OCCUPY WALL STREET

[atomiczombie]

It's not on You Tube so I can't embed, but this is a video about the call to action on November 17th. It's so awesome I wanted to share it!

http://vimeo.com/31114509

[atomiczombie]

Originally Posted by SoNotHer

http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/...059182-1uhuvUx

Tell House Democrats: Stand up to Wall Street banks

It sounds really simple: The largest banks that caused the housing crisis that led to our economic meltdown should be investigated fully, punished to the full extent of the law, and forced to compensate their victims for the harm they caused.

But the Obama administration is pressuring state attorneys general to quickly cut a deal with the banks that lets them off the hook for massive amounts of mortgage and foreclosure fraud.

Democratic Representative Tammy Baldwin is pushing back. She has introduced a resolution that supports taking a tough line with the banks.

The more Democratic members of Congress who cosponsor it, the stronger the message it will send to President Obama that he cannot give Wall Street a "get out of jail free" card for mortgage and foreclosure fraud.

Tell House Democrats: Stand with Tammy Baldwin and stand up to Wall Street banks. Not one of the Wall Street crooks who drove our economy off a cliff has gone to jail. And without aggressive investigation and prosecution of misconduct, none of them will.

Yet the Obama administration is pushing for a deal between state attorneys general and the large mortgage firms that essentially revolves around how lightly the banks would get off. There has been no real investigation, and no real push for meaningful penalties or accountability. In many ways, the settlement terms under consideration would amount to another backdoor bailout for the banks.

This is unacceptable. Tell House Democrats: Stand with Tammy Baldwin and stand up to Wall Street banks.

Rep. Baldwin's resolution has three tenets:

(1) The mortgage servicers who engaged in fraudulent behavior should not be granted criminal or civil immunity for potential wrongdoing related to illegal mortgage and foreclosure practices.

(2) The Federal Government and State attorneys general should proceed with full investigations into claims of fraudulent behavior by mortgage servicers.

(3) Any financial settlement reached with mortgage servicers should appropriately compensate for, and accurately reflect, the extent of harm to all victims, including homeowners and State pension beneficiaries, caused by the mortgage servicers' fraudulent behavior.

What's on the table now--and what the Obama administration is pressuring the states to accept--falls far short of these standards. While the Baldwin resolution itself is non-binding, a large number of Democratic co-sponsors will do two things. First it will make it harder to spin a terrible settlement deal as a victory, which itself makes a deal less likely. Second, by establishing criteria for what an acceptable settlement might look like, it helps demonstrate the inadequacy of what's on the table.

We need to put the brakes on the headlong rush by state attorneys general and the Obama administration to settle with the banks. It's incompatible with the health of our democracy to allow wealthy and powerful people off the hook after they have caused massive and widespread suffering.

Tell House Democrats: Stand with Tammy Baldwin and stand up to Wall Street banks.

http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/...059182-1uhuvUx

1. Yay Tammy. She f'kin rocks.
2. I signed.

[Cin]

Originally Posted by atomiczombie

1. Yay Tammy. She f'kin rocks.
2. I signed.

Me too.....

[SoNotHer]

Beautiful and inspiring - thank you for posting this, AZ.

I am so proud of everyone moving this forward. It has given me such hope. :-)

Originally Posted by atomiczombie

It's not on You Tube so I can't embed, but this is a video about the call to action on November 17th. It's so awesome I wanted to share it!

http://vimeo.com/31114509

[SoNotHer]

Occupy Atlanta Encamps In Neighborhood To Save Police Officer’s Home From Foreclosure
By Zaid Jilani on Nov 8, 2011 at 11:30 am

Occupy Atlanta has repeatedly run into hurdles, as it has been evicted from Woodruff Park in Atlanta multiple times by the city’s unsympathetic mayor, Kasim Reed. Yet the group was invigorated yesterday as it moved to a new location to take action for economic justice.

