The Black Bloc is not the responsibility of OWS. They are vandalizing your institutions not ours.

[Luminous Animal]

If you have a problem with them vandalizing your institutions, then you deal with them.

[muriel_volestrangler]

1. Who is 'you'? I presume it's not DU

So maybe it'd be better if you specified who you are talking to - government, media, corporations ... ?

[blogslut]

2. The Occupy Movement has no leader

Your acceptance of destruction is your own.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. Black blocs are arguably 99%er too

And there is no membership cards for OWS.

Welcome to an open non-structured movement

[blogslut]

12. Perhaps

But there is the General Assembly for each Occupation. While I have yet to locate a Good Neighbor Policy for Occupy Oakland, I'm willing to wager that it will read pretty much like the one for http://www.nycga.net/resources/good-neighbor-policy">OWS-NYC:

OWS has zero tolerance for drugs or alcohol anywhere in Liberty Plaza;

Zero tolerance for violence or verbal abuse towards anyone;

Zero tolerance for abuse of personal or public property.

OWS will limit drumming on the site to 2 hours per day, between the hours of 11am and 5pm only.

OWS encourages all participants to respect health and sanitary regulations, and will direct all participants to respectfully utilize appropriate off-site sanitary facilities.

OWS will display signage and have community relations and security monitors in Liberty Plaza, in order to ensure awareness of and respect for our guidelines and Good Neighbor Policy.

OWS will at all times have a community relations representative on-site, to monitor and respond to community concerns and complaints.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

16. Whatever a particular GA comes up with is hard to enforce at best

Ostracism is about the only tool. The other problem is individuals taking aggressive action. Though not endorsed by the GA, those are the ones making it to the M$M.

[bigtree]

18. it's been done before

Certainly the civil rights leadership and participants in protests had to find ways to separate and define their own actions apart from those who advocated and practiced violent expressions of resistance in the movement's name.

Dr. King and others designed their protest campaigns around a clear principle of non-violence which splintered the movement, but also drew in a broader base of supporters than the more reactive protestors were able to attract to their tactics and platform.

The violent acts occurring under the banner of this movement are real and threaten to define the entire endeavor. There needs to be more visible leadership and more defined goals -- along with that, a clear definition of purpose which emphasizes zero-tolerance for violent acts in its name. Right now, that message isn't getting out to enough folks looking in.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

20. That would means enforced limits and structure something OWS can not do today

As I said in another post, Black blocs etc are the biggest challenges to OWS, not the Oakland PD

BTW, you are ill informed about the "non-violence" of the 60s civil rights movement. Start here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deacons_for_Defense_and_Justice to get a better view of what actually happened.

[sabrina 1]

26. When an organization is specific about its goals, and OWS

could not be more specific than it has been about non-violence, anyone engaging in violence does not belong to the movement. It really isn't difficult.

And anyone who finds that hard to understand, wants to find it hard to understand.

As far as the Corporate Media, why is anyone worried about them? They have been pretty much exposed as part of the problem to anyone who matters and the best way to deal with the Propaganda Arm of Wall Street is to stop watching them.

Without them, OWS has an approval rating higher than both Houses of Congress put together. Their influence has faded. They might have mattered back before people became aware of who they are.

The problem with the 'left' is that they always worried too much about 'what will the rightwing think or do if we do 'whatever'. That held them back, that kind of scared thinking. This movement has its own means of reaching the people and has been spectacularly successful in just a few weeks because rather than play into the MSM's 'messages', they mostly ignored them and kept moving forward.

Nothing can hurt an organization more than being ignored. Which is what the MSM tried to do to OWS, then they learned how little influence they have anymore.

OWS is a non-violent movement and it only plays into the Corporate Media to even watch, let alone repeat their lies.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

31. Actually OWS "goals" are all over the map...

Participants, pundits, and sympathizers are often espousing broad and contradictory viewpoints. There are some common memes, but true goals as most understand it are lacking. Read a screed the other day demanding that there should be no demands for goals etc. Though irrational in many respects, it actually had a point that OWS is about venting, not solutions.

