Is this the problem here? Are most here less than honest? Is no one here plain spoken?
Report thisBy Leefeller, November 7, 2011 at 9:39 am Link to this comment
Imax, Imax; (your quotes)
“My concerns are for the 2012 elections. These idiot children, directly seeded and cheered-on by the ‘Occupy’ crowd, will prove one thing in the next year. The power of the Tea vote.”
“If this wide-spread violence does not end, and I believe it will, the Tea vote, correctly described as a tsunami in 2010, will turn out in epic proportions.”
After rereading your comments, I have discovered I have a problem with premonitions as absolutism’s in your comments. We may agree, but I find the comment ‘will prove’ and ‘will turnout in epic proportions’ resonate as certainty’s!
One thing Imax, I will attempt to scrutinize and decipher your future comments as to their real intent and not a perceived one!
Report thisBy IMax, November 7, 2011 at 9:21 am Link to this comment
Leefeller,
Perhaps you can explain this to me.
Why do so many here have such a difficult time even imagining someone who thinks and feels differently? You seem to have taken everything I write and turned my words into something unrecognizable.
Do you really have a hard time imagining how or why I can support the Occupy message but detest the violence we’re seeing all over the nation? Do you honestly have no idea how I can disagree with the Tea Movement’s underlying message but defend their collective right to protest? Have you any evidence of the Tea people displaying any of the destruction and violence on display within the Occupy protests?
You act as if you hate everything I write and we’re, I think, on the same side of the isle.
I am baffled by so many outward displays of hatred for diversity on this site.
Report thisBy Leefeller, November 7, 2011 at 8:54 am Link to this comment
Disfranchisement and Inequality is alienating, not the OWS or its message. The only thing I see is OM and Imax talking to themselves pumping up the tea party, now the alienating is in the messages of deception as the manipulators and provocateurs are doing their vaudeville song and dance routine.
Tea Party obviously feels threatened, just from the constant harping on anything but the message sponsored by OWS, disenfranchisement and inequality.
I see crocodile tears while rubbing of hands and phoney worry which is really glee,... not concern for OWS, but the usual Republican Tea Baggery!
Report thisBy IMax, November 7, 2011 at 7:44 am Link to this comment
OzarkMichael,
I believe I do understand you. And as much as we may be on opposite ends of the political spectrum I’m certain, based on the tone and flavor of your writings, that we would often come to lasting agreements.
I have no fear of the Tea Movement. As raucous as protesters always get in large numbers (there are idiots in all crowds), I’ve seen zero evidence of violence or destruction from the movement as a whole. - Carrying a gun, or a printed sign of a gun, is not violent. Throwing explosives and chucks of cement is, by definition, violence.
My concerns are for the 2012 elections. These idiot children, directly seeded and cheered-on by the ‘Occupy’ crowd, will prove one thing in the next year. The power of the Tea vote.
If this wide-spread violence does not end, and I believe it will, the Tea vote, correctly described as a tsunami in 2010, will turn out in epic proportions.
Report thisBy Leefeller, November 6, 2011 at 11:23 pm Link to this comment
The hubris is becoming deafening,... can you hear me now?
Once more, the violence was perpetrated by a small splinter group of 70 or so whom no more represents the Occupy Oakland then the the brother from another mother does. It is only for the convenience of those all so happy, horn blowing critics…. Bone appetite!
Report thisBy Leefeller, November 6, 2011 at 11:22 pm Link to this comment
The hubris is becoming deafing,... can you hear me now?
Once more, the violence was perpetrated by a small splinter group of 70 or so whom no more represents the Occupy Oakland then the the brother from another mother does. It is only for the convenience of those all so happy, horn blowing critics…. Bone appetite!
Report thisBy OzarkMichael, November 6, 2011 at 10:58 pm Link to this comment
IMax
Well, lets be careful here. If by “embolden” you mean “get energized, organized, and vote” then yes I will be very happy to see it. i understand that as a liberal you would be a little dismayed to lose elections.