Last week, Tawanna Rorey’s husband, a police officer based in Gwinnett County, e-mailed Occupy Atlanta to explain that his home was going to be foreclosed on and his family was in danger of being evicted on Monday. So within a few hours Occupy Atlanta developed an action plan to move to Snellville, Georgia on Monday to stop the foreclosure. At least two dozen protesters encamped on the family’s lawn, to the applause of neighbors and bystanders.

Nearly two dozen protesters assembled Monday afternoon at Tawanna Rorey’s four-bedroom home in a neighborhood just south of Snellville, clogging the narrow, winding street that runs in front of the house with cars, vans and TV trucks. Many neighbors stopped to gawk at the spectacle and even honked their car horns in support of the crowd. [...] [The protesters] set up two tents in the front yard, draped a “This Home is Occupied” sign over the porch railing and handed out bottled water and granola bars to other members.

A local CBS station filed a report about the new occupation. Watch it:



The Sheriff’s Department did not come to evict the Roreys that day. A spokesman for the department told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that the foreclosure process is still ongoing and that it has not scheduled an eviction. “It’s a good cause,” said Diona Murray, one of the Roreys’ neighbors, about the occupation. “If we don’t take a stand, who will?”

[Cin]

Occupy Wall Street Is Not a Spectator Sport: 5 Ways the 99 Percent Can Contribute to the Movement Right Now
by Les Leopold
How can the rest of the 99 percent demonstrate our outrage? Here are five things we can do, without parking a tent in the street.

Let’s take a look at where we are right now. There is battle royale underway between inhabitants of two entirely different universes over what’s wrong with our nation and what should be fixed.

On the one hand, the entire political establishment, blessed by Wall Street, wants the conversation to be all about debt and “entitlements." We are told 24/7 that we’re living over our heads, that our social safety net is too expensive, and that we need to cut, cut, cut trillions of dollars from public budgets so we don’t become the next Greece.

In that framework the only question is how much to cut and how much we should sacrifice. The so-called liberal position is that the rich should pay a bit more while the rest of us suffer cuts in education, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. (Please note that taxes on Wall Street are not on the table.) The “grand bargain” is all about how much we will have to pay for the economic collapse caused by Wall Street. It's also a loser because the more we cut, the longer unemployment will last, and the more fiscal distress we’ll face as tax revenues stall.

On the other side is the framework that Occupy Wall Street successfully put into play. It argues that Wall Street should pay for the mess it created. It suggests that the issue is employment for the many, not debt repayments for the few. It also gets us to face up to myriad of ways that income inequality is hollowing out our society, destroying the middle-class and increasing poverty. It points the finger at those who crashed our economy and it demands reparations. And it does all this without making any specific demands. It doesn’t have to. It just needs to be the living embodiment of the many versus the few.

That’s the fight. So how can we enlist? Sure, some of us can go down to our local encampment and join the party. But if you’re old like me, or if you have a job and a family, you’re not likely to head out to your local town square and sleep on the concrete. So that raises the critical question: How can the rest of the 99 percent demonstrate our outrage?

Here are five things we can do, without parking a tent somewhere:

1. Get Your Non-Profits into Gear

If you work for a non-profit of any kind (like a labor union, an environmental group, a church organization, etc.) then insist that your organization devote at least 10 percent of its resources to protesting against Wall Street. There are probably 500,000 full-time staff working for unions, community organizations and environmental groups all across the country. Imagine if each week, each of those staffers put in two hours protesting at an Occupy Wall Street site. Combine that with a little organizing to bring out the rank-and-file, and we’re talking about a quantum leap in the size of the anti-Wall Street presence.

Of course, you might get stiff opposition from progressive non-profit leaders. After all, their organizations are set up to press important issues that might not seem to have any direct connection to the Wall Street mess. But it shouldn’t take much to show that the Wall Street crash is a game-changer. It should be clear by now that we can’t make progress on our individual issues unless we join together to reclaim our country from the Wall Street elites.