As for non-violence...even that is not uniform. People are advocating some kinds of violence to gain conformance at any number of levels, including in this thread. Media has been threatened with violence. The clips are out there on Youtube. They may be outliers, but outliers are also a part of OWS.

The cause of all of this is the non structured approach. No one speaks authoritatively for the movement. Its not clear there is a single voice for any particular site. There certainly is not central assembly that covers all the sites. The recent controversy over trademarking of OWS is also an artifact of the current non structure.

You speak of "does not belong to the movement". You do realize that there are no membership cards or standards being enforced? The 99% are who they are and that include a lot of outliers from what you consider the OWS true blue.

Those that you call non members are actually going to be the biggest challenge to OWS. If OWS is going to maintain its identity and current structure, it is going to have to develop the ability to address the presence and goals of diverse groups including the black blocs, open carry advocates, free silver, single taxers etc. Their voices are no less valid at the GA than any others. If you don't accept that, are you a true OWS member and do you really belong to the movement?

[sabrina 1]

32. Well, now I understand the position you are taking. You don't

understand the movement at all. That is clear from your comment.

OWS has been, from the beginning and before it even happened, fully aware that the more successful they became, the more infiltrators there would be which was, if you had been involved even at a minimal level, stated in their literature from day one.

As for goals, you are paying way too much attention the Corporate Media, as your comment is exactly what they want to promote.

A majority of Americans in just a very short while, and we are only beginning, understand the reason for OWS. Why is it so hard for the Corporate media shills? It isn't, they do understand but they don't like it.

The root cause of all of the issues YOU are referring to that people put on signs, is one thing, Corporate Money in Governments. And that is what OWS is attacking. Every other issues, student loans, Medical Care, Wars etc. these are all the results of that money.

Everyone who has participated in this movement from the start understand this, and they understand that until that root cause of all the inequities, wars etc, is addressed and stopped, nothing else can be fixed.

I have had no problem hearing this expressed clearly by the many people who have been interviewed (not on the Corporate media as they seek out plants etc to talk to) by foreign media and Independent media. I have never heard people with such clarity of purpose and the only reason anyone would not be aware of this, is because they are still thinking INSIDE the box where they are fed a daily dose of propaganda by the Corporate media. It is poisonous to democracy and we are way past the point now of wanting them to pay attention to OWS. OWS doesn't need them, they have been extremely well-organized about utilizing other tools to get their message out and apparently considering the rapid growth of the movement, well prepared.

Every effort on the Left failed to address these issues because as you are doing right now, rather than keep moving forward, they got hung up on this kind of trivia.

This movement cannot be stopped, it is Global, people around the world are awake and they expect to be attacked, physically and smeared as the stakes are high for the corrupt Financial Industry that has hi-jacked countries around the globe.

If you like the way things are, then that's your choice, but a vast majority of people around the world do not and they intend to fight to change things, since our political institutions also have been hi-jacked.

I wouldn't worry too much if I were you. All powerful movements in the past faced difficulties and attacks and even death, but if they are on right side of history, none of this trivia you are worried about, is going to make even a dent.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

34. You assert things that do not exist

First of all there is no collective consciousness for OWS. Different encampments have different positions and processes. Not surprising given the non structure. Seen that with my own eyes at several of them. Not a bad thing, but certainly there is no one voice or vision. The goals themselves do not interest me as much as the process. Clearly there are some underlying common themes. It is the process as the movement matures that will make or break things. Process is not trivia to anyone who understands things.

What literature do you cite and what makes it conical for the entire movement? Who speaks for the entire movement? Best I can tell, no one, and that is by design. Given the diversity of views in the field, how anyone could be as absolute in their views as you are makes me wonder.

Whether this movement survives as it is today is a serious question. The outliers are starting to be attracted in droves. Their voice is equal to the original founders in the GA. If you have been to a GA you would know that. OWS has a major choice coming in the outliers. I expect a diverse set of approaches, some incompatible. If you can't see that, then perhaps you are not as in tune with things as you think.

