OCCUPY WALL STREET

[Cin]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

I would imagine they are all in Wall St.'s pocket, but the way the numbers were interpreted is a tad off.

Romney's Raised More Than Twice the Wall St. Cash as Obama... Why Does the WaPo Say the Opposite?

Compare and contrast. Here, via Open Secrets, are the top recipients of campaign cash from the finance, insurance and real estate sector, according to FEC filings:

Top Recipients, 2011-2012

Candidate Office Amount
Romney, Mitt (R) $5,047,797
Obama, Barack (D) $2,464,605
Gillibrand, Kirsten (D-NY) Senate $1,398,945
Corker, Bob (R-TN) Senate $1,195,864
Boehner, John (R-OH) House $1,159,137

And here is the lede from a Washington Post story that's been getting a lot of play:

Despite frosty relations with the titans of Wall Street, President Obama has still managed to raise far more money this year from the financial and banking sector than Mitt Romney or any other Republican presidential candidate, according to new fundraising data.

What's going on? Well, the WaPo included not only cash that Obama has raised on Wall Street for his campaign, but also for the Democratic National Committee, which, it notes, "will aid in his reelection effort."

That's not an entirely inappropriate analysis -- Obama raised that cash, which is news-worthy if for no other reason than we have a lot of Wall Street execs taking to various opinion pages to whine about how mean Obama has been to them and promising to take their balls and go home if he's not nicer. And of course Obama was the Darling of Wall Street in 2008. But there are a few problems with it.

First, this is simply an advantage of being an incumbent at this point in the cycle. Eventually the GOP will have a nominee and he (it won't be Bachmann) will go to Wall Street and raise money for the RNC.

So, it's an apples to oranges comparison. The RNC has already raised about $3.3 million from finance and real estate, according to OpenSecrets.

The other problem is that while the DNC will "aid in his re-election effort," it will also spend some of that cash on party infrastructure and for the campaigns of other Democratic candidates.

I note this mainly because we use contributions to the campaigns themselves in our report on Wall Street's influence in Washington, merely noting in parentheses that the figures don't include money raised for the two parties' national committees. So, a clarification seemed to be in order.

forgot to add link to source for the previous post:
http://www.alternet.org/newsandviews..._the_opposite/


To Be With the 99%, President Obama Must Fire Tim Geithner
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dylan-...b_1021972.html

[Cin]

Interesting article. Well, I think it is anyway.

http://www.alternet.org/world/152802...llion_/?page=1

[persiphone]

Originally Posted by Ebon

The only one of those I haven't seen is deconstructing supper. I'll check it out tomorrow if it's on Netflix along with that 1% doco.

and don't forget The End Of The Line. great flick. very depressing.

[persiphone]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

Interesting article. Well, I think it is anyway.

http://www.alternet.org/world/152802...llion_/?page=1

me too. it was very thought provoking and it enlightened me to an aspect of the system that i hadn't thought of before. but it clicks with me as a parent of a kid in the public school system. i've had more than a few convos with teachers over the years about my child. i have to remind them that i'm not raising a kid to automatically do what adults say just cuz their adults. my son is capable of thinking for himself and it's created some communication problems within the school system. he's also not afraid to point out adult injustice. they don't like that very much either. so when i get called in over an incident like that, the teacher is shocked when i take my son's side. the experience has been very much like swimming upriver for the past 10 years. so this thought process actually makes perfect sense to me. i just never knew what to call it other than i knew something was really fucked up.

[Sachita]

Originally Posted by persiphone

and don't forget The End Of The Line. great flick. very depressing.

Is that the one about factory farming? Its too hard for me to watch these. I do, however drive and buy pasture grass fed meats. I don't eat meat often but when I do...

But you know a lot of people can watch the docs, cry, bitch and get upset but a week later still spend three days a week in a drive thru or buying steaks at sam's club. The truth is you love only the animals you can see and touch.

[persiphone]

Originally Posted by Sachita

Is that the one about factory farming? Its too hard for me to watch these. I do, however drive and buy pasture grass fed meats. I don't eat meat often but when I do...