IMax, i am a little worried about the other type of “emboldened”. Occupy uses direct action to accomplish goals, and if it succeeds then voting doesnt matter much. i really dont know what will happen here. I would like to think that the Tea Party would stick to constitutional principles, but I fear that some or many conservatives might be “emboldened” to take direct action of their own. In which case I will be very dismayed to the point of tears. So will you.
I dont like the idea of using violence to restore the system, fro Left or from Right. Violence degrades(decays) a democratic system, so the odds are against any success of restoring it. Its like Octavian ‘restoring’ the Roman Republic. In the end Rome got the stability it desired but lost the Republic forever.
That is why i would much rather see OWS win the change they want by campaigning and voting. Oh, i would be a little dismayed at some parts of their agenda, but it wouldnt be so bad. As a conservative i celebrate the sytem working better(even changes i dont want) and prefer that by far to tossing the dice with violence and revolution.
There are many Leftists who hope for that very thing. Which is foolish because in an armed clash against Rightists they would lose even worse than they do in the polls. Violence is stupid all by itself, but provoking a fight when you are outnumbered is stupid. Initiating an armed struggle when you are not only outnumbered but also outgunned is world class stupid. Risking that to “restore democracy” is a stupidity of Olympic proportions.
People on the East and West coast have no idea how idealistic, armed, and fiercely old-fashioned Americans in fly-over country are. As Obama said, we cling to our Bibles and our guns.
If OWS manages to negate their vote, the Independent voters out here will not support them, even if they liked OWS political goals. As you say, OWS is alienating, not uniting.
personally, i would support some of OWS agenda, but i cannot wish them an ounce of success with their current method.
I hope you understand me IMax. Although I dont understand you yet.
Report thisBy YoungGringos, November 6, 2011 at 9:40 pm Link to this comment
IMAX-
Murdoch isn’t attacking OWS because we smashed some windows or burned some trash.
Report thisWhat do you think the power structure is more worried about-
windows smashed by a handful of kids
or
the profit lost by the shutdown of a major port by tens of thousands of “commoners”?
By IMax, November 6, 2011 at 3:25 am Link to this comment
“The full out attack on the OWS movement has begun. - We must have struck a nerve.”
-
That nerve has a name. Sanity.
I believe it’s insane to do battle with firemen, policemen, and EMT’s and expect 99% of Americans to follow. These full-on attacks are coming from the 99% OWS is attempting to appeal to.
99% of Americans are passionately against petulant children breaking things, fighting amongst themselves, and “occupying” abandoned buildings to make a point. 99% of American parents will verbally smack-down their child for displaying such adolescent behavior.
-
One commenter here believes occupying an abandoned building is a crime of sorts.
No. Occupying an abandoned building is a crime in every state, every county, every city and every hamlet in the United States. 99% of Americans understand and support laws which make occupying abandoned buildings a crime. I would suggest only petulant, tantrum-throwing, children fail to grasp this reality.
Report thisBy YoungGringos, November 5, 2011 at 11:18 am Link to this comment
OzarkMichael-
That’s Bullchit. The GA didn’t vote on occupying foreclosed homes. Someone got up and talked about it- it’s a democratic forum and people can talk about just about anything. That guy would still need to form a working group and then we would vote on his proposal- kinda like a Democracy.
Not that I’m against his proposal, but we didn’t vote on it and we didn’t sanction it.
Regarding such and action- I rather like this clip from, “Capitalism: A Love Story.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVYIBikzwmk
The full out attack on the OWS movement has begun.
Report thisWe must have struck a nerve.
By Marian Griffith, November 5, 2011 at 5:56 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)
@FRToThus
—-Two words: agents provocateurs. I’d bet they have badges sitting at home on their dresser, or maybe hidden in their back pockets.—-
Possibly, but more likey (unfortunately) is that some of the existing radical anti-government groups (or anti-globalists) is using the OWS to stage their own brand of protests. And many of these groups have long ago given up on peaceful protests and feel that only violence is going to get the results they are looking for.
Report thisGroups like these have instigated riots at G7 and G20 summits for many years now, and the OWS is protesting against the same kind of things they have been protesting for years.
