Occupy Broadwayworld- Page 13

[tazber]

Posted: 11/17/11 at 7:03am

I just want to point out that any OWS people who have broken the law (whether through violence, property destruction, or what have you) have been arrested.

So they are most certainly being held accountable.

And anyway, the few that have been unruly are but a drop in the bucket of the movement as a whole. But of course those few get all the press......

Updated On: 11/17/11 at 07:03 AM

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 11/17/11 at 9:23am

Winston, you only cannot yell "Fire" in a crowded theater when in fact there is no fire.

The quote only applies to created a false sense of panic or risk - not actually warning of a real and present threat.

So, your point is pretty nonsensical in terms of a First Amendment argument and political speech.

When you talk about accountability - where is your demand that our elected officials, police, and corporations be held accountable for the actions and conduct? Why do you hold the OWS collectively accountable for the acts of all and not to the same for others? Why is it OK for the police to direct the mentally ill, known criminals and drug users to OWS locations, and then act surprised that there is crime and drug use at such locations? Why is it OK for the police to use excessive force and mace and beat peaceful protesters? Clearly, the entire police force must be responsible if you hold the OWS to that standard.

And Namo, damn, you write beautifully. That you for taking the time to respond.

[siny]

Posted: 11/17/11 at 9:28am

I think it's only common sense that when you have a mass of people living in a space with no toilet or shower facilities, it's going to become a health hazard. The NY Times said that they were using garbage bags and water jugs in lieu of toilets and then putting them in with the regular trash. That's definitely a public health hazard and pity the poor sanitation workers.

I was/am a very enthusiastic supporter of the OWS movement but I am also very happy that their encampements are being dismantled. They've turned into a nuisance and a bad reflection on the entire movement, especially with all the vagrants and criminals moving in. This is not the way to win a popular support, that's for sure.

Rather than wasting their energy and their supporters' money trying to establish urban campgrounds, they should be trying to influence the electoral process. Maybe field their own candidates, maybe support the ones who are running. Register voters, lobby Congress, etc., etc. But don't waste your resources setting up tents and porta-a-potties. What does that accomplish ?

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 11/17/11 at 9:52am

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances".

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/17/11 at 6:27pm

I'm hoping Winston sees my long post, I really am interested in his reactions.

Today, NYC is swarming with thousands upon thousands of people taking part in direct action. For so many years, many people have asked, what is it going to take for Americans to get so pissed off that they take to the streets? It's happening. And it's happening because of a movement that began coalescing two months ago.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 11/17/11 at 7:58pm

I do think that the Occupy movement does need to pivot a bit.

I think occupying a park or city hall is symbolic, but now that there is a discussion about income inequality actually taking place, and some of the issues raised by the OWS movement are getting air time, the message needs to expand its focus and move into more direct action.

The hardest part is usually getting infrastructure in place - with social media, and the work done these past two months, they now have the means (and money) to organize, plan and communicate not just locally, but nationally.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/17/11 at 8:30pm

If they keep building on events like today's day of direct action (and I have no reason to think they won't), I think the movement will keep on expanding.

[winston89]

Posted: 11/18/11 at 1:09am

Youwantitwhen,

With regards to holding people accountable for their actions, you forgot the fact that I never said in my original post that the people that occupy wall street are fighting against are in the right either. I just don't like the fact that, because the businessmen are wrong that the protesters feel that that justifies them to do things that are wrong as well. So no, I don't have to hold both sides accountable when both sides are in the wrong

Furthermore, there weren't any stories from any legit news sources that said that cops brought people into the park for the sake of being able to have the ability to arrest people. That is just crazy conspiracy talk. The only stories of arrests that I have read (and make more sense to me ) are that the cops told the protestors that if they did X,Y and Z then they will arrest them. And, because the protesters are young and idealistic they do that which the cops explicitly tell them not to do because they feel that it brings more to their cause if they do get arrested like a martyr.
Namo,

I have been down to the area of the protests. I say area because it's kind of hard to get near the park because the police have a good portion of it blocked off. I have heard the noise and smelled the god awful smells. As much as that area of Manhattan is used for business and work, it is also a part of the city where people live as well. I understand that you were talking about how music is a thing that brings people together? The thing is is that if you are living in the area, or going to work, or just walking by and not associated with the protests in any form don't you have the ability to walk down the street or be in the area without their music bothering you?

And, with regards to the noise cannons and the big lights that were used the other night when they cleaned out the park, well, I can't say that I feel too sorry for them there. The people in the park were told by the city that they need to clean up the mess that is going on in there. The city went so far as to even say to them "look, the place is a dump, if you guys leave for a little bit so we can clean it up we are willing to let you back in." And, that was the city saying that in desperation to get the place cleaned up. However, the protesters didn't do any of that so the police had to take it over by force. Do I think that the whole doing it at 2 in the morning thing was the best idea in the world? No, I don't, but at the same time the protesters would have been just as angry if it happened at 2 in the afternoon. It is the simple fact that it happened at all that bothered them.