Whether OWS has "legs" remains to be seen. It has some growing pains to go through. IN the process (there is that word again) it will change and lose some support and perhaps gain more in other areas. To write off that process as trivia is myopic and immature at best.

[bigtree]

33. well, the civil rights protests experienced some serious violence

. . . and more than a few lines in a manifesto was needed to get the message across. That effort to separate the movement from the more reactionary individuals sparked to acts of violence, arson, and vandalism was an ongoing one which required hands-on, visible leadership.

I wouldn't underestimate the effect of the filter of the media in defining the movement for the millions who are looking in from the outside.

Bayard Rustin made a relevant point in reference to unity among blacks within the civil rights movement which rings true for our own diverse coalitions of individuals who have massed to stand together in protest.

"In a pluralistic democracy," he wrote, "unity (among we who agree) is a meaningless goal. It is far more important to form alliances with other forces in society which share common needs and common goals, and which are in general agreement over the means to achieve them."

I think the ability of the OWS protests to broaden their appeal and support beyond their present base of enthusiasts will be critical to their ultimate impact. The media can be ruthless in their stereotyping because they control the imagery and lord over the dialogue.

It will be quite a challenge to keep the movements' message out in front of the general media's memes without strong leadership and representation.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

35. And the formation of strong leadership with authority to speak for the movement will be a decided

change in the movement.

Today there is no message control, membership management etc. The Black Blocs etc can speak at GA as well as anyone else.

[sabrina 1]

36. It's a given that the Police and those with a vested interest

in destroying this movement will infiltrate it and the MSM will do it's job, and has, of attempting to undermine it. But the issue this movement is about has more support among the general population than most, probably any, other movement in recent history. The Civil Rights movement eg, did not have support from large segments of the population, sadly.

As far as diversity, that happened in almost the first week when the Nurses Union and others joined the movement along with Veterans and people from all walks of live.

If you remember in the first week the movement was being called 'a bunch of spoiled, lazy, white college students from suburbia who wanted everything handed to them by the government'. That quickly became irrelevant when the Unions joined so they moved on to 'dirty hippies' etc etc, and each charge was undermined as the evidence proved otherwise. Not that it stopped the fringes on the right and the MSM, but the PEOPLE themselves could see for theselves.

Back during other movements, there was only the MSM to report on issues like this. Today, even Hillary Clinton has bemoaned the fact that 'we are not getting our message out' because of all the other sources of news now available. That probably accounts for the failure of the old methods used by the MSM so far.

This past week, eg, the Longshoreman's Union has met with OWS as they have been fighting the Multi-National Corps for several years now. Joining this movement gives them more power.

I do not dismiss the fact that the more successful the movement becomes, the more people from all walks of live who begin to participate, the more heavy handed those who oppose it will become.

But there are advantages today that were not available to the people before that can and are being made use of. The worse thing OWS could do is to cave to the demands for a 'leader'. Once that happens to a movement, the MSM will smear and destroy that person who will be used to identify the movement.

Their strength right now is the lack of a target for the MSM and that is why they continually whine about it. This is a new way to approach a movement and they are not familiar with how to deal with it. So, they are making the mistake of using old tactics, 'a bunch of hippies, commies' etc and in so doing insulting Middle Americans and Veterans and Union Members.

Also the MSM does not have the impact it once had, as Hillary Clinton herself told the Senate when trying to get funding to 'get our message out' as she correctly pointed to Al Jazeera, RT and Independent media who are becoming increasingly popular with Americans since the old media has become so obviously controlled.

[avaistheone1]

53. Thanks blogslut.

That clearly states OWS does not condone violence against people or property.


K&R

:kick:

[Nuclear Unicorn]

6. Um. Wouldn't that be inviting the riot police to impose a general crack down?

And wouldn't that give the rioters a safe haven within the OWS camps if the camps refuse to eject them?

Obviously the rioters don't share OWS's values so why would they care if they entice the cops to follow them into the OWS camps?

