Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Off-Topic Discussion > Debating with the enemy


'Occupy' types

Debating with the enemy


Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-17-2011, 12:10 PM   #301
Living Legend
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Springfield, VA
Age: 32
Posts: 16,418
Re: 'Occupy' types

Quote:
Originally Posted by firstdown View Post
This is a pretty funny read. It the minutes of a 3 hour meeting they had and got nothing done. It ends with the secretary getting up and just leaving.

Demands | Forum | Minutes of 4th Demands Working Group meeting | NYC General Assembly # Occupy Wall Street

Here is the last minutes of the meeting:

[At this point the police again intervene in the meeting. Facilitators come and do, old ones replace new ones who replaced old ones as we’re threatened with eviction from the space. The group, which has dwindled to half the size it was at 7:15 pm descends into fighting and chaos with nobody in charge and no minutes to keep. I stick around for another 10 or 15 minutes to try and figure out a way to keeping track of what’s happening, but cannot. The fighting and madness continues for at least 10 minutes when I inform facilitation that have to leave.


I also have to ask why they have to have their meetings in the street. Don't they know you can get a library card and they have meeting rooms you can reserve. Oh, maybe you have to have an actual adress to get a library card
the daily show showed their meetings in the deutsche bank lobby... what an odd place for OWS to meet.
__________________
Who says shameless self promotion is stupid? oh yeah, that was me... Click For Tunes!
That Guy is offline  

Advertisements
Old 11-17-2011, 03:29 PM   #302
Living Legend
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Springfield, VA
Age: 32
Posts: 16,418
Re: 'Occupy' types

Quote:
Originally Posted by firstdown View Post
Was that a meeting or the protest they are having today?
it was a council meeting for planning etc, not a protest at all... they said it was too loud outside. weird.
__________________
Who says shameless self promotion is stupid? oh yeah, that was me... Click For Tunes!
That Guy is offline  
Old 11-17-2011, 04:33 PM   #303
Naega jeil jal naga
 
Dirtbag59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta, Georgia From: Silver Spring, Maryland
Age: 29
Posts: 14,750
Re: 'Occupy' types

Okay seriously WTF is this thread and why does it keep getting bumped?
__________________
"It's nice to be important, but its more important to be nice."
- Scooter

"I feel like Dirtbag has been slowly and methodically trolling the board for a month or so now."
- FRPLG
Dirtbag59 is offline  
Old 11-18-2011, 05:26 PM   #304
MVP
 
NC_Skins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 11,489
Re: 'Occupy' types

__________________
"So let me get this straight. We have the event of the year on TV with millions watching around the world... and people want a punt, pass, and kick competition to be the halftime entertainment?? Folks, don't quit your day jobs."- Matty
NC_Skins is offline  
Old 11-19-2011, 10:18 AM   #305
MVP
 
NC_Skins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 11,489
Re: 'Occupy' types

__________________
"So let me get this straight. We have the event of the year on TV with millions watching around the world... and people want a punt, pass, and kick competition to be the halftime entertainment?? Folks, don't quit your day jobs."- Matty
NC_Skins is offline  
Old 11-19-2011, 06:06 PM   #306
MVP
 
NC_Skins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 11,489
Re: 'Occupy' types

Rep. Deutch Introduces OCCUPIED Constitutional Amendment To Ban Corporate Money In Politics | ThinkProgress




Quote:
In one of the greatest signs yet that the 99 Percenters are having an impact, Rep. Ted Deutch (D-FL), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, today introduced an amendment that would ban corporate money in politics and end corporate personhood once and for all.