Also, going back to the area that they are in being a place where people work and live. There was a news story on one of the local news channels here in New York City. The story spoke about how there were small business owners who had to close up shop because of the the folks in the park. That potential customers didn't want to be in one person's coffee shop for example because there were road blocks up because of the protesters in the park. And, those who could get through simply didn't want to because it meant being near the park and near the protesters. When they asked the protesters if they felt responsible that there were a few small businesses that had to close as a result of them being there, they said that they empathize with the owners but don't feel sorry or responsible. Taking accountability that those things happened because you (figurative) were sitting in the park is something that needs to happen. Yes, these people may have been victimized by big business and the fact that the economy is in the toilet. However, just because that is the case you can't use that as a way to get away with doing things. It would be like someone who is black playing the race card and using the whole "white man is keeping me down "defense to get away with whatever they want to do.

And, I have moved beyond the fact that until now I was always under the impression (as were most people) that when people join together in a protest, there generally is a common goal that people want to have happen as an end result. And, that isn't happening with this group. But, I do find it funny that Occupy Wall Street has taken up residence in the atrium of the Deutsche Bank building. For a group that claims to be unified, they sure don't come off that way. For example, There was a story in the NY Times that spoke about how officials from the city were meeting with members of OWS to see what it was that they wanted. The three or four members of the group were offended that the city would think that there was only a couple of people or one person in charge of the movement. And yet, there are only a select few who are able to use the facilities in the office building and who make the decisions for the rest of the people there. And, there is a social gap between people living in the park as well. So, this whole thing is very much divided.

I guess I fall into a category called the 98 per cent. A phrase used by The Daily Show's John Oliver when talking about people who do agree with the protesters cause, but not with the protesters themselves.


John Oliver and the 98 per cent

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 11/18/11 at 2:04am

I will make sure that when I exercise my constitutional rights, including yelling fire when in fact there is one, that I check with you first to make sure it does not offend your sensibilities and belief system.

The business interruption was not caused by the protesters, but the NYPD's overreaction to the protests. I have actually linked to an article by a former NY Sun Editor about the NYPD's shenanigans. The police is not infallible, and when it oversteps it should be held to account. The whole "following orders" meme is a little bit dated, no?

For the record, and to be clear I generally support cops, think they have a terribly difficult job, and for the most part are good people who are trying to do right by their communities. There are some bad cops and bad police departments, but I don't think the rank and file police are generally the problem. I think the supervisors and management are more of an issue and have over-reacted in ways that ended up helping the OWS effort.

What exactly do you think they are trying to "get away with"? Your whole premise buys into a notion that emanates straight out of Fox News.

Fom my perspective, you have missed the point entirely - I am sorry that people are not protesting in the manner and method that fits your narrative and your comfort zone - but what I have seen has been a broad demographic of protesters. For example, I believe that the average age of arrests today in Portland was 50. When I was at the Occupy LA site, the ages varied from senior citizens to early 20's.

Who ever said that the OWS movement spoke with a singular voice or was unified? It doesn't. That is part of its attraction and part of the frustration it creates. There are common themes, but it is not a top-down structure where talking points are generated and followed, while corporate donors provide air conditioned buses and pre-made signs. It is an organic, inelegant expression of mass discontent with the way our current economic and political system operates. It is evolving. I personally think that the physically "occupy" portion maybe has run its course now that the discussion has started.

But, the fact remains that we have the constitutional right to peaceably assembly and exercise free speech. When those rights are challenged, I am going to side with the protesters (even those I fundamentally disagree with).



Updated On: 11/18/11 at 02:04 AM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/18/11 at 2:42am

Thanks for taking the time to respond, Winston.

I do think that you are falling back on big generalizations. The protesters are not all "young and idealistic" (as if being either of those things somehow diminishes their commitment in the first place) and they don't risk arrest to be martyrs. They risk arrest because they are engaged in civil disobedience. Getting arrested is what civil disobedience is about.

"For a group that claims to be unified, they sure don't come off that way." I think what they claim to be is outraged, and I do think they come off that way. They also know that such a diverse group of people has different ideas that bring them to the group and different ideas of what should happen next. In fact, it's this lack of "unification" that both puzzles and angers establishment people who want leaders and bullet points AND contributes to the movement gaining momentum. It is, as they say, a very big tent, and a fairly wide-ranging bunch of people.

"When they asked the protesters if they felt responsible that there were a few small businesses that had to close as a result of them being there, they said that ..."

I think it would probably be more accurate to say "when they asked SOME protesters... some of them said..." because this is a huge group of people and it's agreed upon that when participants give quotes they are speaking only for themselves, not in any official movement capacity. Many people who do speak on camera preface what they say with such a disclaimer.

