Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

It is a new way of thinking, and all the more reason that as a civilized people, we have to be more responsible than we ever have before with our US economy. That means we need regulation. You said it yourself, greed is a fundamental driving force of Capitalism. But if it isn't regulated, we will not be able to sustain it.

Melissia wrote:... no, but it does mean that since the camp was (possibly) a legally allowed form of protest in this instance, breaking it up was an illegal act on the part of the cops.

A camp can have a protest inside and people can protest inside buildings. Civil Rights sit-ins were protesting disparaging treatment from certain businesses thanks to Jim-Crow laws.

Building a camp goes against building and zoning permits for certain areas, especially when it comes down to the fact that some of the land is privately owned.

dsteingass wrote:It is a new way of thinking, and all the more reason that as a civilized people, we have to be more responsible than we ever have before with our US economy. That means we need regulation. You said it yourself, greed is a fundamental driving force of Capitalism. But if it isn't regulated, we will not be able to sustain it.

I'm comfortable just being as responsible as we were in 1998, lol.

Kilkrazy wrote:Apparently there is a court order against the Mayor et al breaking up the camp.

If confirmed this would show that the camp was a legal protest, and presumably they will go back in.

The TRO didn't last long.

"Even protected speech is not equally permissible in all places and at all times."

That is, time, place, and manner restrictions are still Constitutional.

In my opinion, clearing the camps is only going to strengthen the movement. Major strategic mistake. They would have been better off hoping for a long cold winter. Not that that will help either - this is just the latest in a long string of nonviolent movements, going back decades, that have overturned old orders around the globe. The wool has been removed, the curtains pulled back, the game is up! Democracy is on the march, people, and you may as well jump on the bandwagon now! This isn't just about America, it's about the entire planet and human civilization! Isn't that clear for all to see?

What's with the constant references on this forum to people at these occupations as scum, unwashed, etc. etc.? I've been following this closely from the start, and it looks to me like there are thousands of 'normal' people involved. Is the New York City Council member who got arrested last night 'unwashed scum'? How about the legal advisor to the Mayor of Oakland who resigned in protest of the crackdown? http://www.democracynow.org/2011/11/15/top_aide_to_oakland_mayor_resigns

Unwashed scum? Get real. These shrill insults merely highlight the ignorance and apathy running rampant here. At first I was a little shocked at the lack of support on this forums, certainly shocked at the naked hostility, edging right up to the actual incitement of violence. I've avoided OT for a few weeks now because of it. I guess I'm a sucker for punishment, or just feel like talking to the walls or something. Seriously, what do any of you have so invested in the current order that so many of you are against this? I'm sure when a small number of individuals and corporations no longer control the vast majority of wealth and power on the planet we'll still be able to push little soldiers around a table.

Sorry, but the 99% doesn't represent me. I find it absolutely disgusting that they decided to throw me in with their lot by saying that I am part of their 99%.

I am not one of those whining 99%ers nor am I like Scott Olsen. I don't use drugs and run websites about hating the marine corps even though I was only an IT guy for the USMC and had a cushy job.

Sorry, but I don't accept payments from the NYCC(former ACORN) to protest.

Sorry, but I am not a communist, a nazi, or whatever other groups are joining the protest. The 99% movements have been filled with hatred and just because you agree with the direction of their hatred doesn't mean they aren't hateful. The 99% crowd is being violent and so are the police, however "cop beats college kid" makes more headlines than "college kid beats cop". Why is this so? This happens because there are so many people who love to criticize authority should they do something as minimal as forgetting to use a turn signal.

i was hoping some of them would clash with the police....wanted to see them get gak kicked. if things are so bad and you hate living under this repressive big brother government move to canada.

Thats exactly the kind of post I'm talking about, halo. How can we have a conversation if that is what you believe this to be about? In your opinion, the people there are all whining communists, nazis, drug addicts and cop-haters who run anti-military websites and are getting paid to protest? Yikes! Where do you get your information? Please show me where to find out about all the cop-beating college kids.