Deutch’s amendment, called the Outlawing Corporate Cash Undermining the Public Interest in our Elections and Democracy (OCCUPIED) Amendment, would overturn the Citizens United decision, re-establishing the right of Congress and the states to regulate campaign finance laws, and to effectively outlaw the ability of for-profit corporations to contribute to campaign spending.
__________________
"So let me get this straight. We have the event of the year on TV with millions watching around the world... and people want a punt, pass, and kick competition to be the halftime entertainment?? Folks, don't quit your day jobs."- Matty
NC_Skins is offline  
Old 11-19-2011, 06:14 PM   #307
Gamebreaker
 
DynamiteRave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Washington DC
Age: 28
Posts: 12,976
Re: 'Occupy' types

Quote:
Originally Posted by NC_Skins View Post
The old woman getting maced almost brought me to tears. What an effing disgrace.
__________________
Establishment, establishment, you always know what's best.

"We're officially horrible." -RedskinRat

I'm a chick, damnit.
DynamiteRave is offline  
Old 11-19-2011, 06:33 PM   #308
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 52
Posts: 9,190
Re: 'Occupy' types

Quote:
Originally Posted by NC_Skins View Post
Yes it does.

The Occupiers were not denied the right to protest - they may gather peacefully and within the local regulations. Lawfully ordered to leave, they refused to comply with those regulations and had to be forcibly removed.

Nothing in the local governments actions were in contravention of the OWS's right to freely assemble. In Hague v. CIO, 307 U.S. 496 (1939), the Supreme Court addressed the impermissible use of regulations and ordinances by governments as a way to prohibit or abridge the right of free assembly. In that case, the ordinance in question forbade “the leasing of any hall, without a permit from the Chief of Police, for a public meeting at which a speaker shall advocate obstruction of the Government of the United States or a state, or a change of government by other than lawful means”. The city invoked this ordinance to deny the CIO “the right to hold lawful meetings in Jersey City on the ground that they are Communists or Communist organizations”. The City then, “pursuant to an unlawful plan[,] … caused the eviction from the municipality of persons they considered undesirable because of their labor organization activities, and have announced that they will continue so to do.” Hague, 307 U.S. at 501 (1939)

As to the that ordinance, the Court said it did "not make comfort or convenience in the use of streets or parks the standard of official action." Rather, it "enable[d] the Director of Safety to refuse a permit on his mere opinion that such refusal will prevent 'riots, disturbances or disorderly assemblage.' It can thus, as the record discloses, be made the instrument of arbitrary suppression of free expression of views on national affairs for the prohibition of all speaking will undoubtedly 'prevent' such eventualities. But uncontrolled official suppression of the privilege cannot be made a substitute for the duty to maintain order in connection with the exercise of the right.” Hague, 307 U.S. at 516.

In reaching this conclusion, however, Justice Owen Roberts, speaking for the Court, made it very clear that the right to free assembly was, in fact, subject to reasonable regulations and not absolute:

“The privilege of a citizen of the United States to use the streets and parks for communication of views on national questions may be regulated in the interest of all; it is not absolute, but relative, and must be exercised in subordination to the general comfort and convenience, and in consonance with peace and good order; but it must not, in the guise of regulation, be abridged or denied." Hague, 307 U.S. at 515-516 (1939).

FindLaw | Cases and Codes

Unlike the CIO in Hague, the OWS is not being denied its right to assemble. Rather the right is being regulated in conjuction with the "interests of all". The protestors are free to return, sans tents, and continue their protest. According to the NYC Judge, however, the owners of Zuccotti Park and those living and working in the area also have a few rights:

"To the extent that City law prohibits the erection of structures, the use of gas or other combustible materials, and the accumulation of garbage and human waste in public places, enforcement of the owners rules [prohibiting those things in their park] appears reasonable to permit the owner to maintain its space in a hygienic, safe, and lawful condition, and to prevent it from being liable by the City or others for violations of the law, or in tort. It also permits public access by those who live and work in the area who are the intended beneficiaries of this zoning bonus."