You talk about how there has to be "accountability" about the disruption caused by protest, which by definition is disruptive. That's the point. What you didn't really deal with in your response to my long post was my question about your understanding of the First Amendment. As Naomi Klein has pointed out, there is an absolute guarantee of freedom of speech and assembly in the Constitution, even though you say it's not a "blanket," but that's exactly what it is. Klein also points out that the Constitution does NOT guarantee freedom from disruption or disturbance in citizens' lives when others are protesting. It was kind of the point of the amendment, to charge US citizens with raising a ruckus when the country goes off track.

I wasn't asking you to feel sorry about the fact that the police brought bright lights and noise cannons at 2 in the morning, I was pointing out and hoping you agreed that it was at the very least deliciously ironic that they would do things that are so disturbing to the neighborhood at such a terrible time of day because they feel the protesters are too noisy and disruptive.

Also, it was obvious from the beginning that the Bloomberg administration was throwing anything at the wall, (cleanliness, rowdiness, drumming) to influence public opinion and have an excuse to clear out the park and shut down the occupation. I mean, even on the face of it you can see that was the goal. All the things they seemed to care about stopping were just a bunch of lines, distractions to get people riled up. I mean who can forget Mr Roxy claiming occupiers were washing dishes in a bin under a tree a pigeon was sitting in!! Gasp!! Close ALL outdoor cafes in Manhattan!! (Also, it's true that pigeons never sit in trees, but by golly that's what Roxy "heard" and so it was truth to him and he just had to pass it on.)

Let's also not forget that the Bloomberg administration ignored the court order allowing Occupiers back in the park the other morning, the order was read to the police who would not respond (in direct violation of the court order) until a different judge was found to overturn that order. So, let's talk degrees of acting as if the law doesn't apply and see who comes out with the most egregious violations. Another example, people can NOT be allowed to camp in a park vs. all media is banned from the premises when the police go in in riot gear to STOP THE CAMPING!! Doesn't that bother you at least a little, banning and in some cases arresting the press? If nothing else, Occupy models transparency, which really seems to frighten the administration. Hell, the NY city counselor who was knocked down and arrested two blocks from the park while heading down to observe the eviction was detained for 17 hours without being given access to his attorney. Does that not seem very out of whack to you all over the cleanliness of a park? Is it not troublesome for you at all?

Still, all's well that ends well and what ended up happening after the clearing you thought should have happened much sooner was what happened whenever Bloomberg clamps down. He drives more of the 72% of New Yorkers who agree with Occupy Wall Street out in the streets, as the estimated 20-35,000 people who took part in Thursday's actions attests. It's not over by a long shot.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/18/11 at 12:30pm

"A funny thing happened to the First Amendment on its way to the public forum. According to the Supreme Court, money is now speech and corporations are now people. But when real people without money assemble to express their dissatisfaction with the political consequences of this, they’re treated as public nuisances and evicted." - Robert Reich

Updated On: 11/18/11 at 12:30 PM

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 11/18/11 at 4:50pm

Ike Barinholtz Twitter:
Thought I was camping out for #OWS but turns out I was in line for the new goddamn Twilight movie, which, p.s., WAS AMAZING! #teambella
15 Nov

[Q]

Posted: 11/19/11 at 2:01pm

WTF is this, at UC Davis?!?
Link to article.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 11/19/11 at 4:51pm

I don't understand it.

Alumni don't understand it.

It makes no sense.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 11/19/11 at 5:57pm

Better pepper spray than batons.

[Q]

Posted: 11/19/11 at 8:22pm

Or guns.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 11/20/11 at 3:49pm

Last night, protesters were waiting outside of a meeting attendng by the UC Davis Chancellor. She was concerned about her safety (which only makes sense of the campus police was waiting for her outside). The attached video is her walk of shame from the meeting to her car, with absolute seething, angry silence. It makes me proud of my Alma Mater.
Even in Silence, the Message is Clear

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/20/11 at 4:02pm

That is SO great. I think Seething Silence is going to be the name of my new band.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/20/11 at 5:40pm

[Kad]

Posted: 11/20/11 at 6:53pm

Ha!

[SNAFU]

Posted: 11/21/11 at 12:28am

"Occupy the Park with George!"

I love it

[Lavieboheme3090]

Posted: 11/21/11 at 3:16pm

The Westboro church is protesting a funeral in Arkansas today of young football player who passed away. It had me thinking maybe OWS should move to funerals. I mean protesting funerals is frowned upon, but it always seems to be fine.

[CountA]

Posted: 11/21/11 at 9:03pm

I couldn't be happier to know that you people are supporting the OWS movement.

Like the man said, go get a job right after you take a bath!!!

Hahahahahahahahahahaha

[Marianne2]

Posted: 11/21/11 at 9:39pm

Please tell me this movement is also going after the U.S. healthcare system. Or is that a totally different fight? I'm just frustrated now after getting some news today and realizing how messed up things are.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 11/23/11 at 11:29pm

Updated On: 11/23/11 at 11:29 PM