Here's a link to college kid-beating cops:

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/11/11/occupy_cal_39_arrested_in_forceful

And sorry to burst your bubble, but they do represent you, you just don't realize it. Unless of course you are part of the one percent that control most of the wealth and power in the world, and then, would you really be posting on Dakka Dakka?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And yet another post hoping for violence... what's up with that?

astrolux444 wrote:i was hoping some of them would clash with the police....wanted to see them get gak kicked. if things are so bad and you hate living under this repressive big brother government move to canada.

I love it when "If you don't like the way things are, then use the freedoms given to you via the constitutions to change the way things are going. Use your freedom of speech to make your problems know, use your freedom to assemble to find likeminded people, use the democratic process to make changes and lobby your legislature to change the laws" becomes "if you don't like it, then don't use any of the freedoms quaranteed to you and move somewhere else"

d-usa wrote:

astrolux444 wrote:i was hoping some of them would clash with the police....wanted to see them get gak kicked. if things are so bad and you hate living under this repressive big brother government move to canada.

I love it when "If you don't like the way things are, then use the freedoms given to you via the constitutions to change the way things are going. Use your freedom of speech to make your problems know, use your freedom to assemble to find likeminded people, use the democratic process to make changes and lobby your legislature to change the laws" becomes "if you don't like it, then don't use any of the freedoms quaranteed to you and move somewhere else"

The fun bit being that for some reason, both the former and the later are called "Land of the Free". Go figure

NY Judge Rules Protesters Cannot Bring Tents Back Into Zuccotti Park

astrolux444 wrote:i was hoping some of them would clash with the police....wanted to see them get gak kicked. if things are so bad and you hate living under this repressive big brother government move to canada.

That is the stupidest thing I have ever seen. I know he is a troll, but I think I fear an uneducated youth more than the old rich white guys who think they need my hobby money more than I do.

murdog wrote:In my opinion, clearing the camps is only going to strengthen the movement. Major strategic mistake.

Major strategic mistake?

Do you actually think the city is trying to put down the movement? The city is trying to clear the tent camps out of the park. Mission effing accomplished, dude.

You're falling into the classic hippie trap of making everything about you vs THE MAN instead of actually thinking about the motivations of the different players.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

murdog wrote: Seriously, what do any of you have so invested in the current order that so many of you are against this?

current "order"?

You'd win more people over if you dropped the dogwhistle conspiracy language.

Rented Tritium wrote:

murdog wrote:In my opinion, clearing the camps is only going to strengthen the movement. Major strategic mistake.

Major strategic mistake?

Do you actually think the city is trying to put down the movement? The city is trying to clear the tent camps out of the park. Mission effing accomplished, dude.

You're falling into the classic hippie trap of making everything about you vs THE MAN instead of actually thinking about the motivations of the different players.

So all major "Occupy" cities just happened to decide on the same day that tonight is going to be the night?

They have begun to realize that while they are able to remove the traditional media from the area before they attack to make sure that no news coverage of their actions exist, they cannot stop the technology that the occupy peeps possess. Every raid has been broadcast live via more cameras than all the news on site had to begin with. Ustream, Flickr, Twitter, Facebook, all the police actions are broadcast live around the country.

So you might call me paranoid, but I fully believe that the police department in these cities coordinated a mass raid against #occupy in order to dilute the negative impact these actions would have. Clear 3 cities out on three different nights and you are faced with 3 days worth of footage and pictures of cops shooting people in the head with less lethal rounds and then flash banging the folks trying to save the victims life. By coordinating these actions they get to dilute the impact by keeping the coverage to one night.

How many folks were shot in the head by cops during the clearing out of NY? How many flashbangs were thrown by cops during the clearing?

CptJake wrote:How many folks were shot in the head by cops during the clearing out of NY? How many flashbangs were thrown by cops during the clearing?

That event happened during an earlier raid at the Occupy Oakland camp, but I think you missed the reason why I brought it up.

It is a good example why I do not find it hard to believe that this was a coordinated effort between major cities to attack all camps at the same time to keep the negative exposure down to one night.

Before the Occupy Oakland raid that resulted in the injury of the vet, media was removed as per the current protocol. But the cops did not count on having their actions streamed live on the internet anyway and now we have lots of lovely footage of their actions. The police learned that they can no longer silence the media and cover up their tactics by asking the traditional outlets to just leave. So instead of having to deal with the following program:

Monday night: Cops beating civilians in NYC
Tuesday night: Cops beating civilians in Oakland

They coordinate their efforts and raid both at the same time, making sure that their actions only get one night in the spotlight.

d-usa wrote:So you might call me paranoid, but I fully believe that the police department in these cities coordinated a mass raid against #occupy in order to dilute the negative impact these actions would have.