2. Organize Teach-ins about Wall Street’s Casino Economy

If you are affiliated with any academic institution or high school, this is the perfect time to organize teach-ins that target financial elites. We need large forums where information can be shared about our dismal distribution of income, how Wall Street took down the economy, how money is influencing politics, and how jobs can be created. And be sure to invite the community. Americans are just waking up to how much they’ve been ripped off. The educational task is just beginning and teach-ins can push it along in a hurry.

3. Terminate Your Bank Accounts in Public

If you’re going to withdraw your accounts from the major banks, then do it with gusto. At the very least we should try to use our new social media to pick a common time and location to close out our accounts together. We could even have a card-burning event in plain view. (Unlike burning your draft card in the old days, it’s perfectly legal to burn your credit card…outdoors, that is.)

4. Start a “99 Percent Club”

Americans lead the world in setting up new civic organizations. How about launching “99 Percent clubs” in your neighborhood and town? For starters, your club could brainstorm public actions to demonstrate anger at Wall Street. A silent vigil every Friday afternoon at one of the local banks would be a good start. (“Honk if you feel ripped off by Wall Street!")

Each group could develop imaginative actions that could grow in size, and that could gain the attention of the local media. Our social media could easily spread the best actions to other groups. And once you do get the ball rolling, build up your events by talking with your neighbors. I don’t think many doors will slam in your face. Instead, you’ll probably find a lot of angry people looking for ways to contribute.

5. Convince Yourself That You Can Make a Difference

Perhaps the most important act of defiance starts in our heads. We need to believe that real change is possible and that each of us can contribute. We’ve got to get over the idea that someone else – a political knight in shining armor -- is going to do it for us. We have to face up to the fact that very few politicians have the guts to challenge Wall Street. So it’s on us. This doesn’t mean that each of us has to be a superhero and lock ourselves to the gates of Goldman Sachs or JPMorgan Chase. But each of us needs to do something concrete. At the very least we need to show up from time to time at our local Occupy Wall Street site.

Why would that matter? Because the currency of a populist movement is feet on the street. We need to publicly display our support in any way we can. As long as there is something called free will, each of us has the opportunity to go somewhere and publicly show that we are part of the irate 99 percent. We need to publicly display our anger at rule by a faction of the 1 percent.

Add to this list: Those of us trying to build up a new populist movement don’t have the answers. Our most useful role is to provide information, make the frameworks clear and push the discussion. The really good ideas seem like they magically appear. In fact, they are produced by the clash and exchange of ideas involving tens of thousands of people. We all need to dream them up, share them and bat them around until something clicks.

All we know for sure is that something is clicking right now. We have America’s attention….for now. And if we want this moment to last and develop, then each of us needs to add to this list. What can we do to show our support for the 99 percent? What can we do to protest against rule by financial elites? How do we build up this fledgling movement?

It’s your turn. Let ‘er rip!

[Gráinne]

I have a few questions about OWS's mission, and I mean no snark, but it's been bothering me:

1. Let's say I become wealthy purely on hard work and a good idea or three (I'm not, but hypothetically). Does this make me one of the "few"? And if OWS is for income redistribution, exactly how much would I have to distribute, and why? If I manage to get rich, no one should be allowed to tell me differently or what I can do with my earnings. (I'm not talking about charity-which many billionaires create and/or support).

2. Along that idea, would there be a maximum salary any one person could earn? And if so, who would enforce this, since OWS seems not to have any one leader?

3. Most of us wouldn't be here if some of the "few" in England hadn't decided to start a colony, the purpose of which was to make a profit. I think that's a fairly common human motivation-making a profit. How does this jibe with OWS's theories of equality?

4. I saw some of the most appalling poverty in communist China-supposedly a society set up with far more equality than our own. Yet there, and in Russia, there were always a "few" and a whole lot of "many". Is the kind of society OWS envisions even possible, if income equality and redistribution taken to its extreme doesn't work?