But you know a lot of people can watch the docs, cry, bitch and get upset but a week later still spend three days a week in a drive thru or buying steaks at sam's club. The truth is you love only the animals you can see and touch.

End Of The Line is about the state of our ocean fish supply and yeah i lost sleep over it. the result of that movie for me is that now i will only purchase alaskan seafood and some stuff off the coast of oregon that i can get local. but that's it. i will eat nothing else and i stopped going to sushi bars. it's pretty skeery.

on a side note....."grass fed beef" is often what they call "finished" in a feed lot. so it completely defeats the purpose. i just recently learned this myself (about a year ago) and i was kinda pissed cuz here i thought i was buying the right meat. you're not completely safe with any meat you buy in any retail store unless it's certified organic period. otherwise....you're basically paying higher prices for the exact same shit. oh, and "grass fed" doesn't specifiy just how LONG they were grass fed before hitting the feed lot, either. i thought that was interesting. so they could be grass fed for the first 6 months of their lives and then spend the rest of their lives on a feed lot and still be marketed as "grass fed" or they could spend a year being grass fed and spend the last year on a feed lot. it's complete and utter bullshit that makes me madder than hell. cuz the public doesn't know and that's just wrong

[atomiczombie]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

I would imagine they are all in Wall St.'s pocket, but the way the numbers were interpreted is a tad off.

Romney's Raised More Than Twice the Wall St. Cash as Obama... Why Does the WaPo Say the Opposite?

Compare and contrast. Here, via Open Secrets, are the top recipients of campaign cash from the finance, insurance and real estate sector, according to FEC filings:

Top Recipients, 2011-2012

Candidate Office Amount
Romney, Mitt (R) $5,047,797
Obama, Barack (D) $2,464,605
Gillibrand, Kirsten (D-NY) Senate $1,398,945
Corker, Bob (R-TN) Senate $1,195,864
Boehner, John (R-OH) House $1,159,137

And here is the lede from a Washington Post story that's been getting a lot of play:

Despite frosty relations with the titans of Wall Street, President Obama has still managed to raise far more money this year from the financial and banking sector than Mitt Romney or any other Republican presidential candidate, according to new fundraising data.

What's going on? Well, the WaPo included not only cash that Obama has raised on Wall Street for his campaign, but also for the Democratic National Committee, which, it notes, "will aid in his reelection effort."

That's not an entirely inappropriate analysis -- Obama raised that cash, which is news-worthy if for no other reason than we have a lot of Wall Street execs taking to various opinion pages to whine about how mean Obama has been to them and promising to take their balls and go home if he's not nicer. And of course Obama was the Darling of Wall Street in 2008. But there are a few problems with it.

First, this is simply an advantage of being an incumbent at this point in the cycle. Eventually the GOP will have a nominee and he (it won't be Bachmann) will go to Wall Street and raise money for the RNC.

So, it's an apples to oranges comparison. The RNC has already raised about $3.3 million from finance and real estate, according to OpenSecrets.

The other problem is that while the DNC will "aid in his re-election effort," it will also spend some of that cash on party infrastructure and for the campaigns of other Democratic candidates.

I note this mainly because we use contributions to the campaigns themselves in our report on Wall Street's influence in Washington, merely noting in parentheses that the figures don't include money raised for the two parties' national committees. So, a clarification seemed to be in order.

Yes I totally get what you are saying. However, the fact remains that Obama and the Democrats are just as much in the pocket of big banks and corporations as are the Republicans.

[Cin]

Originally Posted by atomiczombie

Yes I totally get what you are saying. However, the fact remains that Obama and the Democrats are just as much in the pocket of big banks and corporations as are the Republicans.

LOL, yes, I believe you are exactly right. They are all in the pocket of the Wall Street. And it looks like both parties are equally compensated for their efforts. I just came across the article and thought it was interesting how The Washington Post interpreted the numbers. Doesn't change a thing except WaPo got it backwards.

[SoNotHer]

I agree, Sachita. I look for beliefs to morph into actions.