"The [OWS Movement] have not demonstrated that they have a First Amendment right to remain in Zuccotti Park, along with their tents, structures, generators, and other installations to the exclusion of the owner’s reasonable rights and duties to maintain Zuccotti Park, or to the rights to public access of others who might wish to use the space safely."

http://www.courts.state.ny.us/press/OWS111511.pdf
__________________
You aren't worth the water in my spit but, maybe, just maybe, you're worth the lead in my shotgun.
JoeRedskin is offline  
Old 11-19-2011, 08:14 PM   #309
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 52
Posts: 9,190
Re: 'Occupy' types

Quote:
Originally Posted by DynamiteRave View Post
The old woman getting maced almost brought me to tears. What an effing disgrace.
Have you ever worked crowd control or disbursement? Can you say that she hadn't just spit on or otherwise forced the police to take more radical steps? If she had been ordered to move and defiantly linked arms with others, would you rather the police use brute strength to enforce the law and possibly cause her serious, lasting physical injury? NC_Skins consistently blasts others for taking snapshots of protesters out of context to demean them but has absolutely no compunction against doing the same if it casts the police in a bad light. Sorry, in this thread, NC_Skins' posts are as agenda driven as anyone - and more so than most.

When it comes to the police and the protesters, neither side has been perfect. The police are outnumbered and trying to execute lawful, just orders from the local govt. to disburse a gathering that had become a public nuisance, a hazard to public health and that was occupying private property against the will of its owners; in order to execute their lawful orders, the police had to force people to leave a place they did not wish to leave. On the other hand, the protestors forcing the issue (not all protesters mind you - many disbursed peacefully) genuinely believe they are either in the right or are happy to force the issue. In light of these conflicting goals, it seems inevitable that occassions of excessive force would occur. I have, however, seen nothing to suggest that such excesses were rampant or in any way the norm.

Would the various Occupy groups have politely and peacefully disbursed if given 24 hour notice or would they have entrenched and made the confrontation more difficult and violent? I think the latter given the ideological nature of the protesters. As I posted many pages ago, it seems to me that the police have, generally, acted with constraint while faced with a difficult and stressful task. Had the protesters disbursed the tent cities when ordered, no violence would have been necessary.

I am sure that, to many - perhaps even the elderly woman, it is some sort of badge of honor to be the victim of "police violence". Sorry, if you invite forced removal by insisting on the primacy of your rights over the rights of others and refuse to obey lawful instructions from the police, then you get what you get.

Bottom line, the Occupiers exceeded their rights and infringed on the rights of others. Ultimately, there are many, many alternative methods for them to lawfully protest and have their voices heard. In fact, they are free to return to the various parks, etc.; they are just not free to set up squatters camps.
__________________
You aren't worth the water in my spit but, maybe, just maybe, you're worth the lead in my shotgun.
JoeRedskin is offline  
Old 11-19-2011, 08:29 PM   #310
Gamebreaker
 
DynamiteRave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Washington DC
Age: 28
Posts: 12,976
Re: 'Occupy' types

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin View Post
Have you ever worked crowd control or disbursement? Can you say that she hadn't just spit on or otherwise forced the police to take more radical steps? If she had been ordered to move and defiantly linked arms with others, would you rather the police use brute strength to enforce the law and possibly cause her serious, lasting physical injury? NC_Skins consistently blasts others for taking snapshots of protesters out of context to demean them but has absolutely no compunction against doing the same if it casts the police in a bad light. Sorry, in this thread, NC_Skins' posts are as agenda driven as anyone - and more so than most.

When it comes to the police and the protesters, neither side has been perfect. The police are outnumbered and trying to execute lawful, just orders from the local govt. to disburse a gathering that had become a public nuisance, a hazard to public health and that was occupying private property against the will of its owners; in order to execute their lawful orders, the police had to force people to leave a place they did not wish to leave. On the other hand, the protestors forcing the issue (not all protesters mind you - many disbursed peacefully) genuinely believe they are either in the right or are happy to force the issue. In light of these conflicting goals, it seems inevitable that occassions of excessive force would occur. I have, however, seen nothing to suggest that such excesses were rampant or in any way the norm.

