OCCUPY WALL STREET

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by persiphone

the actual ins and outs of voting laws in each state is near mind boggling. it's a huge source of discouragement for many.

I understand this, but can't accept that it can not be changed- and I can see OWS as a vehicle to this change- not entirely, but a big part of what needs to happen. I honestly do feel this way. I know that the obsticles are many and so many of us are so damn frustrated too. I have been in this space many times before- but I also can look back at some very critical change factors following social movements that I have lived through. The ending of the Vietnam War is one example as well as the end to a military draft. Roe v. Wade is another. I was a kid for brown v. Board of Education and did not live in the South, but I remember changes even here in CA due to it. Also, civil rights legislation actually brought many people in states that are usually viewed as non-racist out of denial about the fact that racism is everywhere in the US. We may not have had signs posted about where and when POC could go- but it sure was implied behaviorally.

The only way a democracy can work is for people to participate even when we feel frustrated and angry. It has taken a hell of a lot of injustice, especially for younger people to say that is enough, but they are doing so and participating more and more. More and more older folks will join in too as they see that OWS isn't going away. POC unable to trust that this is their movement too will change that and participate in larger numbers. I have to have hope and the only way I can keep hope alive is to do whatever I can as an individual to participate and support this movement. No way am I going to sleep in a tent in winter- those days are gone for me and my older bones, but I will march, vote, reamin involved in local politics and sit with the old fart Republican poll workers during elections and watch every damn move they make!

[ruffryder]

.. and this is what you get for wearing a tent apparently. looks like sexual harrasment to me as they leave her nearly naked.


“This is not consensual,” the lady getting the tent ripped off said. “Don’t take my clothes off!”

The woman yelled as officers ripped and tore the tent dress until she was left in only her bra and panties. As she sat on the ground trying to cover herself, the police quickly turned and exited the park, neglecting to see if she was hurt.

“The Ethical Standards Department has subsequently received a physical assault complaint in relation to this incident and is investigating,” Victoria Police said in a statement.

“As this investigation is ongoing we will not be commenting further.”

Tal Slome, a spokeswoman for Occupy Melbourne, explained that the action was a “completely unnecessary form of brutality” because police knew she was only wearing underwear beneath the tent.

“Who decides what constitutes clothing in our society?” she asked.

http://www.rawstory.com

[ruffryder]

I ran across this video of the UC Davis Pepper Spraying. The maker of this video says,

"This video shows the events leading up to the use of pepper spray by UC Davis police officers. I made this from video I and a friend I was visiting shot. This video shows in chronological order events leading up to the use of pepper spray. I created the video from about an hour of footage, and much of what I cut was when people were standing around and chanting. There were cameras everywhere (on both sides of me and behind me), so I'm sure if you do a search you will be able to find video of the events from different angles. I encourage people to do their own research... the comments in the video are only opinions."

[ruffryder]

December 6 - OWS calls for Occupy Homes. Occupy Homes, an offshoot of Occupy Wall Street, will protest in foreclosed and vacant properties in around 25 U.S. cities on Tuesday's "Day of Action," promoting what organizers call the "basic human right of housing."

This targets the banks and institutions offering incredible and outrageous loans to homebuyers and no help with foreclosure. It encourages Americans to transform their relationship with land and owning homes. People will be protesting foreclosures and auctions that will go on. In the coming months there are plans of more of this kind of protesting on foreclosures. Full story here > http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/2618...ures-dec-6.htm

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by ruffryder

December 6 - OWS calls for Occupy Homes. Occupy Homes, an offshoot of Occupy Wall Street, will protest in foreclosed and vacant properties in around 25 U.S. cities on Tuesday's "Day of Action," promoting what organizers call the "basic human right of housing."