Someone mentioned the destruction of the oceans. If you haven't seen Dr. Jeremy Jackson's TED lecture, you should:


[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0VHC1-DO_8"]Jeremy Jackson: How we wrecked the ocean - YouTube[/nomedia]

Originally Posted by Sachita

Is that the one about factory farming? Its too hard for me to watch these. I do, however drive and buy pasture grass fed meats. I don't eat meat often but when I do...

But you know a lot of people can watch the docs, cry, bitch and get upset but a week later still spend three days a week in a drive thru or buying steaks at sam's club. The truth is you love only the animals you can see and touch.

[SoNotHer]

It sounds like a lot of us are talking about the same great ideas about social justice, food miles, compassion and other important issues in this and other threads. I'm sad that we don't live closer. I'm sure we would have a lot of fun sharing dip and chips (organic, local, dairy-free of course :-) and discussions about what moves us and what we want to move forward.

What do you all think about doing this on the Internet? I've attend a couple webinars (for permaculture and shamanic plants). I thought they were terrific experiences. What if a time and day was set up to explore films, lectures, essays and subjects together and talk about them via the chat room or Skype or another venue?

I personally would love it. What do you think?

[Toughy]

The cops shut down Occupy San Jose last night and Occupy Oakland is being told to vacate today.

I was down at Occupy SF today.........they seem to be going strong....about 30-40 tents and lots of tourists taking pictures of them. The cops have barricades around the Federal Reserve Bank....about 2 blocks from the Occupy SF site....lots of cops around.

The best sign I read:

You would think a police state would pay it's police better

Oh yeah
3:00pm Saturday a rally and march against police brutality is happening.......I think it's going on around the US.

[Sachita]

Originally Posted by persiphone

End Of The Line is about the state of our ocean fish supply and yeah i lost sleep over it. the result of that movie for me is that now i will only purchase alaskan seafood and some stuff off the coast of oregon that i can get local. but that's it. i will eat nothing else and i stopped going to sushi bars. it's pretty skeery.

on a side note....."grass fed beef" is often what they call "finished" in a feed lot. so it completely defeats the purpose. i just recently learned this myself (about a year ago) and i was kinda pissed cuz here i thought i was buying the right meat. you're not completely safe with any meat you buy in any retail store unless it's certified organic period. otherwise....you're basically paying higher prices for the exact same shit. oh, and "grass fed" doesn't specifiy just how LONG they were grass fed before hitting the feed lot, either. i thought that was interesting. so they could be grass fed for the first 6 months of their lives and then spend the rest of their lives on a feed lot and still be marketed as "grass fed" or they could spend a year being grass fed and spend the last year on a feed lot. it's complete and utter bullshit that makes me madder than hell. cuz the public doesn't know and that's just wrong

Yes I understand about grass fed and how the popularity has forced cutting corners. I buy my beef from a local farm, have been there and know them. I think that its important to know. But they do feed some organic grain and have good permaculture practices.

[atomiczombie]

Check this out:

http://www.nycga.net/category/minutes/

It's the minutes from the daily General Assemblies at OWS Zucotti Park (Liberty Plaza). This form of consensus building is simple, yet it seems revolutionary when you compare it to the type of "democracy" we are used to here in the US.

[Quintease]

Hmm... I have police on my Facebook account. Most of them seem to have bought into the lie that OWS is about a sense of entitlement and wanting something for nothing.

Originally Posted by theoddz

Since I live in Las Vegas, I can totally understand where this guy is coming from, on "ringers", "muscle" and the Three Card Monty game. He's right on the mark with what will probably become of the OWS movement.



~Theo~

[Quintease]

Muslims join Jewish and Christian groups

[Ebon]

Coverage for OWS since the US isn't covering it



Occupy Melbourne



Occupy London



Occupy Toronto

[PapiChino]

Originally Posted by atomiczombie

I looked and I didn't see a thread on this particular subject, so I decided to start one here. I want to have a place to specifically discuss the Occupy Wall Street movement, rallys, and how it is spreading across the nation.

Here is their newly voted on platform/declaration:




I think this movement is tremendously important and it's existence is an inevitable outcome of decades of economic injustices perpetrated by the government, banks and corporations in the US and around the world.