[Luminous Animal]

14. Where do I say I accept destruction?

Where do I say that OWS accepts destruction?

OWS camps around the country have repeatedly denounced Black Bloc tactics which for a non-violent peaceful movement is as it should be. But to burden OWS with the responsibility to police another organization with which it has no affiliation is ridiculous.

[blogslut]

15. I agree

But, come on. Do you really think your OP statement is sympathetic or helpful?

[Modern_Matthew]

4. Yeah, really. And people on both sides need to stop calling broken windows "violence"... nt

[Llewlladdwr]

5. You wouldn't consider someone throwing bricks through your windows violence? NT

[Modern_Matthew]

42. Harassment, maybe. Violence, no. Targeting an individual like myself...

Would terrorize me and my family. But a bank building getting a little smashed up caused no mental anguish to anyone.

The amount corporations lost in shutting down the ports are way more than a few broken INSURED windows.

I only give a damn because the other side will use this against us. But when we're too large to be stopped, I will take great pleasure in watching symbols of this current economic system be destroyed by the ones they've destroyed.

[pintobean]

7. Black Bloc needs the cover of OWS

Willingly, or not, OWS is a facilitator. It's their problem. Their survival depends on them ridding themselves of the problem. It's that simple.

[SidDithers]

9. +1...nt

Sid

[Luminous Animal]

10. OWS is no more a facilitator then I would be if my car were stolen off the street.

You are burdening them with a problem that they cannot solve. On Wednesday, Black Bloc attacked a Whole Foods that was about a mile from any OWS action. Just how do you propose OWS deal with that situation? In other cases, when OWS protesters tried to stop Black Bloc members from vandalizing, they were threatened with violence (Black Bloc members usually carry weapons). How do you propose they deal with that?

There is no way to oust them from a camp because without the costume (and they don't sit around suited up), there is no way to distinguish a Black Bloc member from anyone else.

[pintobean]

11. It doesn't matter

When the PTB get fed up with the shit, the only answer will be to shut down OWS. I'm not placing blame and I have no answers. I'm just pointing out the obvious. If you don't want to see it, that's your problem.

[sabrina 1]

39. No, it is not their problem.

But priorities are important. A man rammed his car into a crowd of people, putting two of them in the hospital, then switched seats with his passenger hoping to blame someone else for his crime, was on his way to ramming into more pedestrians and would have done so had the people there not stopped him.

He was not arrested.

A broken window V broken limbs and and maybe worse.

It's revealing the priorities of the Corporate Media.

Another Iraq Vet was beaten so badly by criminal cops his spleen was ruptured. The cops who assaulted him have yet to named, let alone arrested.

A broken Window V Iraq Vet beaten so badly he is now in Intensive care.

Scott Olsen still cannot speak after being criminally assaulted by the Oakland police.

A broken window V a peaceful War Veteran exercising his 1st Amend rights.

The Black Bloc or the undercover cops, whoever they were, are responsible for what they did. Not a movement that is anti-violence and has made that clear from the beginning.

[pintobean]

44. You totally missed my point.

I didn't say OWS was responsible, I said the violence is their problem. If the violence continues, OWS will get shut down. Black Bloc cannot operate without the cover of OWS. The PTB will shut the whole thing down to stop Black Bloc.

[sabrina 1]

46. If they shut it down in one place, it will start in another.

The people have the right to demonstrate against the injustices they have far too patiently tolerated for far too long. The more they try to shut it down, the bigger it grows.

As Michael Moore said, anyone engaging in violence is not part of this movement and should be assumed to be infiltrators. The responsibility for that is NOT OWS's. That's like saying that if you are in the vicinity when a crime is committed, it is your responsibility and you should be forbidden access to that area simply because you were there when it happened. That makes zero sense and is just not acceptable.

They don't get to pass the buck. If it is not instigated by the police, then it is their job to find out who they are and to stop it. But to cave in to them using this as an excuse to shut down an entire movement is just not going to work. They don't get how angry people are and sooner or later they are going to have to start paying attention to the people they are supposed to be representing.