By IMax, November 5, 2011 at 5:31 am Link to this comment
OzarkMichael, - “And most people believe it. How long can this go on?”
-
L.A. Times - “Demonstrators ‘managed’ to gain entry to an empty building”...Which means protesters “broke into” an empty building under the direction of OWS leadership.
-
The answer to your question: A very long time. As a liberal-minded individual I am thoroughly embarrassed by these violent protests and the lack of independent critical thinking on display on this and other Web sites.
This concerted violence and destruction must end. These things will only embolden the Tea vote twelve months from now!
Report thisBy OzarkMichael, November 5, 2011 at 4:43 am Link to this comment
The Occupiers set up the confrontation:
http://thinkprogress.org/special/2011/11/01/358026/occupy-oakland-general-assembly-calls-for-occupying-forclosed-and-abandoned-properties/
And when the police react, if someone gets hurt, its the police at fault? Really?
Enough with phony Occupy ‘victimhood’, and phony ‘non-violence’. Occupations are contrived to be confrontations. This time we have evidence if you read their own “General Assembly” announcement. There is no question now that some hooligans did that on their own, they were told to take over buildings.
It is so bloody convenient that whenever Occupy followers cause mayhem, the ‘leaderless’ movement simply shrugs its shoulders, and as a result the MSM reports to us dullards that Occupy is peaceful.
And most people believe it. How long can this go on?
Report thisBy heterochromatic, November 4, 2011 at 9:54 am Link to this comment
a better job of proclaiming their disavowal of violence and expelling people who
are perpetuating it would go a long,long way toward shutting off the perception
that it’s part of the Occupation movement.
yesterday’s statement from the media committee in Oakland was an excellent first
Report thisstep.
By ardee, November 4, 2011 at 9:35 am Link to this comment
Rosa Luxemburg, November 4 at 7:27 am
I must, as a strong supporter of the OWS movement, rise to refuse your contentions that:
Occupying a building is not ‘violent’. Property damage, assuming their is no human harm that comes of it, ought not to be considered violent either.
Occupying an abandoned building is still a crime but one that any reasonable police force might consider waiting out and refraining from violence of their own. Vandalism is absolutely counter productive and both weakens the movement in the eyes of the public still processing this new movement and opens us all up to violent responses from law enforcement.
I give you, as example, both the use of agitators to invoke violence within a movement, as was experienced during the protests against the Vietnam War and our current propagandists who came immediately out of their usual dark and dank hiding places to spout, distort and overstate the supposed violence of the movement itself when it is obvious to any sane person that said violence comes from the fringe and is immediately and consistently refused by the movement spokespersons.
Report thisBy heterochromatic, November 4, 2011 at 7:45 am Link to this comment
Rpsa Lux——“Property damage, assuming their is no human harm that comes of
it, ought not to be considered violent either. “
that’s idiocy,Rosa
KRISTALLNACHT
Report thisBy Rosa Luxemburg, November 4, 2011 at 7:27 am Link to this comment
Occupying a building is not ‘violent’. Property damage, assuming their is no human harm that comes of it, ought not to be considered violent either. Kicking families out of their homes due to foreclosures to live on the streets is a form of structural violence.
Report thisNarrow definitions of violence assumed by many in US public discourse basically anesthetize possible escalations of tactics in a social movement. Occupy Oakland is spot on by a) physically forcing the shut down of business for the day throughout the city and b)pushing for a building occupation. You can be sure that the fight for child labor laws, the 8 hour day, basic work safety laws, women’s suffrage, the legality of unions, all of the New Deal legislation, the civil rights movement, and the anti-war movement against Vietnam never functioned on the narrow definition of what is considered ‘violent’ in current US public discourse.
By IMax, November 4, 2011 at 5:45 am Link to this comment
Once again it’s obvious that the majority of ‘Occupy’ demonstrators can protest peacefully. Once again it’s obvious that Oakland police have no interest in preventing peaceful, lawful, protests. And, once again, we see that all of this can and will change when many amongst the Occupy crowd are bent on putting people in danger and causing mayhem for everyone.