5. Why isn't OWS really protesting in Washington, at the government that passed the regulations that ultimately created this situation?

I am not starting a fight, but I thought of these questions-and more-this weekend. And before I support any movement, I want to know what it is I'm supporting behind the slogans.

[persiphone]

1. define wealth. also, no one gets rich here "on their own". this concept always annoys me. goods are moved on roads tax payers pay for and labor isn't an invisible force that gets no credit for aiding in making someone else wealthy. it is unethical to make piles of cash using a system we all pay for and then use that money to buy lawmakers to make the not rich people's lives more difficult in effort to make more money. there are many very very wealthy folks who agree with this, btw, and support paying more taxes because they know they can more than afford it.

2. a maximum salary for whom? let's assume you're talking about the not rich. there seems to be earning caps dictated by big business and the loss of manufacturing due to American businesses going overseas. is there a magic number across all professions? no, cuz that would be silly. enforcement of salaries (for those that actually get a salary) can be enforced with unions but they are falling by the wayside as well in the name of fiscal conservatism. and i'm uncertain how OWS not having a leader (they employ a more solvent democracy to make decisions) has anything to do with enforcement of maximum salaries? whatever that even means. i don't get the connection there, but ok.

3. profiting is not the issue. thieving is.

4. i think trying to attach the broken systems that exist in China to assumed theories about OWS is a real stretch and for that to be possible one would have to assume that the American people are really stupid and evil. and of course, they aren't. also, we have appalling poverty right here in this country and i don't think it's shameful that our citizens try to curb that just because there is poverty elsewhere. it should be noted that poverty stricken countries are also rebelling. think Arab Spring.

5. because Washington is owned by the financial sector of this country. i dunno how many times this needs repeating and/or supporting articles/statistics/law referrences.

[Cin]

Originally Posted by guihong

I have a few questions about OWS's mission, and I mean no snark, but it's been bothering me:

1. Let's say I become wealthy purely on hard work and a good idea or three (I'm not, but hypothetically). Does this make me one of the "few"? And if OWS is for income redistribution, exactly how much would I have to distribute, and why? If I manage to get rich, no one should be allowed to tell me differently or what I can do with my earnings. (I'm not talking about charity-which many billionaires create and/or support).

I think I will use a quote from Elizabeth Warren to address this one:

Warren rebuts the GOP-touted notion that raising taxes on the wealthy amounts to "class warfare," contending that "there is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody."

Warren rejects the concept that it is possible for Americans to become wealthy in isolation.

"You built a factory out there? Good for you," she says. "But I want to be clear: you moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did."

2. Along that idea, would there be a maximum salary any one person could earn? And if so, who would enforce this, since OWS seems not to have any one leader?

More important than anything legislative is consciousness. Politics can only change after consciousness changes. The single most important thing that the Occupy Movement can do is shine a light on how Washington is controlled by Wall Street.

3. Most of us wouldn't be here if some of the "few" in England hadn't decided to start a colony, the purpose of which was to make a profit. I think that's a fairly common human motivation-making a profit. How does this jibe with OWS's theories of equality?

Well there's making a profit and there's what we have going on right now. Warren Buffett's secretary pays more taxes than he does. Many corporations pay no taxes at all. They are getting tax breaks to move jobs out of the U.S. where they can pollute at will and higher cheaper labor.

4. I saw some of the most appalling poverty in communist China-supposedly a society set up with far more equality than our own. Yet there, and in Russia, there were always a "few" and a whole lot of "many". Is the kind of society OWS envisions even possible, if income equality and redistribution taken to its extreme doesn't work?

I don't think anyone wants to address our financial disaster by creating more poverty.

5. Why isn't OWS really protesting in Washington, at the government that passed the regulations that ultimately created this situation?

First place Wall Street or should I say Those who have the money or should I say the 1% control Washington. Washington is a puppet government run by and for the rich. What possible use would it be to protest to them. The gesture of protesting where the power is actually located is symbolic. It is to get people to understand who is pulling the strings and controlling our government. Second place regulation did not create this situation deregulation did. There is plenty of information on this thread, some I posted myself, that explains this.