What do you all think about the Occupy Wall Street movement and it's message?

Thanks for starting this...

[Ebon]

Naomi Wolf arrested at OWS

http://occupycyberspace.wordpress.co...y-wall-street/




How I Was Arrested at Occupy Wall Street
Naomi Wolfe

Naomi Wolfe

Last night I was arrested in my home town, outside an event to which I had been invited, for standing lawfully on the sidewalk in an evening gown. Let me explain; my partner and I were attending an event for the Huffington Post, for which I often write: Game Changers 2011, in a venue space on Hudson Street. As we entered the space, we saw that about 200 Occupy Wall Street protesters were peacefully assembled and were chanting. They wanted to address Governor Andrew Cuomo, who was going to be arriving at the event.

They were using a technique that has become known as “the human mic” – by which the crowd laboriously repeats every word the speaker says – since they had been told that using real megaphones was illegal. In my book Give Me Liberty, a blueprint for how to open up a closing civil society, I have a chapter on permits – which is a crucial subject to understand for anyone involved in protest in the US. In 70s America, protest used to be very effective, but in subsequent decades municipalities have sneakily created a web of “overpermiticisation” – requirements that were designed to stifle freedom of assembly and the right to petition government for redress of grievances, both of which are part of our first amendment. One of these made-up permit requirements, which are not transparent or accountable, is the megaphone restriction.

So I informed the group on Hudson Street that they had a first amendment right to use a megaphone and that the National Lawyers’ Guild should appeal the issue if they got arrested. And I repeated the words of the first amendment, which the crowd repeated. Then my partner suggested that I ask the group for their list of demands. Since we would be inside, we thought it would be helpful to take their list into the event and if I had a chance to talk with the governor I could pass the list on.

That is how a democracy works, right? The people have the right to address their representatives. We went inside, chatted with our friends, but needed to leave before the governor had arrived. I decided I would present their list to his office in the morning and write about the response. On our exit, I saw that the protesters had been cordoned off by a now-massive phalanx of NYPD cops and pinned against the far side of the street – far away from the event they sought to address.

I went up and asked them why. They replied that they had been informed that the Huffington Post event had a permit that forbade them to use the sidewalk. I knew from my investigative reporting on NYC permits that this was impossible: a private entity cannot lease the public sidewalks; even film crews must allow pedestrian traffic. I asked the police for clarification – no response. I went over to the sidewalk at issue and identified myself as a NYC citizen and a reporter, and asked to see the permit in question or to locate the source on the police or event side that claimed it forbade citizen access to a public sidewalk. Finally a tall man, who seemed to be with the event, confessed that while it did have a permit, the permit did allow for protest so long as we did not block pedestrian passage.

I thanked him, returned to the protesters, and said: “The permit allows us to walk on the other side of the street if we don’t block access. I am now going to walk on the public sidewalk and not block it. It is legal to do so. Please join me if you wish.” My partner and I then returned to the event-side sidewalk and began to walk peacefully arm in arm, while about 30 or 40 people walked with us in single file, not blocking access. Then a phalanx of perhaps 40 white-shirted senior offices descended out of seemingly nowhere and, with a megaphone (which was supposedly illegal for citizens to use), one said: “You are unlawfully creating a disruption.

You are ordered to disperse.” I approached him peacefully, slowly, gently and respectfully and said: “I am confused. I was told that the permit in question allows us to walk if we don’t block pedestrian access and as you see we are complying with the permit.” He gave me a look of pure hate. “Are you going to back down?” he shouted. I stood, immobilised, for a moment. “Are you getting out of my way?” I did not even make a conscious decision not to “fall back” – I simply couldn’t even will myself to do so, because I knew that he was not giving a lawful order and that if I stepped aside it would be not because of the law, which I was following, but as a capitulation to sheer force. In that moment’s hesitation, he said, “OK,” gestured, and my partner and I were surrounded by about 20 officers who pulled our hands behind our backs and cuffed us with plastic handcuffs.

