Butch Femme Planet - OCCUPY WALL STREET

Butch Femme Planet (http://www.butchfemmeplanet.com/forum/index.php)

- Current Affairs/World Issues/Science And History (http://www.butchfemmeplanet.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=133)

- - OCCUPY WALL STREET (http://www.butchfemmeplanet.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3950)

Quote:

Originally Posted by key (Post 468318)

Cops could start refusing to enforce illegal commands to attack peaceful protestors exercising their first amendment rights.

When that happens (and I believe it will) the revolution will be in full swing. Power to the Peaceful!

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/...12_634x477.jpg

That's right. They always have a choice to do the right thing. No excuses.

Quote:

Originally Posted by persiphone (Post 468271)

i have to wonder what the members here in this online community that are members of the police force think of all of this. i was talking about this with one of them....and i said....worst case scenario if this country started transitioning into a police state....we would be on opposite sides of the fence just because hy's a cop and i'm not...not because of my belief in this movement.

I know 2 police officers in real time and neither of them agree with the tactics that have been employed. Now, both live in tiny towns that do not have a lot of crime- and have not had "crowd control" problems that have ever become violent.

I don't like what is going on here in the Bay Area in terms of the police raids and actions. But, I also don't like seeing an officer's face slashed with exacto knoves when they are just standing there and simply telling demonstrators to stay on the sidewalk. Guess, I just don't like violence or property damage to innocent parties. They have not been involved in any OWS activity at this point. I'm not going to stereotype all cops- even those around me. There have been many police officers joining in protests over the last year against anti-union legislation passed in WS, for example.

Now, this article is upsetting- and it looks like the Goodman research has turned-up some confirmation. Sorry if this link has already been posted.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/1...ds?via=siderec

Quote:

Originally Posted by key (Post 468318)

yeah if corporations stopped "donating" to police pension funds maybe.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miss Tick (Post 468315)

I just read this article. It has ten police assaults on occupy protestors caught on camera. Some I had seen, some i had not. All were appalling. Particularly the ones of people trying to engage in peaceful protests being beaten for no discernible reason. I guess we are not allowed to complain anymore. I remember a quote by Cuban writer Reinaldo Arenas "The difference between the communist and capitalist systems is that, although both give you a kick in the ass, in the communist system you have to applaud, while in the capitalist system you can scream. And I came here to scream". It appears now that screaming is no longer acceptable under the newest version of capitalism. Or they will give you something to scream about.

http://www.alternet.org/occupywallst...esters/?page=1

i think...of course i'm no expert on cops....but i think an entire generation of cops haven't had to deal with anything like this (meaning local civil unrest on this scale). i think their scared of it. i don't think their used to having their authority challenged and i'm of the mind that this is what's behind a lot of the violent responses.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtLast (Post 468324)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/1...ds?via=siderec

this info doesn't surprise me. i'm surprised that this info surprises people. still. after all that's been done.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HowSoonIsNow (Post 468115)

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-xXO6ODyNFZ...400/pepper.jpg

OMG Cops pepper-spray UC Davis students, point blank in face, who are just sitting there doing nothing

Abhorrent. As a non-violent person who has been involved in actions and organizing against police brutality, it sickens me every time.

But it seems they aren't "really" just sitting there doing nothing. The demonstrators seem to have received direction to disperse, and chose not to, as well as received warning that they would be pepper-sprayed, and they chose to stay. So with all the media there, it seems the police response was anticipated, and maybe that was the goal.

A well-organized action uses these kinds of tactics to gain attention to their cause, so I would consider this a successful action if the protestors moved closer to achieving their goals through what happened here.

I know I can be a buzzkill. I trust the readers of this thread know I'm interested in achieving a world of fairness, with the least violence possible. I dont support putting oneself in harm's way- someone being pepper prayed or beaten -- unless they are part of a coordinated action that has medical and legal contingency plans. Since it seems like police brutality is going to become standard behavior even against white people (!) I hope as few as possible suffer permanent damage, and at least it can be documented in service of worthy goals. Including ending police brutality against all people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dykeumentary (Post 468349)

uuuhhh.....what does "even against white people" mean? surely, i'm taking it the wrong way.

just watched the pepper spraying of UC demonstrators

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miss Tick (Post 468315)

"The difference between the communist and capitalist systems is that, although both give you a kick in the ass, in the communist system you have to applaud, while in the capitalist system you can scream. And I came here to scream". It appears now that screaming is no longer acceptable under the newest version of capitalism. Or they will give you something to scream about.