This targets the banks and institutions offering incredible and outrageous loans to homebuyers and no help with foreclosure. It encourages Americans to transform their relationship with land and owning homes. People will be protesting foreclosures and auctions that will go on. In the coming months there are plans of more of this kind of protesting on foreclosures. Full story here > http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/2618...ures-dec-6.htm

These Occupy efforts really are important. I am elated to see these actions begin and spread throughout Occupy demonstrations all over. Wouldn't it be something if somehow an independent "mortgage" company sprung from this? Something that could just pay-off the loans and re-sell the home to people at low interest rates and the principal amount of the market today. And no FICO scores required! So many of these people could pay a sane mortgage- some have become re-employed, but at lower take-home pay. Maybe even a "grace period" of a few months until payments began (with no accrued interest) if they are not yet back to work.

I had a fantasy today about winning the super-duper lottery and setting up a non-profit re-finance that is totally different than traditional profit motivated banks and mortgage companies that could intervene and partner with the Occupy movement to save these homes. LOL- I don't even buy lottery tickets- but it was the only thing I could think of to do something like this.

I know, I'm not a good candidate for running a business. Anyway- any focus on the housing situation and those losing their homes due to the Wall Street greed that brought our economy to where it did, excites me. There was predatory lending going on with junk securities bundled and sold at insane profits. Relaxing mortgage qualifying documentation and requirements made it very easy to rope all of these people in- and that was exactly what they wanted to do.

[GeorgiaMa'am]

Originally Posted by AtLast

I had a fantasy today about winning the super-duper lottery and setting up a non-profit re-finance that is totally different than traditional profit motivated banks and mortgage companies that could intervene and partner with the Occupy movement to save these homes. LOL- I don't even buy lottery tickets- but it was the only thing I could think of to do something like this.

I know, I'm not a good candidate for running a business.

You go, George Bailey! You go! (Just watched _It's A Wonderful Life_ this past weekend for the I-won't-say-how-many-Christmases-in-a-row. Down with Potterville! Honestly, if you need a temporary escape from the crisis, it's a good movie - unless you can't stand sugary-sweet escapism.)

[atomiczombie]

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by GeorgiaMa'am

You go, George Bailey! You go! (Just watched _It's A Wonderful Life_ this past weekend for the I-won't-say-how-many-Christmases-in-a-row. Down with Potterville! Honestly, if you need a temporary escape from the crisis, it's a good movie - unless you can't stand sugary-sweet escapism.)

Well thank you! One of my favorite Christmas movies! I just can't help but think there is a way to tackle this problem via OWS. I really am happy to see the Occupy people in many places on the lawns of foreclosure situations. A couple of these actions have helped get some more time for some folks. We need to get these properties completely out of the hands of banks and re-structure loans based upon actual market values today. Just that would enable many to stay in their homes and pay it off. Some of the bogus loan products people were sold were just nuts! Some of these loans can't even be traced to wherever they ended up!

Oh, I can deal with sugary-sweet escapism!

[Toughy]

The vote and running for political office are the only ways citizens can effect a change in or keep our legislators on a city/county/state/federal level. Term limits are entirely up to citizens.

I have said over and over and over again that a Constitutional Convention should be forced by the individual state legislators. Yes, I know it opens a big ole can o worms around a woman's control of her own body, however it is necessary to change our political system.

1. Speech is not money at all ever. Corporations are not people...ever.
2. Public financing of all (I will settle for federal elections...the house, the senate and the president) elections. No private money can be used for political ads ever never again. No more lies in campaigns. The individual running for office is the only one allowed to put up a political ad. No more 'swift boat' crap.
3. Every citizen of this country (over age 18) has a right to vote,. You don't lose voting rights because of felonies, lack of documentation for an ID card or any other bullshit that might get thrown at you. In case you did not know....there is not a 'right to vote' clause in the Constitution. That is why poll taxes could exist until Congress overturned poll taxes.