In Egypt they killed over 800 people and still could not end the protests, they only grew bigger. In Tunisia, over 300 people were killed, and the same thing happened. This is not about playing games, people have genuine and very serious grievances and they have a right to be where they are.

Maybe they should take a lesson from those who tried 'shutting down' angry citizens and try maybe, talking and listening instead of resorting to these deceptions and brutality for a change.

[pintobean]

47. Good luck with that

[sabrina 1]

48. It's not a matter of luck, it's a matter of necessity and determination.

Six weeks ago those who did not want this to succeed, predicted that it would be over after the first weekend. Instead, it has spread all over the country and joined forces with the world-wide movement against the corruption of money in Governments everywhere.

Unless they start killing people, and so far they have nearly killed two Iraq War Vets, and if they do that, they will have to kill an awful lot of people, this movement is only going to grow.

Sorry you are not part of it. It is a historical period of time and those who are supportive of it, the necessity of it, are on the right side of history.

[mulsh]

8. Black Bloc attracts media attention like an offer offree booze & drugs

These cowardly little shits are every one's problem.
Once these cowardly rightwing stooges kick in any other aspect of a protest is ignored. Just check out the local media's coverage of Occupy Oakland's general strike yesterday. With the exception of KTVU, which actually showed Occupy Oaklanders cleaning up graffiti.all the other outlets were only interested in the vandalism and fires.

Black Bloc contribute nothing but destruction and diversion, lack the courage to stand up for anything but breaking windows and writing on walls. It appears that the folks at Occupy Oakland are devising ways to identify and deal with these pathetic Potemkin protesters.

I wonder who buys them the neat black uniforms most of them always wear.

[Uncle Joe]

24. This is precisely where focus needs to be on threads here at DU and across the Internet to offset

the distorted, one sided corporate media propaganda and illuminate the distinction between the two groups.

"Once these cowardly rightwing stooges kick in any other aspect of a protest is ignored. Just check out the local media's coverage of Occupy Oakland's general strike yesterday. With the exception of KTVU, which actually showed Occupy Oaklanders cleaning up graffiti.all the other outlets were only interested in the vandalism and fires."

[bigtree]

13. organizers had better look for some way to address those folks smashing things up

. . . it's a mistake to just ignore them.

I understand organic protests and this is certainly one. Yet, at some point, the movement will likely seek to define itself for the sake of clarity. If they don't, others certainly will. In that self-defining, there will be inevitable splintering from factions who might judge that stated direction in or outside of their own beliefs and intentions.

Right now, there is no clear leadership and no clear definition of the protests' intentions or goals and participants will inevitably vie to make their own pet peeve the cause celeb of the occupation movement.

The 'black bloc' is going to get the majority of the headlines from a 1%-owned media determined to use sensationalistic imagery to portray the movement as some kind of threat to average Americans. That reality means that mainstream participants risk their aims and goals being obscured and co-opted by the violent acts of the 'direct action' followers.

It's the organizers' and participants' problem (and responsibility), first, if they expect their own definition of the purpose and intention of their movement to prevail over all of the noise created by this small band of disruptors and vandals operating alongside of them and under their banner.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

17. The non structured approach really limits what can be done

And it is things like the Black Blocs that will prove the biggest challenge to OWS


Consider this story out of Oakland; http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/11/03/BACM1LQ5FU.DTL

Then there are those about antisemitism, not allowing access to the press, declaring sovereignty etc. Clearly all cherry picked by those in the media opposed to OWS. OWS needs a widely distributed and read media stream and needs to find a way to effectively distance itself from such nonsense.

[bigtree]

22. you gotta love the energy and abandon of participants

Right now, few want to define their movement, I think, because that would inevitably limit the direction and focus; likely splintering support. That definition would also demand some sort of accountability for results. I'm not saying that folks are shying away from responsibility, but there's a sense among the folks I've heard that choosing a direction will invite the same sort of pandering and half-assed initiative from pols that brought us to this point.