Ignore list achieved

Rented Tritium wrote:

d-usa wrote:So you might call me paranoid, but I fully believe that the police department in these cities coordinated a mass raid against #occupy in order to dilute the negative impact these actions would have.

Ignore list achieved

Behold the power of having your world view challenged

d-usa wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

d-usa wrote:So you might call me paranoid, but I fully believe that the police department in these cities coordinated a mass raid against #occupy in order to dilute the negative impact these actions would have.

Ignore list achieved

Behold the power of having your world view challenged

Dude, you think all the police departments got together to conspire against a protest that's not even aimed at them and you're face palming ME for not wanting to talk to you anymore? You have straight up hopped the train to crazytown.

Dude, A hippie doesn't care about politics, or the man. I think you either have your history mixed-up, or are using a conservative generalization you don't understand.

Hippie is a term given to people who created their own societies and lived on communes, as far away from the tumultuous political climate of the 1960s as they could get. They were mostly pacifists more interested in free love, drugs, and music. The term "hippie" comes from the term "hipster" which was given to the Beat generation of the late 1940s-1950s, who were also de-humanized by "the man" because they didn't want to "fit in" with Mainstream USA.

What you are generically grouping into the "hippie" category is the various political counter-culture that normal, everyday American youths participated in, frustrated with their government including the Civil Rights Movement, Marches on Washington D.C., Draft Card burnings, and Anti-Vietnam protests. A small minority of the people who participated in these "Commie" activities as "the Man" called them at the time were Hippies.

However, your statement about thinking about the motivations of the players is a good one, but that just doesn't happen man. No one gave a flying crap what the Government's motivations for Vietnam were after the draft was initiated and American boys were forced to go to Vietnam and the death toll rose.

Now now, let's not get personal.

Rented Tritium wrote:

d-usa wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

d-usa wrote:So you might call me paranoid, but I fully believe that the police department in these cities coordinated a mass raid against #occupy in order to dilute the negative impact these actions would have.

Ignore list achieved

Behold the power of having your world view challenged

Dude, you think all the police departments got together to conspire against a protest that's not even aimed at them and you're face palming ME for not wanting to talk to you anymore? You have straight up hopped the train to crazytown.

They are not conspiring against a protest that is aimed against them, they could care less WHY the people are camping out there. They are told to remove them, and that is what they are doing.

What they are trying to do is force the media (both traditional and the news coverage via live footage from the protesters) to cover two raids in the same night, splitting their resources, and only having to face one day worth of negative PR.

That is not even major conspiracy theory stuff, that is basic PR that any Public Information Officer worth their salt would think about.

Why have two raids on two nights and give the protesters two days to play the victim if you can plan it out to get the job done in one night?

d-usa wrote:

CptJake wrote:How many folks were shot in the head by cops during the clearing out of NY? How many flashbangs were thrown by cops during the clearing?

That event happened during an earlier raid at the Occupy Oakland camp, but I think you missed the reason why I brought it up.

It is a good example why I do not find it hard to believe that this was a coordinated effort between major cities to attack all camps at the same time to keep the negative exposure down to one night.

Before the Occupy Oakland raid that resulted in the injury of the vet, media was removed as per the current protocol. But the cops did not count on having their actions streamed live on the internet anyway and now we have lots of lovely footage of their actions. The police learned that they can no longer silence the media and cover up their tactics by asking the traditional outlets to just leave. So instead of having to deal with the following program:

Monday night: Cops beating civilians in NYC
Tuesday night: Cops beating civilians in Oakland

They coordinate their efforts and raid both at the same time, making sure that their actions only get one night in the spotlight.

I didn't miss your reason. You missed the fact that the cops have not used undue violence against the law breakers. In your Oakland example the occupiers were chucking rocks and bottles and looking for a fight with the cops.

d-usa wrote:
They are not conspiring against a protest that is aimed against them, they could care less WHY the people are camping out there. They are told to remove them, and that is what they are doing.