Way back when I was a Republican (yes I was), I believed that real power is in local government and the federal government should be small....ya know....that state's right crap.... I am no longer a Republican, not because I no longer believe power is most effectively used at the city/county/state level, but because Republicans lost sight of individual rights and became enamored with corporate rights and money. They also lost sight of what a government is actually for....the people (ok my brain just went to the people united will never be divided) is what government is about.

I vehemently oppose ANY movement that suggests citizens abdicate our right to vote. I would suggest that part of the Constitutional Convention also contain an amendment granting the right to vote to every fucking citizen over the age of 18 (yes Perry it is 18) in this country. No losing your voting rights for felony convictions. No losing your voting rights because you cannot produce proof of citizenship (not the same as ID cards). Citizen gets to vote period.

This is what the Occupy movement is about. Fair play, economic and social justice for all....

[ruffryder]

Originally Posted by Toughy

3. Every citizen of this country (over age 18) has a right to vote,. You don't lose voting rights because of felonies, lack of documentation for an ID card or any other bullshit that might get thrown at you. In case you did not know....there is not a 'right to vote' clause in the Constitution. That is why poll taxes could exist until Congress overturned poll taxes.

........

I vehemently oppose ANY movement that suggests citizens abdicate our right to vote. I would suggest that part of the Constitutional Convention also contain an amendment granting the right to vote to every fucking citizen over the age of 18 (yes Perry it is 18) in this country. No losing your voting rights for felony convictions. No losing your voting rights because you cannot produce proof of citizenship (not the same as ID cards). Citizen gets to vote period.

This is what the Occupy movement is about. Fair play, economic and social justice for all....

Drugs, Voting, Citizenship may be a whole other thread in it's entirety. I'm still trying to grasp how this all comes together with the OWS movement and maybe that's why some people, including myself are confused with what people want to accomplish with Occupying. I do appreciate all the feedback here on my questions and trying to understand some of your points, so thank you all for the feedback and clarifying your thoughts.

I do not feel someone that is a criminal should have the same rights as a law abiding citizen. Voting should be a privilege to citizens who love their country and follow the basic rules. I am not okay with a sexual child predator voting on perhaps a bill about these types of criminals getting out of prison early for good behavior or being able to live in a neighborhood where there is a school. I also don't feel I would be comfortable with serial killers having a vote and say on anything. I am for the death penalty and feel if you want to save money on taxes on people in jail then use that for those that deserve it.

Why wouldn't a citizen be able to produce a document or ID that shows his/her citizenship status? Are you saying a foreigner should be able to vote in the U.S. elections and on U.S. and state bills just because they happen to be in the U.S. but have not received citizenship for whatever reason? What would be reasons for this and why is that okay?

Thank you.

[ruffryder]

December 5, 2011
http://www.alternet.org/

Pepper Spray, Tasers, and LRADs — What's Behind the Explosion of 'Less Lethal' Weapons for Crowd Control?

From the battlefield of Afghanistan to your local Occupation, the government has invested big bucks in weapons that don't cause permanent damage.


Hundreds of millions of dollars have been invested in the research and development of more "media-friendly" weapons for everyday policing and crowd control, and as uprisings around the world spread, the demand for nonlethal weapons is increasing.

According to an October report by the Homeland Security Research Corporation, the global market for "less lethal" weapons is predicted to triple by 2020, with more than half of the current market devoted to crowd dispersal weapons like those being used against protesters at Occupy Wall Street.

Americans have a rich history of taking to the streets to demand social justice. From the labor strikes of the progressive era to the civil rights and antiwar movements of the 60s and 70s, the reaction by the powers-that-be has been the same: send in the riot police. As the Occupy Wall Street movement advances this tradition, the powerful have again reacted with overwhelming force. But the riot police of yesterday were armed much differently than they are today.

Today’s arsenal includes a broad array of weapons that are meant, not to kill, but to force compliance by inflicting pain without leaving permanent injury. The Pentagon's approved term for these weapons is "non-lethal" or "less-lethal" and they are designed to disperse crowds, empty streets, and incapacitate defiant individuals.