My response would be that there's really nothing especially unseen or unheard of in this organic movement. There's been a bit of a renaissance in the past decade in the practice of taking our complaints to the streets -- sparked, I think, by the protests against Bush's militarism and anti-democratic/anti-constitutional acts.

There were similar offshoots from the civil rights-era protests with unions drawing most Americans out to the pavement to air their grievances and promote their petitions for redress. Almost every one of those movements was challenged to adopt incorruptible leadership and clear, defined goals in order for their complaints to be elevated into the public (and hopefully, political) debate and addressed.

Within the ranks of those protest leaderships and memberships there was inevitable debate about message and tactics which usually tested the resolve and determination of participants. Those internal debates also set the direction of the protests. Often, those definitions led to compromise, inside and outside of their ranks.

So, despite the exhilaration of the movement and the breathtaking scope of its appeal today, there will come a time for defining and taking sides within the individual movements, and eventually, among participants nationally.

There will also come a time to determine leadership. One thing certain, if they don't manage to define themselves, someone else will.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

23. Or fade

The things that I have seen about the OWS movement is really astounding...it is indeed all over the map. Pundits, participants and sympathizers are all providing fodder for the opponents at an alarming rate. At this point it seems to me that OWS has reached its apogee in its current form. What it becomes will clearly be more restrictive and less inclusive if it is to go on. It can not continue and survive in its current form, demographic, and structure much longer. For example, I find it amusing that there are trademark discussions underway...

[brentspeak]

19. OWS people should physically remove the Black Bloc's masks

and capture their mugs on camera.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

21. So now non-violent OWS should endorse physical assualt

Is that where you want the movement to go?

[brentspeak]

25. Hyperbole?

Taking off masks = "physical assault"?

[metalbot]

28. Yes, by most legal definitions

I'm not sure how you'd take off someone's mask without committing assault.

Texas Penal Code:

Sec. 22.01. ASSAULT. (a) A person commits an offense if the person:
(1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another, including the person's spouse;
(2) intentionally or knowingly threatens another with imminent bodily injury, including the person's spouse; or
(3) intentionally or knowingly causes physical contact with another when the person knows or should reasonably believe that the other will regard the contact as offensive or provocative.

I'm fairly sure that taking off someone's mask would qualify under 22.01 (a)(3).

[ProgressiveProfessor]

29. It would be if done forcibly

More over the victim would we well within their rights to defend against such an assault. Non violence anyone?

[G_j]

27. to some extent we might blame testosterone poisoning

and no doubt a touch of provocateur..


just my two cents

[Llewlladdwr]

30. How delightfully misanthropic. NT

[applegrove]

37. Wrong. The black bloc makes OWS look bad. OWS needs to step up and kick bb out of camp.

Peace is the only way demonstrations win.

[Douglas Carpenter]

38. +1000 OBVIOUSLY - All the good OWS is doing will be lost if the movement comes to be seen as violent

Anyone who denies the danger this scum posses is either being obtuse, an idiot or are themselves trying to discredit the OWS movement.

This is not some abstract political argument about whether or not one believes in principle that violence is sometimes necessary or whether or not someone feels sympathy or disdain for banks and such institution that are being hit with violence. Of course everyone who supports OWS does not have any soft and gentle feeling for these wretched institutions. We all disdain them. The success of OWS is absolutely dependent on winning the hearts and minds of ordinary people most of whom are not left-wing activist. Almost all of whom will turn against OWS and cease listening to the message of this once in a generation opportunity if they come to believe OWS is a destructive and violent movement. If OWS comes to be seen as violent - then the message of this movement is lost. The cause of economic justice suffers a mortal blow.

OWS is the first real opportunity progressives have had in more than generation to completely change the direction of the country and the world. If a handful of scum ruin this with their violent and destructive antics - they are not just enemies of OWS - they are enemies of the human race.

[Luminous Animal]

40. You can't kick people out of a camp if people don't know that they are in the camp.

When not out marching, they don't sit around in their "costumes".

[EFerrari]

41. So what should they do, hold a crystal ball over people's heads

while they're sleeping?

