100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: OWS - The rap sheet so far | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
The "powers that be" have done EVERYTHING in their power to victimize the OWS protestors! Took away generators (now returned by lawyer intervention) Limited "sanitary" stations and availability to them! Police "escorts" have led marchers into areas SO THEY COULD ARREST THEM! And on and on! These "powers that be" are supposed to work for US, or why are we paying them? If they were upholding our 1st amendment rights, all these things would be made available to the protesters and the police (for the most part) would be facing the other direction! Noone got raped at a tea party rally, there have been SEVERAL at the OWS events. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keep watching Faux News..... next a spaceship will drop aids infested pluto pups in the crowd for the protesters to use against police! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That list is inspiring! What is the most inspiring crimes for you? I stated the activity that I found inspiring - which is criminalized in several different ways: Also on that list of 'crimes' are many people getting arrested simply for assembling in public.
The actual charges filed could range from loitering, or obstructing a sidewalk, or assembling without a permit, or being in a particular public space past a defined time period, or even obstructing justice. To the OWS criminals! 
What about the SEVERAL incidents of sexual assault and robbery? Guess you support that too. Im basically 20 minutes out of LOS ANGELES, CA so as the previous posts you quoted say, what does that have to do with the protestors...thats the norm for big city life anyways. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keep watching Faux News..... next a spaceship will drop aids infested pluto pups in the crowd for the protesters to use against police!  you're too much 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That list is inspiring! What is the most inspiring crimes for you? I stated the activity that I found inspiring - which is criminalized in several different ways: Also on that list of 'crimes' are many people getting arrested simply for assembling in public.
The actual charges filed could range from loitering, or obstructing a sidewalk, or assembling without a permit, or being in a particular public space past a defined time period, or even obstructing justice. To the OWS criminals!
What about the SEVERAL incidents of sexual assault and robbery? Guess you support that too. Would you like to expand on your 'logic' ? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Im basically 20 minutes out of LOS ANGELES, CA so as the previous posts you quoted say, what does that have to do with the protestors...thats the norm for big city life anyways. Yes. I know firsthand, here in oakland, of people jumping to the conclusion that completely unrelated violent events are somehow related to OWS. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I do think that there is great value in a group of people being willing to ignore the permit process. I'm just trying to understand your position... Do you think that the Government should have the authority over and establish laws that require permits for large protests, which will then not be evenly enforced? Thanks for focusing in, narrowing the domain under discussion. That seems like a simple question, but to me it isn't. Consider that we have reality: that which actually happens. And then we have some person's utopian vision - at the other end of the spectrum. Now with any discrepancy between these you, when you ask: "What should happen?" you can choose any point along that spectrum and come to a different answer. I could argue (naively and pointlessly) that we shouldn't have 'laws' as we know them (tied to regions, enforced by threat of violence) at all, but simple teach our children respect, honesty, self restraint, the value of honoring contracts, etc etc Sensible people may reject that argument as having nothing to do with reality - and insist that we need permits precisely because of how people 'actually are' (and point to the public defecation happening at ows to illustrate their point). This isn't necessarily a different basic position, not a different spectrum, but a different place on the spectrum between, for lack of better terms, realism and idealism. So, regarding permits: Ultimately, ideally, no. There 'should' be no permitting process for public spaces. We 'should' be a sufficient mature society that we can resolve our competing needs for public spaces without a top-down, enforced by threat of violence, power structure keeping us civil. But we aren't, and thus we have permits. Here is where I might say 'given that we are not so mature a society, we 'should' have permits' - but at the moment I don't see it that way. Its just what happens. I see permits as a tool, not as absolute authority that must be respected. Groups of people tend to create structures that serve needs; sometimes those structures do a great job of actually serving the needs of the group, and sometimes they don't. ---- You can approach 'should' from a 'this is how the whole system ought to function' perspective, but also from the 'this is what this person in this position should do' perspective, and I don't see any reason that we should expect these to always be aligned. I was outraged that a cell station was shut down, preventing phone calls, during a protest here in oakland. It reminded me of tactics used by cuba, iran, china. While debating whether citizens in a democracy should expect and demand that their basic means of communication be left open, someone raised the argument that "The person who shut down the station was just doing their job - s/he did what s/he should have done." I agree. Fine. Thats what they should do, in their world, doing their job. And what I should do, as a citizen that cares about personal freedom, is publicly criticize it. And what we should do (imo) as a populace, is continue debating the trade off of liberty and security. Similarly, you should be criticizing the ows for their flaws, and maybe you should be making the argument that we should reject protests and protesters who are unwilling to respect the laws and civil expectations. And I should be arguing that people should be willing to break the law for what they believe in, and that permits are a tool created to serve some of our needs - and that lacking permits should not stop people from protesting. The mayors in these cities should be stressing about how to handle this, the cops should be following orders, the protesters should be resolved to continue struggling for the rights that they believe they have. You mention 'evenly enforced'. The only laws which have even a shot at being evenly enforced are those laws whose enforcement is automated. (No human bias effects the stop-light cameras.) The world is insanely unjust when it comes to law enforcement. I'm not saying we shouldn't aspire to more just and balanced enforcement, I'm saying that even enforcement is a fantasy, and its worth looking at that when asking what tolerances and priorities we 'should' have when it comes to 'even enforcement' of permit laws. So we not only have a question of 'basic values', and the question of 'from where on the spectrum are deriving your notion of should', and also 'from which point of view', but also: even if you agree that they 'should' enforce permit laws.... what measures are appropriate? IMO, the efforts made to 'enforce' whatever laws were invoked as the motive (I'm sure its more than 'permitting' laws) the other week in oakland were completely inappropriate. In my personal value system, the situation in oakland absolutely did not justify the force that was used. Oakland has made a tremendous effort to enforce these laws, but the protesters are committed. Which brings me back to:
Excellent post!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Im basically 20 minutes out of LOS ANGELES, CA so as the previous posts you quoted say, what does that have to do with the protestors...thats the norm for big city life anyways. Yes. I know firsthand, here in oakland, of people jumping to the conclusion that completely unrelated violent events are somehow related to OWS. When they just happen to be at the OWS location and OWS protesters are involved yed it is related. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Im basically 20 minutes out of LOS ANGELES, CA so as the previous posts you quoted say, what does that have to do with the protestors...thats the norm for big city life anyways. Yes. I know firsthand, here in oakland, of people jumping to the conclusion that completely unrelated violent events are somehow related to OWS. When they just happen to be at the OWS location and OWS protesters are involved yed it is related. So are you claiming to have all the inside information, names, etc then? Any links to the stats? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/11/09/rash-sex-attacks-and-violent-crime-breaks-out-at-occupy-protests/
http://www.christianpost.com/news/occupy-wall-street-protests-unsafe-sexual-assaults-and-violence-on-the-rise-61275/ Wednesday night, whilst filling in for Bill O’Reilly on The Factor, Laura Ingraham took a look at the instances of sexual violence going on within the Occupy movement. The situation has gotten so out of hand in lower Manhattan’s Zuccotti Park, she told viewers, that women have been given their own separate area within the protesters’ so-called “tent city.” What’s more, she added, there have also been rapes of men that have gone unreported. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/laura-ingraham-weighs-in-on-violence-and-rape-within-ows-its-time-to-wrap-it-up-and-move-on/ http://www.mediaite.com/tv/new-york-post-reporter-on-fox-and-friends-says-sexual-assualts-at-ows-are-going-unreported-by-victims/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It’s a safe house from the sex fiends.
Zuccotti Park has become so overrun by sexual predators attacking women in the night that organizers felt compelled to set up a female-only sleeping tent yesterday to keep the sickos away. The large, metal-framed “safety tent” -- which will be guarded by an all-female patrol -- can accommodate as many as 18 people and will be used during the day for women-only meetings, said Occupy Wall Street organizers. “This is all about safety in numbers,” said Becky Wartell, 24, a protester from Portland, Maine. “When you’re in a large group of people sleeping, you will, of course, feel a lot safer than if you were by yourself,” she added. “It will also keep away people that might feel more inclined to prey on two- and three-people tents.” The safety measure comes amid a terrifying spree of sexual assaults -- including an alleged rape -- in the Zuccotti Park camp. Kitchen worker Tonye Iketubosin, 26, was arrested Wednesday for allegedly groping an 18-year-old woman after offering to help set up her tent. He is also a suspect in a rape at the park. The grope victims include Kara Demetropoulos, who told The Post she was fondled in a tent last Saturday night after accepting a man’s offer of a place to sleep. Most protesters have not been reporting all the incidents to police -- instead preferring to settle things on their own. The tent and its all-female security detail is the latest crime-fighting measure, and it is already garnering much interest. “I’m gonna be staying here,” said Olivia Chitayat, 23, who was helping to put up the tent. “It’s partially because of the recent attacks that have been happening. “I think that this will help bring more women to the movement as well. I think a lot of women have been hesitant and especially for those that are new and don’t know a lot of people it’s hard to find a safe place to stay.” Demetropoulos thought the safety tent was a good idea, though she doesn’t plan on using it even after her own unhappy experience. “I feel safe in my tent, but I bet this will help a lot of other women feel a lot safer than they have been,” said the 20-year-old native of Alabama. Some of the male OWS protesters remained in denial over the growing number of sex attacks. “Sexual harassment gets called rape, and it’s not,” one scoffed when told of the women’s tent. “There’s no way that it’s happening as much as people are saying it has. It’s just word spreading and getting misunderstood.” One woman was also against the structure, saying the protesters who put it up took her tent down without notice to make room. “I’m pissed! I pretty much just got evicted,” fumed Angelina Isfreed, 32, after returning to find her tent taken down. “I won’t be staying there.” More people may have to move. The protest organizers plan to put up seven more large tents, including ones for gay and transgender people, co-ed tents and a medical tent. Meanwhile, Mayor Bloomberg said on his WOR radio show that he wasn’t going to tolerate lawlessness in Zuccotti Park. “People have the right to protest; they don’t have a right to destroy a neighborhood,” he said. “Anybody that thinks we’re going to tolerate behavior that’s not protected is wrong.” Yesterday, former Mayor Giuliani said President Obama must take responsibility for the “very dangerous” OWS movement. “Barack Obama owns the ‘Occupy Wall Street’ movement; it would not have happened but for his class warfare,” Giuliani told the conservative Americans for Prosperity Foundation summit in DC. Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/zuccotti_park_big_top_ilBy4VfYIwDGt2I1rM33vL#ixzz1dwk8L0Nm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gather hundreds of protesters in a public park with free food, little to no security and a general disregard for the rule of law, and you’re bound to attract a few unsavory characters.