[Cin]

I think coming into a thread that is 45 pages long and asking questions that have been addressed at length might be a clue to one of the problems we are all facing as a nation and as a planet. Regardless of all the information that is available, regardless of what is actually happening right in front of us, many of us are not able to see it.

[AtLast]

I keep thinking back to things like the SI Hayakawa and Ronald Reagan days in CA along with one of my favorite profs, Angela Davis (I hope she talked to OWS folks about what went wrong as well as what was positive "back in the day"). My biggest fear is that what is going on in some of the OWS camps will lead to the use of the National Guard to break up camps. This was a horrible time in the history of social activism in US history. I remember Kent State, too.

Things got twisted and violent even though that period brought about important change. I don't want this to happen again. I am having problems with continued support of OWS after things like rape, the drug overdose and death of a 20 year old as well as people just slashing cops in SF with exacto knives while they were simply standing by (doing their job) as OWS folks marched the other day. One was slashed on the face. Artisans that sell their wares at street fairs in SF were ripped-off and harassed by the negative groups in the SF camps over the weekend. These people make a living at these events and also pay to participate in these events. This is the time of the year in which they do a lot of business.

I want the core of this movement that is working on coalitions and ways to effect change for all of us to make a clear separation of themselves. The kinds of efforts to help the cop stay in a home is one way to do this. So is working with legislators on putting together real banking reforms is also great and these ideas are being presented by the 99%. Having some spokespeople out there making it clear that the core is non-violent and disagrees with the anarchist activities is a good idea. And I have had it with the punching-out of the media- they are doing their jobs, too (even those for Faux affiliates).

I hope the latest efforts of those that really are the OWS movement take over media reports so that what is really important about this movement is what the general public hears because this is what they can support that can effect positive change.

Social democratic values are based upon respect for all and working together to promote good for all- even if we disagree. I feel an obligation to support things like school or other municipal bonds that help stop lay-offs even if higher property taxes are crunching me during these financial times. And I will always vote for social programs because I think we all need to take responsibility for disadvantaged groups.

It has been interesting to be teaching community college students here this term. The bulk of my students are of color and young parents. Some are older and are trying to re-train due to being laid off. There are veterans too that have not been able to find employment. Obviously, fee hikes in education are on their minds and some are getting assistance from social programs- thankfully- they wouldn’t be able to attend classes if they couldn’t do this. Some have gone out to marches, but most need to take care of their children and also have some “under the table” type part-time jobs. Just about every one of them state that the camps should be broken up. Seven of my students that are parents of young kids and live in Richmond don’t want the only place they can take their kids too and play outside to be taken over by campers. They live in small apartments without safe play areas for their kids and use city park playgrounds several times per week. They have grandparents of little means that play checkers there, too. Our whether has been pretty good lately, so people can still be outside and enjoy themselves.

I know, I’m a broken record, but the fact is, I don’t think the general public gets how important public use areas are to low income people and senior citizens. I really don’t. Plus, I deal with this student group that is nothing like young, white, middle and upper middle-class university students. But I was an activist during the Vietnam War years. I get the importance of social discourse and protest, yet, we also made mistakes back then in taking over public space for prolonged periods and didn’t think about how this effects others. And I get really tired of other people thinking they have a right to take over public space for their agendas without going by the rules that are set up do that all of us so that we all can use these spaces. I really am a social democrat and don’t believe any of us have a right to interfere with public land use by all to the degree these camps are. And I really don’t want to see force being used against people. But, city officials have asked and asked for people to stop camping and offered alternatives for those that are homeless. Day protests without camping is effective, especially if it continues on and is peaceful and respectful. In fact, this would go much further in effecting change.