As rapid advancements in media and telecommunications technologies allowed people to record and publicize images and video of undue force more than ever before, a 1997 joint report from the Pentagon and the Justice Department hinted at the purpose of nonlethal weapons:


A further consideration that affects how the military and law enforcement apply force is the greater presence of members of the media or other civilians who are observing, if not recording, the situation. Even the lawful application of force can be misrepresented to or misunderstood by the public. More than ever, the police and the military must be highly discreet when applying force.

As journalist Ando Arike wrote in a 2010 article in Harpers Magazine, "The result is what appears to be the first arms race in which the opponent is the general population.”

The Whole World Is Watching

The demand for non-lethal weapons is rooted in the rise of television, a medium that, in the ‘60s and ‘70s, let everyday Americans witness the violent tactics used to suppress the civil rights and anti-war movements of the era. This new dynamic popularized the slogan, “the whole world is watching”, chanted by antiwar protesters outside the Democratic National Convention in 1968 as TV cameras captured a police riot against peaceful demonstrators.

When Martin Luther King Jr. and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) used nonviolent direct action to challenge segregation in Birmingham, Alabama, in 1963, they captured unprecedented media attention as a thousand high school students took to the streets in defiance of a court injunction. On orders from Public Safety Commissioner Eugene “Bull” Connor, officers attacked demonstrators with high-pressure fire hoses and police dogs. Scenes of the ensuing mayhem caused an international outcry, leading to federal intervention by the Kennedy administration.

Years later, King and the SCLC employed similar tactics in Selma, Alabama, where the police violently repressed civil rights activists. In what became known as “Bloody Sunday."

[Corkey]

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Drugs, Voting, Citizenship may be a whole other thread in it's entirety. I'm still trying to grasp how this all comes together with the OWS movement and maybe that's why some people, including myself are confused with what people want to accomplish with Occupying. I do appreciate all the feedback here on my questions and trying to understand some of your points, so thank you all for the feedback and clarifying your thoughts.

I do not feel someone that is a criminal should have the same rights as a law abiding citizen. Voting should be a privilege to citizens who love their country and follow the basic rules. I am not okay with a sexual child predator voting on perhaps a bill about these types of criminals getting out of prison early for good behavior or being able to live in a neighborhood where there is a school. I also don't feel I would be comfortable with serial killers having a vote and say on anything. I am for the death penalty and feel if you want to save money on taxes on people in jail then use that for those that deserve it.

Why wouldn't a citizen be able to produce a document or ID that shows his/her citizenship status? Are you saying a foreigner should be able to vote in the U.S. elections and on U.S. and state bills just because they happen to be in the U.S. but have not received citizenship for whatever reason? What would be reasons for this and why is that okay?

Thank you.

Ruff, voting is a right of every citizen, I would go so far as to say a duty, it however is not a privilege, that's driving. If a convicted criminal has served their time, and are not under any further parole, then they have done their time and should be considered a full citizen. The Constitution made no proof of citizenship to vote, states have usurped the federal voting rights law, and are now enacting their own set of rules. Until someone steps up and challenges them they will get away with voter suppression.

[Toughy]

I'm gonna do this point by point because it is necessary and in this color.

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Drugs, Voting, Citizenship may be a whole other thread in it's entirety. I'm still trying to grasp how this all comes together with the OWS movement and maybe that's why some people, including myself are confused with what people want to accomplish with Occupying. I do appreciate all the feedback here on my questions and trying to understand some of your points, so thank you all for the feedback and clarifying your thoughts.

The Occupy movement (across the world...not just the US) is about fair play and social economic justice. Corporations are NOT people. Government exists to protect the people....the people IS you, me and every other homo sapien on this planet

I do not feel someone that is a criminal should have the same rights as a law abiding citizen. Who decides who is a criminal? I smoke dope and have for years and yet according to CA law, it's legal as a medicine, however I go to jail (a felony depending on quantify and lose the vote) if you are talking about Federal Law. Am I a criminal who should not be able to vote?