Would the various Occupy groups have politely and peacefully disbursed if given 24 hour notice or would they have entrenched and made the confrontation more difficult and violent? I think the latter given the ideological nature of the protesters. As I posted many pages ago, it seems to me that the police have, generally, acted with constraint while faced with a difficult and stressful task. Had the protesters disbursed the tent cities when ordered, no violence would have been necessary.

I am sure that, to many - perhaps even the elderly woman, it is some sort of badge of honor to be the victim of "police violence". Sorry, if you invite forced removal by insisting on the primacy of your rights over the rights of others and refuse to obey lawful instructions from the police, then you get what you get.

Bottom line, the Occupiers exceeded their rights and infringed on the rights of others. Ultimately, there are many, many alternative methods for them to lawfully protest and have their voices heard. In fact, they are free to return to the various parks, etc.; they are just not free to set up squatters camps.
I'd rather the police just move her, physically. Even arresting her would've been better. She was 84 and just went to the protests out of curiosity. I mean, really. If she had threatened them or had otherwise proved a danger? Cool. Do what you gotta do. But cops are so quick to abuse power and then hide behind a badge and say they're just doing their jobs.

I mean these protesters are so unruly and unpredictable. Better hold onto your shirts, it's another '68 riot in the making! Oh lawdy, lawdy.

It's only a matter of time before some protester gets killed anyway. If not by police then by the hands of some protester. So. Everyone who's against this can take comfort in how wrong these protests are and how they led to someone's death *Shrugs*

I personally think there are much more progressive ways to go about change than clogging up streets and marching around. But if these guys wanna go at it, I've got no problem with it. They aren't bothering me or infringing on my rights so. Whatever. I'm a bit apathetic about the whole thing. So sue me.
__________________
Establishment, establishment, you always know what's best.

"We're officially horrible." -RedskinRat

I'm a chick, damnit.
DynamiteRave is offline  
Old 11-19-2011, 09:11 PM   #311
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 52
Posts: 9,190
Re: 'Occupy' types

Quote:
Originally Posted by DynamiteRave View Post
I'd rather the police just move her, physically. Even arresting her would've been better. She was 84 and just went to the protests out of curiosity. I mean, really. If she had threatened them or had otherwise proved a danger? Cool. Do what you gotta do. But cops are so quick to abuse power and then hide behind a badge and say they're just doing their jobs..
Sorry sick of this characterization - Sure some police are but the vast majority that I have dealt with (and I have dealt with many) are conscientious men and women who would take a bullet to protect me or mine.

As to the woman, I simply was not aware of her circumstances. If you know the context, fine. I am pretty sure, however, I don't want police trying to use brute strength to force an elderly woman to do what she doesn't want to - the next headline is "Police assault elderly woman break her arms".

Quote:
Originally Posted by DynamiteRave View Post
I mean these protesters are so unruly and unpredictable. Better hold onto your shirts, it's another '68 riot in the making! Oh lawdy, lawdy.
Or a 2011, London - also a protest that started out peaceably. So tell me, how would you "just move" the Occupiers without force when they refused to move? - - Lawdy Lawdy back at you.
__________________
You aren't worth the water in my spit but, maybe, just maybe, you're worth the lead in my shotgun.
JoeRedskin is offline  
Old 11-19-2011, 09:20 PM   #312
Gamebreaker
 
DynamiteRave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Washington DC
Age: 28
Posts: 12,976
Re: 'Occupy' types

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin View Post
Sorry sick of this characterization - Sure some police are but the vast majority that I have dealt with (and I have dealt with many) are conscientious men and women who would take a bullet to protect me or mine.

As to the woman, I simply was not aware of her circumstances. If you know the context, fine. I am pretty sure, however, I don't want police trying to use brute strength to force an elderly woman to do what she doesn't want to - the next headline is "Police assault elderly woman break her arms".



Or a 2011, London - also a protest that started out peaceably. So tell me, how would you "just move" the Occupiers without force when they refused to move? - - Lawdy Lawdy back at you.
The London riots got out of hand thanks to blackberry messaging and a few bad eggs bringing their bad egg comrades. I could easily see this turning into a London Riot type situation if the police end up killing someone.

