Occupy Wall Street PROTESTERS Not Letting Up - Nationwide

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maxamillion

Last night police descended on one of the Occupy Boston camps. I saw some rather disturbing footage on Youtube where the cops were assaulting war veterans that were there with the protest. Cops throwing the American flag on the ground and trampling it. Seems fitting symbolism.

---

This seems a bit overblown to me. It's fairly apparent that the Occupy Boston group was trying to provoke the police into arresting them. They were warned for several hours that they would need to leave the area they had moved to and when the police finally came to move them back to their permitted area a veterans group, complete with American flags, stepped between the police and the squatters to prevent their being escorted away.

There may be times when civil disobedience is called for, I don't think this was one of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore

The problem making this argument is most of Obamas policies are Bush 2.0. The exception: the healthcare plan. Really what else? Taxes? The Bush tax cuts were kept AND more tax cuts were passed (payroll tax cuts)! Obamas so called "jobs bill" is half tax cuts (and a trade bill is snuck into it as well). That more taxes should be expected given the kind of deficits we are running well yes, eventually, there is that.

Regulations? What specifically? Clean air regulations were stopped. The Obama administration failed to do the kind of adequate regulation that would have prevented the gulf oil spill (this is documented). And we're going to have a pipeline running over the major aquefier for the middle of the country. That can not end well. Financial regulation? Well there was the bank regulatory bill which may have caused some chaos for sure (I saw it first hand and was working for a company that was almost put out of business by it - ironically the company I was working for was NOT a big bank and not in ANY WAY part of that which contributed to the financial crisis!), but AT THE SAME time this same regulation almost certainly fails to regulate the big banks enough, so that the exact same banking crisis can and probably will happen again. Glass Stegal is certainly nowhere to be seen.

---

Seriously, my husband and I marvel at this almost weekly now as Obama is demonized more and more and more by far right. We sit there and say -- 'hey, he's co-opted a vast majority of YOUR ideas!'
There is plenty of meat on the bone for Repub leaders sit at negotiating table and gnaw on. Yet, here they go again - walking away, throwing their hands up in disgust.
If there are any spoiled brats that Catwoman alluded to a few pages back in this whole scene - I would say it's the Repub leadership.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mtnlaurel

Seriously, my husband and I marvel at this almost weekly now as Obama is demonized more and more and more by far right. We sit there and say -- 'hey, he's co-opted a vast majority of YOUR ideas!'
There is plenty of meat on the bone for Repub leaders sit at negotiating table and gnaw on. Yet, here they go again - walking away, throwing their hands up in disgust.
If there are any spoiled brats that Catwoman alluded to a few pages back in this whole scene - I would say it's the Repub leadership.

---

If the strategy is trying to redefine what the "far left" is, and thereby shift the center to the right, I think they are being effective.

I would put Obama right of center (based on his actions, I'd put him to the right of Reagan)- but he's characterized over and over that he is too far left for any sensible person to ever agree with. And I think it sticks with a lot of people. Which effectively discards anything that may truly be leftist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by creaker

If the strategy is trying to redefine what the "far left" is, and thereby shift the center to the right, I think they are being effective.

I would put Obama right of center (based on his actions, I'd put him to the right of Reagan)- but he's characterized over and over that he is too far left for any sensible person to ever agree with. And I think it sticks with a lot of people. Which effectively discards anything that may truly be leftist.

---

Here's where I get very angered though - representatives are elected to GOVERN not just 'strategize'.
Of course, strategy is involved in keeping your party in power --- but at the expense of the future of the United States and the American people? -- when they could be putting their energies toward solving problems TODAY.
I really don't see how they can sleep at night taking that big of a gamble with the future of our country.

Re: Occupy Boston 100 protestor arrested last night.

First, it should be noted that OccupyBoston, due to size, had two camps. Both camps are in public parks -- as are all the occupy movements -- where public citizens have a right to be and a right to assemble.

Second, it is true that the city via the police told assembled protestors to disperse and return to the single camp (Dewey). But, they had no authority to do this, other than the city demanding it. The park is an open, public park where people may occupy and protest, just as they are in the other public park.

Thus, OccupyBoston made the decision to maintain the occupation as an act of civil disobedience against this demand, which has no legal force other than asking them to leave.

To support this occupation, Veterans for Peace came and encircled the camp, and all of the protestors remained nonviolent.

Police showed up in riot gear, with white batons (the long thin ones), at 2 am, gave the encampment a 5 minute warning, and then arrested anyone in the park. They also arrested several legal observers (which is illegal), as well as paramedics and others there to help with injuries.