We were taken in a van to the seventh precinct – the scary part about that is that the protesters and lawyers marched to the first precinct, which handles Hudson Street, but in the van the police got the message to avoid them by rerouting me. I understood later that the protesters were lied to about our whereabouts, which seemed to me to be a trickle-down of the Bush-era detention practice of unaccountable detentions. The officers who had us in custody were very courteous, and several expressed sympathy for the movements’ aims.

Nonetheless, my partner and I had our possessions taken from us, our ID copied, and we were placed in separate cells for about half an hour. It was clear that by then the police knew there was scrutiny of this arrest so they handled us with great courtesy, but my phone was taken and for half an hour I was in a faeces- or blood-smeared cell, thinking at that moment the only thing that separates civil societies from barbaric states is the rule of law – that finds the prisoner, and holds the arresting officers and courts accountable. Another scary outcome I discovered is that, when the protesters marched to the first precinct, the whole of Erickson Street was cordoned off – “frozen” they were told, “by Homeland Security”. Obviously if DHS now has powers to simply take over a New York City street because of an arrest for peaceable conduct by a middle-aged writer in an evening gown, we have entered a stage of the closing of America, which is a serious departure from our days as a free republic in which municipalities are governed by police forces.

The police are now telling my supporters that the permit in question gave the event managers “control of the sidewalks”. I have asked to see the permit but still haven’t been provided with it – if such a category now exists, I have never heard of it; that, too, is a serious blow to an open civil society. What did I take away? Just that, unfortunately, my partner and I became exhibit A in a process that I have been warning Americans about since 2007: first they come for the “other” – the “terrorist”, the brown person, the Muslim, the outsider; then they come for you – while you are standing on a sidewalk in evening dress, obeying the law.

By Naomi Wolf, Guardian UK

[persiphone]

i'm actually pretty surprised by the police response. perhaps i shouldn't be. perhaps i knew this would be the reaction all along i just didn't want to admit it. police brutality is something that happens to other people in far away places. it's something you read about sometimes in the morning news and you shake your head while reading it and then go about your day. and now the police brutality is in our face and happening to our own with massive frequency. and yes, we have lost our rights. we have no choices. and this is fast becoming possibly the second greatest civil rights movement in our history.

[SoNotHer]

I have enormous respect for NW, and her post are one of the things I miss about FB.

This post feels momentous to me. I think we're watching the historical landmarks of this movement fall into place.

No wake up call is easy, particularly when it has been a long, self-induced, self-delusional slumber. But we are waking up. I am more hopeful about that than ever.

Thank you for the videos and Wolf's commentary, Ebon. :-)

Originally Posted by Ebon

Naomi Wolf arrested at OWS

http://occupycyberspace.wordpress.co...y-wall-street/




How I Was Arrested at Occupy Wall Street
Naomi Wolfe

Naomi Wolfe

Last night I was arrested in my home town, outside an event to which I had been invited, for standing lawfully on the sidewalk in an evening gown. Let me explain; my partner and I were attending an event for the Huffington Post, for which I often write: Game Changers 2011, in a venue space on Hudson Street. As we entered the space, we saw that about 200 Occupy Wall Street protesters were peacefully assembled and were chanting. They wanted to address Governor Andrew Cuomo, who was going to be arriving at the event.

They were using a technique that has become known as “the human mic” – by which the crowd laboriously repeats every word the speaker says – since they had been told that using real megaphones was illegal. In my book Give Me Liberty, a blueprint for how to open up a closing civil society, I have a chapter on permits – which is a crucial subject to understand for anyone involved in protest in the US. In 70s America, protest used to be very effective, but in subsequent decades municipalities have sneakily created a web of “overpermiticisation” – requirements that were designed to stifle freedom of assembly and the right to petition government for redress of grievances, both of which are part of our first amendment. One of these made-up permit requirements, which are not transparent or accountable, is the megaphone restriction.

So I informed the group on Hudson Street that they had a first amendment right to use a megaphone and that the National Lawyers’ Guild should appeal the issue if they got arrested. And I repeated the words of the first amendment, which the crowd repeated. Then my partner suggested that I ask the group for their list of demands. Since we would be inside, we thought it would be helpful to take their list into the event and if I had a chance to talk with the governor I could pass the list on.