I'd think the ultimate message of the Occupiers is to remain peaceful and to weed out the bad eggs as soon as possible because if this get violent, they've let the government win and politicians will start waving their finger saying, "I told you so" and God knows, they can't let THAT happen.

This isn't anything like the Civil Rights Movement in terms of scale or importance (to me personally) but they did peacefully do a lot of civil disobedience and though it took forever. They made progress. I'm gonna wager a guess that the Occupiers feel like this will do the same thing.

Will it? Probably not.
__________________
Establishment, establishment, you always know what's best.

"We're officially horrible." -RedskinRat

I'm a chick, damnit.
DynamiteRave is offline  
Old 11-19-2011, 09:46 PM   #313
Contains football related knowledge
 
JoeRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 52
Posts: 9,190
Re: 'Occupy' types

Quote:
Originally Posted by DynamiteRave View Post
The London riots got out of hand thanks to blackberry messaging and a few bad eggs bringing their bad egg comrades. I could easily see this turning into a London Riot type situation if the police end up killing someone.

I'd think the ultimate message of the Occupiers is to remain peaceful and to weed out the bad eggs as soon as possible because if this get violent, they've let the government win and politicians will start waving their finger saying, "I told you so" and God knows, they can't let THAT happen.

This isn't anything like the Civil Rights Movement in terms of scale or importance (to me personally) but they did peacefully do a lot of civil disobedience and though it took forever. They made progress. I'm gonna wager a guess that the Occupiers feel like this will do the same thing.

Will it? Probably not.
Generally, I agree. I think you discount the fact that the police would be just as disappointed if someone gets killed. The police have a tough, tough job and the vast majority are conscientious professionals who take their duty to "protect and serve" seriously. When crowds and confrontations are involved, a few bad eggs - on either side - can make an otherwise tense but peaceful situation into a bad/dangerous situation quickly.

I hope the Occupiers get busy with the real work of acheiving change through the political process - I don't agree with all of their agenda, but neither do I disagree with it entirely.
__________________
You aren't worth the water in my spit but, maybe, just maybe, you're worth the lead in my shotgun.

Last edited by JoeRedskin; 11-19-2011 at 09:47 PM.
JoeRedskin is offline  
Old 11-19-2011, 10:00 PM   #314
Registered User
 
Gary84Clark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 1,035
Re: 'Occupy' types

I agree with NC Skins. Also, it does not matter if someone has an agenda or not, it is their right to have an agenda. I had a friend of mine say it is not the time for OCCUPY we are at war. Funny we were at war when the tea party was calling our president a socialist and comparing him to Hitler. Imagine what Limbaugh would have said if the Tea Party protesters got maced? Blind ideological allegiance is dangerous to the ideologues more than anyone. Ask yourself how many RHINOS exist. Who is really with you in this ideology game or who is just saying they are with you?
Gary84Clark is offline  
Old 11-20-2011, 09:53 AM   #315
MVP
 
NC_Skins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 11,489
Re: 'Occupy' types

U.S. banks should "undermine" Occupy protesters: memo - Yahoo! News


Quote:
The Occupy Wall Street movement is a big enough problem for U.S. banks that they should pay for opposition research into the political motives of protesters, said a firm that lobbies for the industry.

Clark Lytle Geduldig & Cranford, a Washington-based firm, proposed the idea in a memo to the American Banking Association, an industry group which said on Saturday that it did not act on the idea.

The four-page memo outlined how the firm could analyze the source of protesters' money, as well as their rhetoric and the backgrounds of protest leaders.

"If we can show they have the same cynical motivation as a political opponent, it will undermine their credibility in a profound way," said the memo, according to a copy of it on the website of TV news channel MSNBC, which first reported on it.
__________________
"So let me get this straight. We have the event of the year on TV with millions watching around the world... and people want a punt, pass, and kick competition to be the halftime entertainment?? Folks, don't quit your day jobs."- Matty
NC_Skins is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.46196 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25