Occupy Wall Street

[Cannon Shell]

[quote=somerfrost;811146]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Kent State is part of history and shows what can happen when those in power think they have a right to use said power with no regard for the consequences. Once again, reading comprehension comes into play, I never compared Kent to recent events but used it as an example of past events...what could very easily happen again if folks allow....nonviolence civil disobedience is preferred to violent riots I think you'd agree...neither side is 100% blameless because even in the most noble endeavors there are bound to be some lawless individuals who will seize the opportunity, that doesn't mean authorities have a green light to repress those who are acting in an appropriate manner. Common sense and foresight are not too much to expect, the thing I always taught new officers at the prison was never back inmates into a corner where they feel they must defend their "manhood" always give them a peaceful alternative, you are in control and things will always work out in your favor. Sure, there comes a time when physical force becomes necessary but ONLY AS A LAST RESORT! The letter of the law should never replace the objective of the law!

At some point people will understand bringing up something in the same context of a subject is in effect comparing the situations otherwise why bring it up? I'm quite sure my comprehension of what you were saying is quite clear.

Again maybe this time you will answer the question if you can comprehend it. If you were the police and given orders to disperse a crowd that refused to move what would you do?

[somerfrost]

[quote=Cannon Shell;811160]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

At some point people will understand bringing up something in the same context of a subject is in effect comparing the situations otherwise why bring it up? I'm quite sure my comprehension of what you were saying is quite clear.

Again maybe this time you will answer the question if you can comprehend it. If you were the police and given orders to disperse a crowd that refused to move what would you do?

saying that in the past events that are similar to today's events led eventually to a specific outcome is not comparing a past outcome with present yet to be determined outcome but warning that in the near future the past outcome may repeat itself. The situation(s) that preceded Kent are very similar to what we are seeing today, I can hardly compare Kent to the eventual outcome of today's situation because it hasn't happened yet so no, Kent isn't similar to the events we have seen thus far but it may be very similar to the future. Kent happened, that's an historical fact...what happens as a result of the current situation is as of now unknown, my point being that in the past, the use of power because one can, has led to violence by the powerful.
Regarding what I would do, I would seek a result that the crowd might be able to accept without them seeing it as a defeat...perhaps relocation to another site, a hearing to express grievances, anything that would allow them to gracefully disperse. My main ally should be time...as long as there is no violence, there is no need to rush in and bust heads. In the end however, the police cannot address the issues that brought about this situation, it is up to those holding the power to do so and only public outcry can convince them to address same.

The rulers shall not hear any grievances from the peasants. Preposterous. Back to work with thee, swine!!

[Danzig]

why is it that people say 'if you don't like it here, leave' when someone is critical of something, but they have a different opinion...but when they side with a protest, by god those protesters have every right to bitch?


i wish people could be more consistent in their 'beliefs'. either the constitution is the law of the land, or its not. we all know that there is a right to free speech, and a right to assemble. it would be nice if people didn't just confer that right when they are in agreement with those who are exercising that right.

i see this view expressed in letters to the editor, hear it in conversation, and i see it on this board.

[witchdoctor]

OCCUPY HERBSTREIT





http://occupyherbstreit.tumblr.com/

[jms62]

I have modified my platform. All entities must pay taxes there will be NO SUCH THING AS TAX EXEMPT. We will cut Not For Profits a break but still they use our resources and they need to pitch in.

[Danzig]

they should tax all churches. they don't use all their money for charitable purposes. only what they can show as charitable should be tax free, just like the rest of us.
religion is a business, just like other businesses. they make money, or they close.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by jms62

I have modified my platform. All entities must pay taxes there will be NO SUCH THING AS TAX EXEMPT. We will cut Not For Profits a break but still they use our resources and they need to pitch in.

Well, okay - I can absolutely support that!

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

why is it that people say 'if you don't like it here, leave' when someone is critical of something, but they have a different opinion...but when they side with a protest, by god those protesters have every right to bitch?

i wish people could be more consistent in their 'beliefs'. either the constitution is the law of the land, or its not. we all know that there is a right to free speech, and a right to assemble. it would be nice if people didn't just confer that right when they are in agreement with those who are exercising that right.

i see this view expressed in letters to the editor, hear it in conversation, and i see it on this board.

When I say, "love it or leave it", I'm addressing people here who are quite angry that other people in the country have the democratic right and freedoms to do exactly as they wish, against the beliefs of the person I'm addressing.

[Riot]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/15/bu...s.html?_r=1&hp

In Private, Wall St. Bankers Dismiss Protesters as Unsophisticated

“Who do you think pays the taxes?” said one longtime money manager. “Financial services are one of the last things we do in this country and do it well. Let’s embrace it. If you want to keep having jobs outsourced, keep attacking financial services. This is just disgruntled people.”

He added that he was disappointed that members of Congress from New York, especially Senator Charles E. Schumer and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, had not come out swinging for an industry that donates heavily to their campaigns. “They need to understand who their constituency is,” he said.

And the above complete disconnect with reality is why OWS is growing and will not go away before the next election cycle.

BTW: "Financial services" = imaginary products. No wonder we're screwed. We sell ethereal, fictional "products", not real "things" that actual people manufacture, that require materials, factories, skills.

[dellinger63]

Now here come's the focus and gravitas the flea party was lacking.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011...reet-movement/

[jms62]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Now here come's the focus and gravitas the flea party was lacking.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011...reet-movement/

So the Tea Party is breaking up?

[dellinger63]

Not in Mayor Emanuel's Chicago.

They don't play the OWS game. I suppose a misdemeanor park fine range between $200 and $300 in Chicago so the city will end up coveting the protesters' money for voicing their desire to covet other people's money. How ironic is that?

Hint to the protesters: A shower, shave and haircut may be the holy grail/missing link to finding a job paying more than single digits an hour. Hope you enjoyed your stay and come back real soon. Maybe next time they'll take you to Cook County Jail. It'll be like an amusement park visit with plenty of rides and games of chance available.

http://www.suntimes.com/8232448-417/...rant-park.html