Right now, this AM- Oakland- so far (6:33 AM) no violence.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/news/ci_19331753

[Gráinne]

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

I think coming into a thread that is 45 pages long and asking questions that have been addressed at length might be a clue to one of the problems we are all facing as a nation and as a planet. Regardless of all the information that is available, regardless of what is actually happening right in front of us, many of us are not able to see it.

I think it reflects a problem with the OWS movement, that there are a whole bunch of disparate groups with competing issues, and no one is able to make a concise list of say, the top 5 demands, that satisfies everyone and even more importantly, a firm plan besides occupying parks and "raising consciousness", for accomplishing these goals.

As you said, this thread is 45 pages long with lots of quotes, articles and vague ideas, but I haven't seen any list and how disrupting others' use of public property helps the cause.

[persiphone]

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?...BstoryMediaBox


Congress: Trading stock on inside information?
November 13, 2011 4:02 PM

Steve Kroft reports that members of Congress can legally trade stock based on non-public information from Capitol Hill.



Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?...#ixzz1dgzDM1gh

[persiphone]

Originally Posted by guihong

I think it reflects a problem with the OWS movement, that there are a whole bunch of disparate groups with competing issues, and no one is able to make a concise list of say, the top 5 demands, that satisfies everyone and even more importantly, a firm plan besides occupying parks and "raising consciousness", for accomplishing these goals.

As you said, this thread is 45 pages long with lots of quotes, articles and vague ideas, but I haven't seen any list and how disrupting others' use of public property helps the cause.

huh?

actually, you're right. there are so many different ways that corruption has run rampant in this country that's it's SUPER hard to narrow it down to just ONE.

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by guihong

I think it reflects a problem with the OWS movement, that there are a whole bunch of disparate groups with competing issues, and no one is able to make a concise list of say, the top 5 demands, that satisfies everyone and even more importantly, a firm plan besides occupying parks and "raising consciousness", for accomplishing these goals.

As you said, this thread is 45 pages long with lots of quotes, articles and vague ideas, but I haven't seen any list and how disrupting others' use of public property helps the cause.

If my memory serves me, the chief complaint at the start of the movement was that not one CEO, CFO or multi-millionaire at the top of Wall Street firms and the US banking system has been charged and prosecuted for wrong doing since the major collapses in 2008. This is something that has bothered me since that time along with those that "packaged" bogus securities which were sold internationally at the tune of mega-millions and even billions.

This and the fact that the regulations put in place to ward off future corruption like this really have no bite. And some of these very same practices are continuing right now!

Unless these "big wigs" are held criminally accountable- it will not stop. This would be at the top of my list of 5!

[ruffryder]

I went to Orlando pride yesterday. I've been to a few pride gatherings but not a parade. So, during the parade and looking at the booths I see support for our LGBT community and I see this from a few huge banks and politicians. . . I mean they are always trying to gain support from the community but it seemed so prevalent and I wondered if it had anything to do with the occupying going on and trying to keep people, "our community's" business and interest.

... and I just had to think about how some of these huge businesses have really supported the LGBT community and offer domestic and partner insurance and health care.

I know I will get some of you saying they also want to take our money and steal from us, etc., etc., I wasn't coming on to debate this. It was just something I took note of at a Pride event.

[SoNotHer]

By even calling it "Obamacare," health care opportunities for millions have been mislabeled, misunderstood and misrepresented. I'm not given health benefits at my job. Do you know someone else who is living without health care or who is paying out of pocket?


Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Obama's Health Care Law

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/2490...titutional.htm

The U.S. Supreme Court Monday announced that the justices will hear arguments on the constitutionality of President Barack Obama's health care reform law, the centerpiece of his agenda.

The justices decided to take on four legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act. They will hear five and a half hours of oral arguments. The biggest issue for the nine justices will be the constitutionality of the law's mandate that most Americans carry health insurance.

Other legal issues on "Obamacare" that will get attention from the justices include whether the entire law can stand if the mandate is struck down, the law's Medicaid extension is constitutional and if an obscure tax law blocks any legal challenge to the law.