Around 6:00 a.m. Sunday, one such person entered a woman’s tent at Occupy Wall Street’s Zuccotti Park shantytown and sexually assaulted her, the latest in a string of rapes and sexual assaults at anti-corporate protests across the country. Equally troubling is “Occupy” organizers’ reluctance to cooperate with police or encourage victims to seek help. In Sunday’s case, they chased the pervert away but never called the authorities. “We don’t tell anyone,” an organizer told the New York Post. “We handle it internally. I said too much already.” In Baltimore, a security statement from protesters warned that sexual assault would not be tolerated, but discouraged involving police to apprehend lawbreaking sex criminals. Rape victims were encouraged to contact the point people from the “Security Committee,” nicknamed Koala! and Largesse. “Though we do not encourage the involvement of the police in our community, the survivor has every right, and the support of Occupy Baltimore, to report the abuse to the appropriate law enforcement,” the statement added. Occupy Baltimore revised its sexual assault statement after criticism from the Baltimore Sun, among other publications. At the larger Occupy Wall Street protest, a “Safer Spaces” working group advises activists who have been assaulted, offended or hugged, and members walk the nylon-lined alleyways of the tent city in pink armbands to identify themselves. Their interventions failed in an incident earlier this month: An alleged groper was brought to the edge of the park and handed over to police. Other assaults have been alleged at Occupy Cleveland, and authorities in Seattle and Oakland have reported instances of indecent exposure and threats. At Occupy Dallas, police are investigating the possible rape of a 14-year-old runaway. Transients occupied one of many protestors’ tents during the night of a possible sexual assault at Occupy Lawrence, in Kansas. Scotland TV reports a woman was raped at Occupy Glasgow. Demonstrators’ insistence on self-determination stems from their desire to build a self-governing, self-contained community apart from ordinary instruments of civic justice. But a failure to prevent sexual assaults casts doubt on their experiment in autonomy. “A failure in self-government,” The Nation declared the effort, in a profile of women in the Occupy movement. Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/31/sexual-assaults-continue-to-plague-occupy-protests/#ixzz1dwl7mtDC Wow, they have a security committee that covers up crimes. Someone might wanna let these dumdum's know it is a felony to try to prevent or deter someone from committing a crime and it is a felony for attempting to cover one up not to mention they would risk letting women get attacked so they don't have an alleged rapist in their camps or worse they will handle it internally, which the US doesn't allow vigalante justice and that is all it would be. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh yea, and there is only one way to stop a rapist, put him behind bars so he cant do it again. Those people can not stop and anyone who harbors one or tries to prevent one from being brought to justice is just as guilty as the rapist and they are partially to blae for what happens to future victims.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Thu 11/17/11 04:58 AM
|
|
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/11/09/rash-sex-attacks-and-violent-crime-breaks-out-at-occupy-protests/ http://www.christianpost.com/news/occupy-wall-street-protests-unsafe-sexual-assaults-and-violence-on-the-rise-61275/ Wednesday night, whilst filling in for Bill O’Reilly on The Factor, Laura Ingraham took a look at the instances of sexual violence going on within the Occupy movement. The situation has gotten so out of hand in lower Manhattan’s Zuccotti Park, she told viewers, that women have been given their own separate area within the protesters’ so-called “tent city.” What’s more, she added, there have also been rapes of men that have gone unreported. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/laura-ingraham-weighs-in-on-violence-and-rape-within-ows-its-time-to-wrap-it-up-and-move-on/ http://www.mediaite.com/tv/new-york-post-reporter-on-fox-and-friends-says-sexual-assualts-at-ows-are-going-unreported-by-victims/ Yep! I knew it! 