BB has been a problem for many years. But suddenly, OWS is supposed to be able to solve it? That's ridiculous.

[Luminous Animal]

43. It's ridiculous, isn't it? They want OWS to kick them out of camp when there is no

way of telling who they are. They want un-armed peaceful people to physically remove helmets from black bloc members who are usually armed with hammers, bats, and bike lock (yes, most black bloc in Oakland wear helmets, not scarves).


It's the fucking cops who should be policing them, not OWS. It's not like they are invisible. TV aerial news had no trouble tracking them... they travel in groups... but, nope, not a cop in sight.

[applegrove]

45. At Toronto OWS people were told if they saw someone put on a black mask to run away, pointing at the

person, screaming "black mask, black mask". That is how you identify them.

[Luminous Animal]

50. Yes. And then what? They still managed to cause destruction.

In the SF Bay Area, black bloc travel in a group. There is no isolating one person and it is outlandish to expect that people NOT TRAINED in any kind of policing techniques can surround armed opponents and rip their helmets off to expose them.

Would you rush in to constrain a group of people wielding bats and hammers? I think I would to help a human being but not by myself and no fucking way to save a window.

[applegrove]

51. If all the demonstrators run away from them if the bb are in a big group then the demonstrators will

not get hurt by any police action.

[Luminous Animal]

54. In the Bay Area. The cops let the black bloc run amok unmolested.

I've personally begged the cops to step in to stop vandalism that both the cops and I were witnessing with our own eyes only to be met with stony silence and inaction.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

59. Why would the cops pick them up?

In bygone days Black Block bubbas stayed inside the law when they were on the street until the shit started. They know how not to give the cops preemptive cause.

[sabrina 1]

49. Who do they make them look bad to? Most people I know

are not blaming OWS for what people who are not a part of their movement do. The only people trying to make that connection are from the far right and the Corporate media.

Meantime the support for OWS has gone up. 10,000 people marched all day in Oakland that day without any violence, and with very little police presence if at all. Most people who were there say they saw no police that day, the Mayor obviously trying to keep her promise. And nothing happened, the Strike was a huge success, done in a matter of a few days. And that shows the power the people have when they decide to use it. clearly THAT is the problem, not the BB which is intended to be used to try to undermine the American people's efforts to address the problems that are clearly not being addressed by their elected officials.

Then almost simultaneously, the BB and the Police showed up and all hell broke loose. People ended up in the hospital, and violence on THEIR part was what happened. I don't see anyone claiming that makes anyone, other than the perpetrators, look bad, unless they WANT to make them bad. And that would be those most threatened by this movement, who are a small fraction of the population who we know, will do all in their power to quash any attempt to expose them.

[applegrove]

52. I'm talking about the public who are not privy to what happens on the ground and just hear that

there was violence. They say 30% of Americans do not quite know what to think of OWS. And 43% support them. So it would be those two portions of the public that you don't want to alienate.

[EFerrari]

55. #OWS is the public.

[sabrina 1]

56. Yes, actually the last poll I saw said 57% supports them. And in

NYC 69%. And that happened without the media's support. I know it is a problem that those who want to crush this movement will work hard to discredit it. They have a lot to lose and they prefer an apathetic population who they can manipulate, so this movement must be a bit of a shock to them, how popular it is. AND they have way more powerful tools than the people do.

But we have tools also, and one of them is what Michael Moore said, when there is violence, get out in front of it and blame it on infiltrators right away. Because it is infiltrators. No serious member of this movement is going to be violent.

If everyone who wants to see this succeed talks to their friends and family and then they talk to theirs, the numbers will increase and it will be much harder for them to discredit it. And if the general consensus becomes that violent behavior is from those the movement is opposing, that will make people think at least before accepting the propaganda.

There will always be the minority who will never approve of any kind of opposition to authority. But no change was ever approved of by a majority of the people, it is always a small, determined, committed group who lead the way. This movement by comparison to others so far, has been the most popular with much broader support so early on. The reason for it is that almost all Americans are affected by the greed and corruption that caused the financial meltdown.