That is how a democracy works, right? The people have the right to address their representatives. We went inside, chatted with our friends, but needed to leave before the governor had arrived. I decided I would present their list to his office in the morning and write about the response. On our exit, I saw that the protesters had been cordoned off by a now-massive phalanx of NYPD cops and pinned against the far side of the street – far away from the event they sought to address.

I went up and asked them why. They replied that they had been informed that the Huffington Post event had a permit that forbade them to use the sidewalk. I knew from my investigative reporting on NYC permits that this was impossible: a private entity cannot lease the public sidewalks; even film crews must allow pedestrian traffic. I asked the police for clarification – no response. I went over to the sidewalk at issue and identified myself as a NYC citizen and a reporter, and asked to see the permit in question or to locate the source on the police or event side that claimed it forbade citizen access to a public sidewalk. Finally a tall man, who seemed to be with the event, confessed that while it did have a permit, the permit did allow for protest so long as we did not block pedestrian passage.

I thanked him, returned to the protesters, and said: “The permit allows us to walk on the other side of the street if we don’t block access. I am now going to walk on the public sidewalk and not block it. It is legal to do so. Please join me if you wish.” My partner and I then returned to the event-side sidewalk and began to walk peacefully arm in arm, while about 30 or 40 people walked with us in single file, not blocking access. Then a phalanx of perhaps 40 white-shirted senior offices descended out of seemingly nowhere and, with a megaphone (which was supposedly illegal for citizens to use), one said: “You are unlawfully creating a disruption.

You are ordered to disperse.” I approached him peacefully, slowly, gently and respectfully and said: “I am confused. I was told that the permit in question allows us to walk if we don’t block pedestrian access and as you see we are complying with the permit.” He gave me a look of pure hate. “Are you going to back down?” he shouted. I stood, immobilised, for a moment. “Are you getting out of my way?” I did not even make a conscious decision not to “fall back” – I simply couldn’t even will myself to do so, because I knew that he was not giving a lawful order and that if I stepped aside it would be not because of the law, which I was following, but as a capitulation to sheer force. In that moment’s hesitation, he said, “OK,” gestured, and my partner and I were surrounded by about 20 officers who pulled our hands behind our backs and cuffed us with plastic handcuffs.

We were taken in a van to the seventh precinct – the scary part about that is that the protesters and lawyers marched to the first precinct, which handles Hudson Street, but in the van the police got the message to avoid them by rerouting me. I understood later that the protesters were lied to about our whereabouts, which seemed to me to be a trickle-down of the Bush-era detention practice of unaccountable detentions. The officers who had us in custody were very courteous, and several expressed sympathy for the movements’ aims.

Nonetheless, my partner and I had our possessions taken from us, our ID copied, and we were placed in separate cells for about half an hour. It was clear that by then the police knew there was scrutiny of this arrest so they handled us with great courtesy, but my phone was taken and for half an hour I was in a faeces- or blood-smeared cell, thinking at that moment the only thing that separates civil societies from barbaric states is the rule of law – that finds the prisoner, and holds the arresting officers and courts accountable. Another scary outcome I discovered is that, when the protesters marched to the first precinct, the whole of Erickson Street was cordoned off – “frozen” they were told, “by Homeland Security”. Obviously if DHS now has powers to simply take over a New York City street because of an arrest for peaceable conduct by a middle-aged writer in an evening gown, we have entered a stage of the closing of America, which is a serious departure from our days as a free republic in which municipalities are governed by police forces.

The police are now telling my supporters that the permit in question gave the event managers “control of the sidewalks”. I have asked to see the permit but still haven’t been provided with it – if such a category now exists, I have never heard of it; that, too, is a serious blow to an open civil society. What did I take away? Just that, unfortunately, my partner and I became exhibit A in a process that I have been warning Americans about since 2007: first they come for the “other” – the “terrorist”, the brown person, the Muslim, the outsider; then they come for you – while you are standing on a sidewalk in evening dress, obeying the law.

By Naomi Wolf, Guardian UK