Here's an article via occupywallst.org. OccupyBoston has a page of video and images here.

This act of civil disobedience is wholly justified. If the government just says tomorrow "all occupiers go home?" what -- everyone is supposed to just go home? The point of this assembly is to exercise democratic rights to assembly and speech. If the government illegaly and forceably removes people for not just going home when they say so -- for doing what is our right to do?

then what?

Here's a video showing the police giving the five minute warning and how the people are continuing to stand. It shows the first arrests of the Veterans for Peace.

the police claim it is "unlawful assembly" even though it is public land, managed by the Rose Kennedy Greenway. The protestors had been given the OK from RKG to utilize the park, so long as there was no destruction to art or flowers.

Just because they call it something, doesn't meant it IS something.

So, yes, this was an act of civil disobedience. Also, the boston globe reports here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by creaker

If the strategy is trying to redefine what the "far left" is, and thereby shift the center to the right, I think they are being effective.

---

If we define the center as a median point (half falling on either side) then I would probably agree that the center has shifted right in the past several years. I think its always been a pendulum swinging one way then back the other over the course of a generation or so. OTOH, the far extremes of either side seem to be even farther out and farther from the proverbial center than they were many years ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zoebird

If the government illegaly and forceably removes people

---

Civil disobedience doesn't make you exempt from arrest, does it? Why were the arrests illegal?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gregg

If we define the center as a median point (half falling on either side) then I would probably agree that the center has shifted right in the past several years. I think its always been a pendulum swinging one way then back the other over the course of a generation or so. OTOH, the far extremes of either side seem to be even farther out and farther from the proverbial center than they were many years ago.

---

I agree the claims of further extremes are more active (although I think it's directed mostly at the left) - but in actual practice?

If Obama is the most extreme example of "socialist" they can come up with, we have shifted very far to the right indeed.

Civil disobedience doesn't make you exempt from arrest; usually it puts you right in the way of the arrest.

I suppose when I spoke, I was really speaking to the charge -- unlawful assembly -- for which there wasn't evidence.

The city simply demanded that they vacate the park, and gave them notice, BUT as the protestors has two rights to be there (1. it was a public space with no direct laws governing when it can be occupied, which usually have to be posted; and 2. permission from the management of the park so long as they didn't harm flowers, artworks, and related elements managed by the Rose Kennedy Greenway Trust), it wasn't an unlawful assembly.

It was civil disobedience that they didn't disperse, and it might also be noted that the individual protestors are deciding HOW they want to be arrested -- by either going forward and being arrested peacefully, or going limp or "resisting arrest." There's actually a really good wiki article on this topic.

Now, from here, it's a question of the charges. In this case, the 129 people were arrested for unlawful assembly, which is a pretty hefty charge, but most have been moved down to small misdemeanors with smaller fines. I think that only 9 or 10 people remain in custody at this time, just simply waiting to go through their court. The local DA mostly cut a massive deal for everyone, since that makes it go quickly.

----

Also, OccupySeattle has just been going through a form of "wearing down" or "annoyance" from the police. First, they were told no tents, and then no temporary or pop up structures, and then no umbrellas. They are allowed tarps over their sleeping bags/bodies.

Last night, several police cars parked near protestors with lights on (headlights and flashing) and every 10-15 minutes or so asked them to disperse, saying that it was trespass to camp there overnight. Likewise, in this park, there are no posted rules about when the park is open, and they have been there for two weeks now.

Since the protestors realized that this was simply a method to get them to avoid sleep, it was agreed that some would sleep, while the others blocked the lights from the police cars and sang a happy song. It is said that they will switch shifts after several hours of sleep.

Reports on the ground say that the police seem bored with having to do it, and the mayor is officially stating that he is sympathetic with the protestors. This means that the police were somehow acting independently of the mayor, but the whole situation is convoluted there, and I can't figure out what is rumor and what is fact from what is being reported (from inside and out).

---

Most of the Occupy movements across the world (many starting this weekend, such as OccupyWellington) are able to peacefully maintain themselves.

---

Occupy Wall St is doing a march today, so it's going to be interesting to see what comes of that -- because i'm sure they don't have permits for these marches. As it has the potential to cause a real problem for the city, I would expect arrests to be made in this one as well.

Again, as an act of civil disobedience, though it will probably get tossed as a misdemeanor charge.

---

there are rumors that occupyDallas and StLouis also had some stuff happen overnight, but no word yet on whether or what.