Ok, so you aren't trying to say that they're "putting down" the protest etc? Ok, we're cool. Did you see the post I was replying to when you got into this, though? He really thinks the GOAL of the police is to end occupy and called their decision to break down the camp a "strategic mistake" since it gave occupy more protest power.

So when you replied that way, it really looked like you were agreeing with him on that.

Now, on your actual point, I think it's way more likely that one of them was clear about when they were going in and the other, for the reasons you described, decided to go with the same night. I don't think they got together and planned it though. One department just matched the other.

d-usa wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

d-usa wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

d-usa wrote:So you might call me paranoid, but I fully believe that the police department in these cities coordinated a mass raid against #occupy in order to dilute the negative impact these actions would have.

Ignore list achieved

Behold the power of having your world view challenged

Dude, you think all the police departments got together to conspire against a protest that's not even aimed at them and you're face palming ME for not wanting to talk to you anymore? You have straight up hopped the train to crazytown.

They are not conspiring against a protest that is aimed against them, they could care less WHY the people are camping out there. They are told to remove them, and that is what they are doing.

What they are trying to do is force the media (both traditional and the news coverage via live footage from the protesters) to cover two raids in the same night, splitting their resources, and only having to face one day worth of negative PR.That is not even major conspiracy theory stuff, that is basic PR that any Public Information Officer worth their salt would think about.

Why have two raids on two nights and give the protesters two days to play the victim if you can plan it out to get the job done in one night?

What I bolded is an unsupportable assertion. Local news coverage (which the networks use) in NY is not affected by local news coverage in Oakland or any other city. With a 24/7 news cycle the netowrks could EASILY handle feeds of violence from more than one city at a time.

What is happening is cops remove anyone not actually involved in a situation before trying to break it up, you get the media and other rubberneckers outta the way to brevent them getting hurt or getting a cop hurt. Kind of like they clear an area for a couple of blocks before they take down a drug house for example.

CptJake wrote:
What is happening is cops remove anyone not actually involved in a situation before trying to break it up, you get the media and other rubberneckers outta the way to brevent them getting hurt or getting a cop hurt. Kind of like they clear an area for a couple of blocks before they take down a drug house for example.

This is a BIG part of it. When they clear a large area, they can't be checking press passes or what have you, they need to actually CLEAR the park. They cleared the airspace over the park, but that's probably because they wanted to be able to bring a police helicopter if they HAD to.

And since the park is actually private property, run by a private company in contract with the parks department, the "right" to be there freely is a lot less clear than some people like implying.

But Rented Tritum, please use your own stated logic, "thinking about the motivations of the different players". WHY do you think people have a knee-jerk reaction to distrust authority figures like the police? WHY do people immediately assume that the police are trying to "put down" the protesters a-la the Kent State Massacre? History is full of precedence for this sort of thing, it's only natural to distrust "them" whenever we are put into an "us vs. them" situation.

now, before you flame, I'm not arguing that I agree with any of this, we have a Constitutional right to assemble 'peacefully" once you throw rocks, it changes to "violently" don't whine to me when you get clubbed.
But this Occupy situation isn't as cut and dried or black and white like some people want it to be.

CptJake wrote:

d-usa wrote:They are not conspiring against a protest that is aimed against them, they could care less WHY the people are camping out there. They are told to remove them, and that is what they are doing.

What they are trying to do is force the media (both traditional and the news coverage via live footage from the protesters) to cover two raids in the same night, splitting their resources, and only having to face one day worth of negative PR.That is not even major conspiracy theory stuff, that is basic PR that any Public Information Officer worth their salt would think about.

Why have two raids on two nights and give the protesters two days to play the victim if you can plan it out to get the job done in one night?

What I bolded is an unsupportable assertion. Local news coverage (which the networks use) in NY is not affected by local news coverage in Oakland or any other city.

Local news coverage in NY is not affected by the local news coverage in Oakland. But local news coverage in NY is affected by the decision of the police to ask the local news media to leave prior to the raid, and by the decision of the news media to comply with that request. So that means that actually no local news media coverage exists and that the only footage is the live footage available from the protesters. They have taken the lead in covering the raids, not the local affiliates.