Breaking and taunting the law by “Occupying” a building is the most disruptive and dangerous thing that can happen at this point. What it amounts to is an action, by those causing these escalating violent incidences, designed to dig in and “barricade” themselves. - Very dangerous!
Taking any building or structure in this manner is the surest way to escalate these violent incidents. No City Council, no Mayor, no City Administrator can allow anyone to “take control” of a building (that does not belong to them) by way of violence.
-
I wonder if anyone here would sit back quietly, or stand before the police, and argue all the reasons why it’s OK for bands of proven destructive hoodlums to “Occupy” their homes or businesses. It seems much more likely that most here would call on those they now enjoy vilifying to remove these violent criminals who broke into their home (I doubt it was peaceful protesters took control of this building). - It’s OK to break and enter. It’s for a good cause?
Report thisBy ardee, November 4, 2011 at 5:18 am Link to this comment
Leefeller, November 4 at 3:13 am
An excellent post and , not only fair minded but raises a thoughtful point.
Report thisBy Leefeller, November 4, 2011 at 3:13 am Link to this comment
The success of the General Strike is apparent and important, only to be superseded by 70 or so people who splintered off after the strike this is important only in its successful ability to trash the 3000 plus people who participated in the peaceful statement. Maybe the splinter folks can become part of the 1 percent?
The same thing happened in Rome after the majority of the people were successful in their huge march, a splinter group went off and caused violence.
In Rome some peaceful protesters attempted to stop the violence only to feel threatened themselves. It seems there will be instigators and provocateurs who will attempt to circumvent any movement.
Who is instigating and provoking these splinter groups? Your guess is as good as mine. Some people may say it is the police or the Tea Party or the establishment. I do not know who or care, but the police, the media and the establishment should be able to tell the clear difference from the real Occupy Wall Street peaceful from the degenerates. But of course we can be fairly sure they do not want to know the difference. The LA article substantiates a case in point!
Report thisBy YoungGringos, November 4, 2011 at 1:18 am Link to this comment
hetero-
Report thisYou’re good at instigating and spreading disinformation.
You aren’t, by any chance, an Oakland cop?
By heterochromatic, November 4, 2011 at 12:55 am Link to this comment
yeah, Ringo, California is a police state….maybe you oughta tighten your grip,
Report thischickenchoker.
By YoungGringos, November 3, 2011 at 11:59 pm Link to this comment
After the world economy crashes and the police state tightens its grip everyone will be smashing windows. Then we’ll all look back on this moment and laugh.
Report thisBy heterochromatic, November 3, 2011 at 8:56 pm Link to this comment
MeHere—-the people infiltrating OWS and acting violently aren’t doing it ‘cause
Report thisthey can’t feed their children…let’s put that bag of wind off to the side.
By heterochromatic, November 3, 2011 at 8:52 pm Link to this comment
greenuprising
—- So let’s join in, why don’t we?——
—-
Report thiswell, the likelihood of well-earned beatings from people who will find your actions
pointless and obnoxious is a pretty good reason not to join in.
By gerard, November 3, 2011 at 8:45 pm Link to this comment
Somehow, snide doesn’t get it with me.
Report thisBy greenuprising, November 3, 2011 at 8:43 pm Link to this comment
Nothing changed, idiot! The usual casual clash became an opportunity for the Los Angeles Times and other idiot media outlets to distract attention from the stunning fact that the Occupy movement managed yesterday to close down a city. Whether it was an agent provacateur or a raging protester who provoked the police encounter is irrelevant. The whole incident is a distraction.
What matters is that the movement has taken a new step. Like Seattle, the step is a tactic: close down business as usual as a protest against business as usual. So let’s join in, why don’t we? and close down the game of playing non-violence vs. violence while the violence of the system rages all around us.
Report thisBy heterochromatic, November 3, 2011 at 6:32 pm Link to this comment
we should have a General Assembly to determine if the situation in Oakland is
REALLY different from that of Yemen.
perhaps some of the folks want to take a run over there and Occupy Sanaa, maybe
Report thissome will return and report.