The Obama administration and the group of states will get two hours to argue the constitutionality of the individual mandate. Another hour will be allotted for arguments on whether legal challenges to the Affordable Care Act can be heard.

The obscure tax law, called the Anti-Injunction Act, essentially prohibits federal courts from hearing cases challenging a tax before it is paid. This applies to health care reform because people who refuse to get health insurance will get hit with a tax penalty. This could give the justices a way to avoid a decision on the constitutionality of the individual mandate.

Meanwhile, two "Obamacare" challenges -- a case from 27 state attorneys general and a small business group -- were consolidated. The justices granted the parties 90 minutes to argue whether all of the Affordable Care Act must fall if the individual mandate is severed.

The final issue for the justices will be an expansion of Medicaid. Under the Affordable Care Act, the eligibility requirements for Medicaid are expanded. States must cover these new Medicaid enrollees. Though the federal government will cover the cost of the expansion, states will start kicking in 5 percent of the costs in 2017 and 10 percent in 2020. The justices will decide if Congress exceeded its authority in passing that provision into law.

So far, lower appellate courts have split on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act. A decision from the high court is expected this summer in the thick of the 2012 presidential election season.

[ruffryder]

Looks like Denver's occupy movement is getting shut down.

http://thedenverchannel.com

DENVER -- Denver police have ordered Occupy Denver protestors to remove belongings from Civic Center parks where demonstrators have been camping off-and-on for the past month.
Early Friday, police officers handed out written notices warning protestors, "It is illegal to place … any article, vehicle or thing whatsoever" on the public right of way, including “any street, alley, sidewalk, parkway or other public way or place.”
"PLEASE REMOVE ALL PERSONAL ITEMS FROM THIS AREA," the notice stated, adding that those who fail to remove belongings could face up to one year in jail and a $999 fine.

"If personal items are not removed immediately, you may be subject to an order of removal at which time all items will be subject to removal by the Denver Police Department," the police notice said.
The Denver Post reported that about 25 people removed their property and some left the park area.
"I was given one of these (notices). When I asked about it, a cop told me 'You can’t have all these couches, chairs and tables blocking the sidewalk,'" an activist posted on the Occupy Denver website.
Another person posted: "So, is this a way of getting people off the sidewalk as well as out of the park? (Denver Mayor Michael) Hancock is showing his true colors as an enemy of our First Amendment rights. Recall, anyone?"
Clashes between protestors and police over illegal overnight camping in Lincoln Park, where officers have repeatedly removed tents, tables and other gear, have triggered arrests and protests since early October.

This article here http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news...48/detail.html details officers getting injured and more people getting arrested as the occupy protest become violent in Denver. It seems they are not supposed to have personal belongings blocking and taking up space on public sidewalks.

[Toughy]

It is not too much regulation that bankrupted Wall Street.........it is too LITTLE regulation on how paper is bundled and passed back and forth between financial institutions.

Most of the 1% want to pay their fair share in taxes. Warren Buffett made that clear and there is information out there about that. Warren Buffett (and all of those in the 1% plus the multi-national corporations) should not be paying a smaller percentage in taxes than I pay. Not fair, not right, not just, not ethical.

This is a MOVEMENT, not a single issue cause. It's messy. Movements rarely can be consicely put to paper. The goal is economic justice for all. If it makes someone happy, then the demand is economic justice.

The fact that homeless and mentally ill people are flocking to the Occupy encampments speaks volumes to economic injustice. The politicians and police are using violence occurring because of this as a reason to shut down the encampments. It's 'not safe' for you to be camped out on public property. Violence and death is occurring within and around the camps. Safety is paramount....safety safety safety.

[Toughy]

They did shut down Occupy Oakland this morning about 5:00am. From what I can tell it was peaceful and about 33 folks where arrested. They will not be allowed to return.

edited to add: at the press conference Mayor Quan suggested OO find private property like Occupy NY......interesting thought from her.