LOOK BOSS! THE SPACESHIPS! THE SPACESHIPS! 
unreported by victims....but not Faux News! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh my GOSH, the Protestors in LA are walking down HOPE st. NOT HOPE!!!
the nerve of some people, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keep watching Faux News..... next a spaceship will drop aids infested pluto pups in the crowd for the protesters to use against police! Fox news, owned by money grubbing money changing criminal Rupert Murdoch. The people are protesting people like him. He don't like it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Keep watching Faux News..... next a spaceship will drop aids infested pluto pups in the crowd for the protesters to use against police! Fox news, owned by money grubbing money changing criminal Rupert Murdoch. The people are protesting people like him. He don't like it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch
Yep! He's been all over the "REAL' news lately for his criminal deeds, and he, his son, and his entire network are under indictment in the UK and elsewhere for it. USA has him under investigation for possible charges pending as well. He's a definate hairball it would be nice to get out of our throats! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I do think that there is great value in a group of people being willing to ignore the permit process. I'm just trying to understand your position... Do you think that the Government should have the authority over and establish laws that require permits for large protests, which will then not be evenly enforced? Thanks for focusing in, narrowing the domain under discussion. That seems like a simple question, but to me it isn't. Consider that we have reality: that which actually happens. And then we have some person's utopian vision - at the other end of the spectrum. Now with any discrepancy between these you, when you ask: "What should happen?" you can choose any point along that spectrum and come to a different answer. I could argue (naively and pointlessly) that we shouldn't have 'laws' as we know them (tied to regions, enforced by threat of violence) at all, but simple teach our children respect, honesty, self restraint, the value of honoring contracts, etc etc Sensible people may reject that argument as having nothing to do with reality - and insist that we need permits precisely because of how people 'actually are' (and point to the public defecation happening at ows to illustrate their point). This isn't necessarily a different basic position, not a different spectrum, but a different place on the spectrum between, for lack of better terms, realism and idealism. So, regarding permits: Ultimately, ideally, no. There 'should' be no permitting process for public spaces. We 'should' be a sufficient mature society that we can resolve our competing needs for public spaces without a top-down, enforced by threat of violence, power structure keeping us civil. But we aren't, and thus we have permits. Here is where I might say 'given that we are not so mature a society, we 'should' have permits' - but at the moment I don't see it that way. Its just what happens. I see permits as a tool, not as absolute authority that must be respected. Groups of people tend to create structures that serve needs; sometimes those structures do a great job of actually serving the needs of the group, and sometimes they don't. ---- You can approach 'should' from a 'this is how the whole system ought to function' perspective, but also from the 'this is what this person in this position should do' perspective, and I don't see any reason that we should expect these to always be aligned. I was outraged that a cell station was shut down, preventing phone calls, during a protest here in oakland. It reminded me of tactics used by cuba, iran, china. While debating whether citizens in a democracy should expect and demand that their basic means of communication be left open, someone raised the argument that "The person who shut down the station was just doing their job - s/he did what s/he should have done." I agree. Fine. Thats what they should do, in their world, doing their job. And what I should do, as a citizen that cares about personal freedom, is publicly criticize it. And what we should do (imo) as a populace, is continue debating the trade off of liberty and security. Similarly, you should be criticizing the ows for their flaws, and maybe you should be making the argument that we should reject protests and protesters who are unwilling to respect the laws and civil expectations. And I should be arguing that people should be willing to break the law for what they believe in, and that permits are a tool created to serve some of our needs - and that lacking permits should not stop people from protesting. The mayors in these cities should be stressing about how to handle this, the cops should be following orders, the protesters should be resolved to continue struggling for the rights that they believe they have. You mention 'evenly enforced'. The only laws which have even a shot at being evenly enforced are those laws whose enforcement is automated. (No human bias effects the stop-light cameras.) The world is insanely unjust when it comes to law enforcement. I'm not saying we shouldn't aspire to more just and balanced enforcement, I'm saying that even enforcement is a fantasy, and its worth looking at that when asking what tolerances and priorities we 'should' have when it comes to 'even enforcement' of permit laws. So we not only have a question of 'basic values', and the question of 'from where on the spectrum are deriving your notion of should', and also 'from which point of view', but also: even if you agree that they 'should' enforce permit laws.... what measures are appropriate? IMO, the efforts made to 'enforce' whatever laws were invoked as the motive (I'm sure its more than 'permitting' laws) the other week in oakland were completely inappropriate. In my personal value system, the situation in oakland absolutely did not justify the force that was used. Oakland has made a tremendous effort to enforce these laws, but the protesters are committed. Which brings me back to:
Excellent post!
Thank you!
|
|
|
|
|