By MeHere, November 3, 2011 at 5:52 pm Link to this comment
Huge difference between a movement that spouses violence and random acts of
violence which, by the way, happen every day in major cities.
Violence is far from ideal but it seems inevitable. When people get pushed enough
Report thisto the point they can’t feed their children, they often resort to violence. Whatever
the reason -genetic makeup, lack of spiritual development, absence of political wisdom, mental illness, greed, etc.- we haven’t succeeded in eradicating violence. However, let’s not confuse wishful thinking with reality….and let’s not promote violence which includes the way we talk to each other.
By larrypsy, November 3, 2011 at 12:24 pm Link to this comment
Groups need to get smaller, more focused, and relocate to neighboring communities where people
Report thisactually reside and vote. Consider just marching
during the day and not disturb the peace or the
establishment that we hope to enhance with the
goals we want to accomplish.
By gerard, November 3, 2011 at 12:14 pm Link to this comment
Nothing personal here, Robespierre. We are coming at problems from opposite poles. It may irk you that I am forever coming down hard on violence, no matter where, why or in whose hands. The perpetrators’ intentions are bound to get lost in the escalating results. That’s the similarity between Oakland, Yemen and Podunk—only that. But there’s evidence enough of the truth, without even mentioning names of people or places.
Report thisBy Robespierre115, November 3, 2011 at 12:00 pm Link to this comment
@gerard, kind of hard to compare Oakland to YEMEN you clown. In Oakland a brutal dictator isn’t carrying out air raids and literally, military assaults. If Oakland had been invaded with army then it would be hard to condemn violence in self-defense, but in the case of the general strike being carried out violence was indeed uncalled for.
Report thisBy FRTothus, November 3, 2011 at 11:15 am Link to this comment
Two words: agents provocateurs. I’d bet they have badges sitting at home on their dresser, or maybe hidden in their back pockets.
Report thisBy JTraveller, November 3, 2011 at 10:51 am Link to this comment
I think I agree with Jimnp here - this seems all too staged to me. Last night it was reliably reported that the “only” remaining group left in the area after all the PEACEFUL protestors had left (the real OCCUPY members ARE peaceful)- was about “150-200” anarchists who had been vandalizing places throughout the day -and were even stopped sometimes by the real occupy protestors.
So what we’re seeing here is a small group of wannabe criminals whose whole idea of OCCUPY is that it gives them an excuse to fire themselves up on drugs and destroy property, and be violent with police. They prominently display the Occupy banner to place the blame on others- these are not real OCCUPY people at all, just a bunch of vandals.
Report thisBy Jimnp72, November 3, 2011 at 10:08 am Link to this comment
wondering if agitators have been hired to infiltrate and discredit the movement and by who…
everything we are seeing now has happened before, so why not this.
Report thisBy gerard, November 3, 2011 at 9:57 am Link to this comment
So much for the violent approach. It destroys whatever it touches—Oakland, Yemen, Podunk—no matter what the intentions behind it are. Yet some people of all political persuasions everywhere still “believe in” its efficacy, inevitability, etc., no matter how much evidence disproves that.
Report thisDeep personal opinions about what “being human”
means are now being re-evaluated from minute to minute, all over the world. The question is probably not so much “How will it all end?” as “Where do you stand?”
By ardee, November 3, 2011 at 9:53 am Link to this comment
Thus we see any excuse for a police riot. Even the guys from adjoining cities came to join in on all the “fun”.
Certainly occupying an abandoned building is a crime of sorts. But, considering the situation, considering all the ,apparently bullshit, statements from the OPD about them being a part of the 99%, when the shite comes down these cops side with the 1%.
Would it not have been far easier to simply allow the occupation of that empty building at least for the time being?
The video shows an impending police riot against people in a public street. As the narrator noted, the police riots are a wonderful tool to energize and educate the public.
Again, that corporate tool, IMax, will see protestor violence where none is shown. But then, by now, we all should understand the contemptible motives that drive he and his compatriot,OM.
“We are all Scott Olson”
Report this