Voting should be a privilege to citizens who love their country and follow the basic rules.

Voting IS NOT a privilege. It is a right in a democracy and many democracys around the world assert that as fact. In case you did not know......the US is not the only democracy in the world. I lived in a democracy that gave me far more rights and privileges than I receive today as a US citizen. I lived in New Zealand.

I am not okay with a sexual child predator voting on perhaps a bill about these types of criminals getting out of prison early for good behavior or being able to live in a neighborhood where there is a school. I also don't feel I would be comfortable with serial killers having a vote and say on anything. I am for the death penalty and feel if you want to save money on taxes on people in jail then use that for those that deserve it.

So the sexual predator who is 19 years old and committed the act of having consensual sex with a 17 year old, which is pedophilia in many states, should not get to vote? Where should this person live? I don't believe in the death penalty so should I not be allowed to vote? I would rather 100 guilty men go free than have the STATE execute an innocent man. The death penalty is racist in this country. You want to save taxes by killing innocent people? A brave new world eating soma comes to my mind.

Why wouldn't a citizen be able to produce a document or ID that shows his/her citizenship status?

My grandmother had no birth certificate. She was born in 1898 in what is now know as Texas. When she was 3 years old she and her family came to southeast NM by covered wagon. THere is NO record of her birth. You think she should not have been able to vote? She could not proof she was born in the US. She could not prove she was a citizen. FFS.........get out of your white privilege and open eyes.

Are you saying a foreigner should be able to vote in the U.S. elections and on U.S. and state bills just because they happen to be in the U.S. but have not received citizenship for whatever reason? What would be reasons for this and why is that okay?

Why put words in my mouth. I used the word citizen in ALL my comments.

I won't even go to what I really think about what citizenship means.......let's just use the current definition of born in this country or naturalized.

Personally I think an uneducated, unthinking person born in this country citizen is a far greater threat to our Constitution than someone busted for possession of a Schedule I drug or an undocumented family living here and paying taxes could ever be.

Thank you.

Pay attention

[ruffryder]

Thanks for the responses.

I said a "CHILD" sexual predator nothing about sexual consent. Whether a consent of sex or a rape being questioned is consented to is a matter of she said, he said. A child is totally different than what you are refering to and what I said.

As for a what constitutes a criminal, you tell me? You are the one that stated no voting rights should be lost to those that have felonies. Are you saying any one that has felonies, no matter what they are or how many they have should be ok to vote on any thing if they are serving a sentence even if it refers to justice and them being held accountable for their criminal acts?

I also did not say those that do not believe in the death penalty should not vote? I said I believe in the death penalty and I believe in it if found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and if someone said, "oh yeah I killed those 100 people." I do not think the death penalty should be given to innocent people. Yes, there have been cases where it was administered and there were questions if it should have been and if it was justified. We may not be able to pick and choose but there is a case if we make amendments to include evidence and without a reasonable doubt that someone that is a criminal may be able to vote for to allow this if we look at the way you would like criminals to be able to vote. In regards to the OWS movement I stated I believe in the death penalty as a way to lower taxes and diminish the prison population.

As for not having a birth certificate or no record of it, I think the laws have changed for that over the years and people started receiving birth certificates at one point. I know refugees currently coming over from Africa and they had no clue when they were born and were given resident cards based on what they thought was correct. Oh I'm sure some may have been older or younger than what they thought. So, I'm sure nowadays there is no question to determine if someone is a citizen or not. People come from other countries all the time and gain citizenship status. For your definition of citizenship as born here or naturalized there should be no reason now why their wouldn't be a record of it.

[Toughy]

[Cagain me in this colorOLOR="DarkOliveGreen"][/COLOR]

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Thanks for the responses.