CptJake wrote:With a 24/7 news cycle the netowrks could EASILY handle feeds of violence from more than one city at a time.

They can, and they did. But again, my point is not that they are trying to sweep the raids under the table, but that they are minimizing the amount of time devoted to the backlash. It is a 24/7 news cycle, and after 24 hours the news cycle has moved on to the next story and coverage will already be reduced.

By having both raids on the same day you don't prevent one or the other being covered, but you prevent two days worth of coverage by forcing both raids to be covered on the same day. That was the objective IMO. You don't have to believe it, but I think that that was a factor in determining the timing of the two raids.

CptJake wrote:What is happening is cops remove anyone not actually involved in a situation before trying to break it up, you get the media and other rubberneckers outta the way to brevent them getting hurt or getting a cop hurt. Kind of like they clear an area for a couple of blocks before they take down a drug house for example.

"We are going to clear up a shanty-town and tear down these camps, if your cameras can see us you are not safe." Sorry, our news can cover wars from the front lines, they can hande the breaking up of a 'hippie shanty town". Supresion of the media in the name of safety, they are quickly learning that this tactic no longer works.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rented Tritium wrote:

d-usa wrote:
They are not conspiring against a protest that is aimed against them, they could care less WHY the people are camping out there. They are told to remove them, and that is what they are doing.

Ok, so you aren't trying to say that they're "putting down" the protest etc? Ok, we're cool. Did you see the post I was replying to when you got into this, though? He really thinks the GOAL of the police is to end occupy and called their decision to break down the camp a "strategic mistake" since it gave occupy more protest power.

So when you replied that way, it really looked like you were agreeing with him on that.

Now, on your actual point, I think it's way more likely that one of them was clear about when they were going in and the other, for the reasons you described, decided to go with the same night. I don't think they got together and planned it though. One department just matched the other.

Yeah, I am not trying to approach it from a "the man keeping the protest down" viewpoint.

I am trying to see the "how can we keep down the amount of negative PR from this" viewpoint.

dsteingass wrote:But Rented Tritum, please use your own stated logic, "thinking about the motivations of the different players". WHY do you think people have a knee-jerk reaction to distrust authority figures like the police? WHY do people immediately assume that the police are trying to "put down" the protesters a-la the Kent State Massacre? History is full of precedence for this sort of thing, it's only natural to distrust "them" whenever we are put into an "us vs. them" situation.

It gets passed down through misinformation. The problem is that people who are taught not to trust the police absolutely 100% refuse to learn anything about how police force actually works. So ONCE someone is indoctrinated with anti-police paranoia, either through actual bad experiences with police or just from their parents or what have you, it's nearly impossible for them to understand anything else.

But then police, knowing this, stop being willing to try to explain things. The attitude is "I don't have time for this" and they just do things.

Why are they being so decisive about the tent cities? It's because for weeks people have been spouting nonsense about them. There's no evidence anyone will listen to an explanation, so they don't get into the dialogue at all. Unfortunately that actually worsens the anti-police sentiment.

That's not counting that bad cops actually DO exist and when people get anti-cop, THOSE guys actually get aggressive. Oh boy, that sure helps.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

d-usa wrote:
"We are going to clear up a shanty-town and tear down these camps, if your cameras can see us you are not safe." Sorry, our news can cover wars from the front lines, they can hande the breaking up of a 'hippie shanty town". Supresion of the media in the name of safety, they are quickly learning that this tactic no longer works.

It's actually private property being cleared of ALL people. The press doesn't have unhindered right to private property.

I don't think as many people are "anti-cop" in that strict sense as you may think. You know the old saying "it only takes one bad apple to ruin the whole cart". It is purely a perception thing.

Where I live, the Police force has real crime to fight, so they aren't as oppressive on things like traffic or speeding violations. If you are caught speeding, they give you a ticket, and you pay it and move on. Now, where I grew up, the Ohio State Highway Patrol was a different story! If you got caught speeding there, it feels like you are getting a Gestapo shakedown!
"do you know how fast you were going? Where were you going?, why were you in a hurry to get there?

Well, for one thing it's none of their damn business where I was going! Give me my punishment for breaking the law and move along! That sort of thing doesn't make people violently anti-cop, but it doesn't make them trust them either.