[Douglas Carpenter]

57. I'm sure most people you know don't blame OWS. But the amazing accomplishment of OWS is that it is

getting ordinary people from all across the country and all across the spectrum and from every conceivable lifestyle talking about the issues OWS are raising for the first time in a generation. Most people do not live in the enlightened San Francisco Bay area like I did 25 years ago where most people have a political sophistication seldom found in the United States. Most people in the United States just watch the news on TV and pick up simple impressions. Most people are not easily definable as left-wing or right-wing or any wing. The brilliance and greatness of the OWS movement is that it is getting most people talking about the issues that they are raising that for more than the last 30 years that before OWS they were not even thinking about. Wouldn't it be a tragedy if most people ended up accepting an impression of OWS as violent movement and then turned off?

I absolutely agree that totally stopping them is a lot easier said then done. There is not simple answer to that, But what can be done and should done at every opportunity is for OWS to limit as much as possible the damage these thugs are causing and to distance themselves at every opportunity from the actions of these lunatics.

The OWS movement is giving myself and countless others hope for the first time in decades. I certainly applaud the leadership of Occupy Oakland for doing their best to distance themselves and to minimize their harm. This incredible opportunity to completely change the political consciousness of the whole county is so important - it is equally important that OWS continue to separate themselves and increase their efforts to separate themselves to make sure that this less this once in a lifetime opportunity to change the direction of the country is not blown by a handful of violent and idiotic thugs.

[sabrina 1]

58. I agree with what you say, it is the most hope for changing

the way things have become that we have. The problem with the thugs is that they are most likely planted.

And that ought to be the claim by everyone. Since the beginning, at Zuccotti Park, at Occupy Baltimore and elsewhere, occupiers were catching police infiltrators, even photographing them as they got into their police cars in ordinary clothes after hanging around with the people. The occupiers in the beginning were prepared for this, but if most of them are plants, dressed in black etc, pretending to BB or whatever, there is no way to stop them.

So, all over the place, when talking to people, emailing, on the phone, we have to let it be known that there will be violence, but it won't be from the people and explain it, until it becomes so familiar that when it happens people know what they are trying to do.

And if there is any rule at all, it should be that anyone who engages in violence of any kind, will be considered an infiltrator and is not welcome. They probably are anyhow, we've seen the Rightwingers eg, O'Keefe, and Breitbart trying to undermine the efforts.

It's a given it will happen. But it won't work if WE don't let it. You can't control everything, the best thing to do is to keep growing and growing and moving forward.

Look at what happened today here. One of the most successful protest/strikes ever held, some are saying there were between 60,000 and 100,000 in Oakland in protest for what happened to Scott Olsen, took place yesterday.

All day the marches were peaceful and there were no signs of any police. They successfully shut down the port, demonstrating that when you get the people mad, they DO have power. This was almost spontaneous, no violence all day, several banks shut down, many businesses joining in. It was BRILLIANT. And an astounding success. Many people thought they couldn't pull it off in such a short time, but the outdid all expectations.

This had to be scary for those whose interests are threatened by this movement. NYC also had a solidarity march where Veterans came out in support of Scott Olsen also and some incredible photos were generated from that solidarity march. Great PR for the movement.

Then what happened? Later that evening, when most of the protesters were gone home, with no need for police all day long, suddenly there is chaos. Even the Police chief is saying they were anarchists and not part of the movement. But were they? We need their names, they were arrested so that should not be difficult info to get.

Anyhow, had that not happened when only a couple of hundred people were around, tens of thousands had already left, we would have been talking about that incredible day of protests and the general strike, plus the solidarity marches and the military participation. But the MSM only talked about the infiltrators. And we end up doing the same thing, We should not fall for this.

And another veteran was beaten severely and sent to the hospital, I wonder if he went to the protest to honor Scott Olsen? How sad. Beaten by a bunch of cowardly thugs. I do not trust the police, nor should we. But we should not allow these events to overshadow the more important things that are happening.