I said a "CHILD" sexual predator nothing about sexual consent. Whether a consent of sex or a rape being questioned is consented to is a matter of she said, he said. A child is totally different than what you are refering to and what I said.

Who defines 'child'? I know more than one person in the state of New Mexico who is forever doomed to registering as a pedophile because they had consensual sex defined by the laws of NM as pedophilia. The 'pedophile' must register and are subject to all kinds of horrors because a priest abused them when they were a 'child' and that pedophile is simply acting out an innocent sexual activity with a peer? At what age can consent be given. If you are talking about clinical drug trials, a 12 yr old can give consent to participating in a clinical trial. What is consent? When can consent be given? Does age and type of consent for different activities make a difference?

Why is a 12 year old 'child' consenting to sex with a 19 year old different from a 12 year old consenting to take an experimental drug that could render them _________ different from sex consent. WHAT IS the aqe of consent? States differ unimaginably on this issue.

Truth is it does not matter. Why does being a less than member of society deny you the right to vote for representation?

As for a what constitutes a criminal, you tell me? You are the one that stated no voting rights should be lost to those that have felonies. Are you saying any one that has felonies, no matter what they are or how many they have should be ok to vote on any thing if they are serving a sentence even if it refers to justice and them being held accountable for their criminal acts?

EVERY CITIZEN (above age 18) HAS THE RIGHT TO VOTE. I cannot make it more clear

I also did not say those that do not believe in the death penalty should not vote? I said I believe in the death penalty and I believe in it if found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and if someone said, "oh yeah I killed those 100 people." I do not think the death penalty should be given to innocent people. Yes, there have been cases where it was administered and there were questions if it should have been and if it was justified. We may not be able to pick and choose but there is a case if we make amendments to include evidence and without a reasonable doubt that someone that is a criminal may be able to vote for to allow this if we look at the way you would like criminals to be able to vote. In regards to the OWS movement I stated I believe in the death penalty as a way to lower taxes and diminish the prison population.

[BYou believe as you have stated twice that.......the death penalty is a way to lower taxes and diminish prison populations............

actually I'm gonna stop here.........I will no longer engage any human being who believes taxes and money are more important than people........][/B]


As for not having a birth certificate or no record of it, I think the laws have changed for that over the years and people started receiving birth certificates at one point. I know refugees currently coming over from Africa and they had no clue when they were born and were given resident cards based on what they thought was correct. Oh I'm sure some may have been older or younger than what they thought. So, I'm sure nowadays there is no question to determine if someone is a citizen or not. People come from other countries all the time and gain citizenship status. For your definition of citizenship as born here or naturalized there should be no reason now why their wouldn't be a record of it.

you are a fucking idiot who should be denied the right to be a citizen of this country (which as a matter of ethics I would never do). In 1972, I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution of this country. You....are an abomination to what I swore to uphold. Jesse Ventura...a navy seal.....called on ALL veterans to remember the oath we took........that oath was to 'uphold the Constitution'...........

I ask every single veteran who did swear to uphold the Constitution to re-affirm that oath and Occupy the Constitution.............


I am so fuckin done with this stupid crap...............

[Medusa]

Originally Posted by Toughy

[Cagain me in this colorOLOR="DarkOliveGreen"][/COLOR]

you are a fucking idiot who should be denied the right to be a citizen of this country (which as a matter of ethics I would never do). In 1972, I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution of this country. You....are an abomination to what I swore to uphold. Jesse Ventura...a navy seal.....called on ALL veterans to remember the oath we took........that oath was to 'uphold the Constitution'...........

I ask every single veteran who did swear to uphold the Constitution to re-affirm that oath and Occupy the Constitution.............


I am so fuckin done with this stupid crap...............

Toughy-


Your post was reported for ugly name-calling.

I get that you are pissed off but it is not ok to call people names anywhere on this forum. You are now on a two week time-out.

During that time-out you are not to access this site, our Facebook page, or make a second screen name in order to circumvent the system.

Thanks,
Medusa