That was hard to watch. I winched a few times, but when someone started to yell "These are children, These are children", I became emotional. I only saw three being hauled away (yes, three too many) For the front the police put on, I expected more. The students showed everyone its a US against THEM situation, and you saw how the police
backed off as the crowd chanted louder and the peaceful demonstration became an anti police protest. That could have been ugly. I also saw alot of hesitation on the faces and the body language of the police. Clearly they were struggling with what was going on here.

Police are only allowed to use the amount of force that is neccessary, and NOT A BIT MORE. NOT A BIT MORE.

Thank you for posting this. Ugly as it was, I needed to see it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ebon (Post 468323)

That's right. They always have a choice to do the right thing. No excuses.

I totally agree, and I hope this can be used to the 99%'s advantage.
Police are agents of state power, and state power has become "1%ers power". We are in an asymmetrical power/resource relationship with the police, so hating them or even trying to kill them means that there will be more of them, invested with ever more vicious methods and justification from their bosses.

I think the way to "win" this asymetrical situation is to have the police stop following orders that don't make sense, such as firing weapons at veterans, grannies, young people, or anyone at all.
There's no way a banker is going to go out themselves and fight. I hope we can find a way to have the police see that their orders are unethical. I hope that we can appeal to police offiicers' sense of shared humanity, rather than their survival instincts and sell-defense. Will politicians use our movement as a reason to have a domestic military force? They would be a "jobs with a secure future"- chillingly enough.

I have to deal with this issue of police brutality often, as an activist against it, and with lots of family members who work in law enforcement.
Bishop Oscar Romero is one of my heroes. I refer to him when I deal with my Catholic family:
"“Before an order to kill that a man may give, the law of God
must prevail that says: Thou shalt not kill! No soldier is obliged to
obey an order against the law of God.”

Quote:

Originally Posted by persiphone (Post 468357)

uuuhhh.....what does "even against white people" mean? surely, i'm taking it the wrong way.

I'm glad you asked me to clarify: I am saying that police brutality is and has been a reality for People of Color, particularly for men of African decent, for centuries in the USA.

Now with all the photos and videos of police brutality against 99% protestors available, I am seeing white people surprised by police brutality, as if it is something brand new. It had never crossed the minds, or the experience, of some white people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by theoddz (Post 468031)

I was wondering how long it would take for the moneyed interests, crooked politicians and bastard bankers to crawl out from under their rock to outwardly and openly oppose OWS. Here we go.

This on msnbc.com this morning.

http://openchannel.msnbc.msn.com/_ne...py-wall-street

My guess is that this is going to, ultimately, heat things up until there is rioting in the streets. The second American Revolution has begun.

~Theo~ :bouquet:

Here's the article on the Up With Chris Hayes site. The video is at the bottom of the page:

http://upwithchrishayes.msnbc.msn.co...l-street-video

Quote:

Exclusive: Lobbying Firm's Memo Spells Out Plan to Undermine Occupy Wall Street (VIDEO)
Sat Nov 19, 2011 8:53 AM EST
by Jonathan Larsen and Ken Olshansky
(crossposted from MSNBC's "Open Channel" blog)

A well-known Washington lobbying firm with links to the financial industry has proposed an $850,000 plan to take on Occupy Wall Street and politicians who might express sympathy for the protests, according to a memo obtained by the MSNBC program “Up w/ Chris Hayes.”

The proposal was written on the letterhead of the lobbying firm Clark Lytle Geduldig & Cranford and addressed to one of CLGC’s clients, the American Bankers Association.

CLGC’s memo proposes that the ABA pay CLGC $850,000 to conduct “opposition research” on Occupy Wall Street in order to construct “negative narratives” about the protests and allied politicians. The memo also asserts that Democratic victories in 2012 would be detrimental for Wall Street and targets specific races in which it says Wall Street would benefit by electing Republicans instead.

According to the memo, if Democrats embrace OWS, “This would mean more than just short-term political discomfort for Wall Street. … It has the potential to have very long-lasting political, policy and financial impacts on the companies in the center of the bullseye.”

The memo also suggests that Democratic victories in 2012 should not be the ABA’s biggest concern. “… (T)he bigger concern,” the memo says, “should be that Republicans will no longer defend Wall Street companies.”

Two of the memo’s authors, partners Sam Geduldig and Jay Cranford, previously worked for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. Geduldig joined CLGC before Boehner became speaker; Cranford joined CLGC this year after serving as the speaker’s assistant for policy. A third partner, Steve Clark, is reportedly “tight” with Boehner, according to a story by Roll Call that CLGC features on its website.

Jeff Sigmund, an ABA spokesperson, confirmed that the association got the memo. “Our Government Relations staff did receive the proposal – it was unsolicited and we chose not to act on it in any way,” he said in a statement to "Up."

CLGC did not return calls seeking comment.

Boehner spokesman Michael Steel declined to comment on the memo. But he responded to its characterization of Republicans as defenders of Wall Street by saying, “My understanding is that President Obama is the single largest recipient of donations from Wall Street.”

On “Up” Saturday, Anita Dunn, Obama campaign adviser, responded by saying that the majority of the president’s re-election campaign is fueled by small donors. She rejected the suggestion that the president himself is too close to Wall Street, saying “If that’s the case, why were tough financial reforms passed over party line Republican opposition?”

The CLGC memo raises another issue that it says should be of concern to the financial industry -- that OWS might find common cause with the Tea Party. “Well-known Wall Street companies stand at the nexus of where OWS protestors and the Tea Party overlap on angered populism,” the memo says. “…This combination has the potential to be explosive later in the year when media reports cover the next round of bonuses and contrast it with stories of millions of Americans making do with less this holiday season.”

The memo outlines a 60-day plan to conduct surveys and research on OWS and its supporters so that Wall Street companies will be prepared to conduct a media campaign in response to OWS. Wall Street companies “likely will not be the best spokespeople for their own cause,” according to the memo. “A big challenge is to demonstrate that these companies still have political strength and that making them a political target will carry a severe political cost.”

Part of the plan CLGC proposes is to do “statewide surveys in at least eight states that are shaping up to be the most important of the 2012 cycle.”

Specific races listed in the memo are U.S. Senate races in Florida, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Wisconsin, Ohio, New Mexico and Nevada as well as the gubernatorial race in North Carolina.

The memo indicates that CLGC would research who has contributed financial backing to OWS, noting that, “Media reports have speculated about associations with George Soros and others.”

"It will be vital,” the memo says, “to understand who is funding it and what their backgrounds and motives are. If we can show that they have the same cynical motivation as a political opponent it will undermine their credibility in a profound way.”

Quote:

Originally Posted by dykeumentary (Post 468385)

thanks for clarifying cuz for a sec i was like....oh no she dint! *ghetto neck rolling* and i thought surely i am misunderstanding after having done the online forums thing with you for so many years now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by persiphone (Post 468396)

I'm so glad you know this about me! How is it that we've never gone out dancing? We should have some fun times together....soon, I fear. :fastdraq:

Quote:

Originally Posted by dykeumentary (Post 468406)

I'm so glad you know this about me! How is it that we've never gone out dancing? We should have some fun times together....soon, I fear. :fastdraq:

prolly has something to do with being on opposite ends of the country perhaps? :)

Are you two discussing dancing in a time of great social unrest, political upheaval and paradigm shifting?

Well, then, go on with your bad selves. :-)

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...asv-MpyJPVGcHQ

Quote:

Originally Posted by persiphone (Post 468415)

prolly has something to do with being on opposite ends of the country perhaps? :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoNotHer (Post 468429)

Hears Janis Joplin music :wine:

how awesome would that be though.....flash mobs of ballroom dancers in the middle of police clashes. i call it The Mace Tango. it's sooooo Titanic~ish with the violinists playing as the ship goes down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by persiphone (Post 468455)

Don't even go there, P.
I might incite global revolution just so I can bedazzle you with my "BUTCH DYKE DOUGIE".

“Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” - Thomas Jefferson

Quote:

Originally Posted by dykeumentary (Post 468385)

Actually if you go back to the 60's......it was white folk who were also beat, gassed, arrested during political protests and they were surprised then....

white folk in the US have no oral tradition to pass down the reality of oppression by the owner, landed class........it's no surprise that some are shocked today....

as Sonny & Cher sang

"and the beat goes on'