Last night at St Louis ( OWS eviction)

[nadinbrzezinski]

I saw another one of those images that will not leave my mind. Well, there were two.

First the "confrontation" with a resident that came to do some lookie look. He told the kid that they had no right to take over a public park that belongs to the city The kid tried to make the connection between those taxes we all pay and ownership of the commons. The older man could not get that connection. Kid walked away from the obvious confrontation that was coming, bright kid.

In the same vein, when the cops started taking their stuff away... the kids started to mic check the Fourth Amendment and DEMANDED to see the warrant. To do what the cops were doing, they NEED a warrant. Here was the shocking moment of the night. I expected the PD to produce saith document, They admitted they had none. 

Now chew on that one for a minute... and connect dots to GPS systems in cars, and your lovely nude o scanners at the airport. Warrants, who needs no stinking warrants... and that is the mark of a closing society. One of the things OWS is doing is slowing down, hopefully reversing, that slide. 

Now as to why cops all over are selectively enforcing laws to harass and drive OWS protesters... it is actually simple, they are trying to squash what they do not understand by doing what they have done over ten years. FEAR. What happens when the citizens no longer fear you? And those kids were pretty fearless. What happens? Exactly what is happening. People are FINALLY standing up for their rights. 

I just report from the comfort of my couch. I am not the one taking incredible risks... these people are. But that is why the forces of the state are increasingly becoming harder on them. The State sees them, rightfully so, as a threat. I mean how dare they DEMAND to see a warrant? This is actually a very well known dynamic, and with some of the crap that our reps in congress are considering... this will only grow. When people have nothing else to lose, they become pretty fearless. 

All I can say to DC is... that bubble will be your undoing...
 
EDIT TIME IS GMT... for the obvious...

[pintobean]

1. ... for the obvious...

Your GMT edit time only shows up for you, unless you copy it and paste it into another post. The rest of us see it in our local time.

[dixiegrrrrl]

2. a nitpick over one point:

"Now as to why cops all over are selectively enforcing laws to harass and drive OWS protesters... it is actually simple, they are trying to squash what they do not understand...."

TPTB that own and direct and control the police DO understand what OWS is all about, Egypt put a world wide scare into the 1%.
What the cops DON'T understand is that while they are doing the bidding of the 1% ...
(even tho WE, the 99%, pay their salary via taxes)
it is the 1% who are in the process of destroying public sector pensions!

[Fire Walk With Me]

3. IIRC one of the first things Schwarzenneger did was to attack nurse, teacher, and firefighter

pensions, when he got into office. He even called them names, bullying them.

[dixiegrrrrl]

7. I remember vividly, I was in SF at the time he ..ascended ...into office.

A most repugnant ill mannered megalomaniac, I thought then, and now.

[coalition_unwilling]

9. A misogynistic, philandering NAZI piece of shit - n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. No they really do not understand what this is about

they really don't... they are that out of touch...

My personal opinion of course, but even a few in the pundocracy are starting to admit it.

[Fire Walk With Me]

4. I am lucky enough to have also heard that livestream. This is why so many legal agencies are taking

an interest in #Occupy, with the ACLU becoming active in most states. Our rights are forgotten, but we are demanding that they stand. This is the end of the police state: People taking an interest in the rights guaranteed to them in our Founding Documents. Which are only worth as much as people demand of them!

Fully agreed...it is beautiful, beautiful, beautiful.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. It is a thing of beauty

this is one of the aspects of OWS, but an important one

[JDPriestly]

11. I don't think that our forefathers stopped to get a permit before

petitioning their governments in Philadelphia or Virginia or Boston. I seriously doubt that.

Why do we need a permit today? It's just beyond me.

Crowd control.

Freedom:

: the quality or state of being free: as
a : the absence of necessity, coercion, or constraint in choice or action
b : liberation from slavery or restraint or from the power of another : independence
c : the quality or state of being exempt or released usually from something onerous <freedom from care>
d : ease, facility <spoke the language with freedom>
e : the quality of being frank, open, or outspoken <answered with freedom>
f : improper familiarity
g : boldness of conception or execution
h : unrestricted use <gave him the freedom of their home>
2
a : a political right
b : franchise, privilege

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/freedom

Freedom means not needing someone else's permission.

Time, place and manner. My eye. Surely Scalia with all his plain meaning interpretation or textualism doesn't really think that Madison and his friends would tell today's demonstrators that they had to say "Mayor, may I," before assembling to discuss public issues. No way.

As for staying overnight. At least the OWS crowd don't bring their horses with them.

Republicans talk a lot about freedom. Ask them to define it.

[Odin2005]

8. And don't get me started on the "Free Speech Zones" BS.

The 1st Amendment clearly says that the government may enact no law restricting freedom of speech and the redress of grievances.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. What we are seeing nationally is... PUSHBACK

and I expect the next attack to come on the NET. There is no way I could physically be in St. Louis, Portland and Oakland in the same night in the span of two hours.

But I can do the reporting this way... next attack will be on the net... you heard it here first.

[JDPriestly]

13. For the Republicans, the conservatives, there is a problem looming.

They want no regulation of business. No EPA regs. No OSHA regs. They say that businesses should have the right to operate as they wish without regard for the public interest or the desires of the rest of society.

So they want freedom in running their businesses: freedom to pollute the air and water of others, freedom to put the health and safety of their employees at serious risk and freedom to buy politicians.

On the other side, the OWSers want freedom to camp out on any public property as they wish.

So the problem or dilemma the conservatives are going to have to deal with sooner or later is that they can't demand the unfettered "freedom" to spew their chemicals into our water -- which, in California, belongs to the State on the one hand but deny the OWSers the unfettered "freedom" to sleep in tents in public areas because they belong to the government.

Which is it going to be? Unfettered freedom. Everybody gets to do what they want to or on public property? Or we have rules we all obey.

Everybody gets to buy their own congressman or nobody gets to buy a congressman?

Which will it be?

[Fumesucker]

24. The net was designed to survive a nuclear war..

And it has now become so integral to our society that it cannot be turned off without destroying our society.

The government 1% has a great deal of power but the 99% has a great many really smart and creative people.

[sabrina 1]

12. People became complacent about the loss of rights

'Free Speech Zones' is an oxymoron.

You are correct that OWS is shining a light on this by taking a stand against the claims that, eg, a curfew imposed by City or State ordinances trumps the Constitution.

In two court cases brought by OWS against these violations, one in Nashville and one in Cleveland, OWS won the right, at least temporarily, to stay overnight without being arrested.

It seems the court believed that while the city ordinances (or state) are lawful, they may not apply to people operating under the umbrella of the 1st Amendment. If more courts rule this way, it will be a beginning of the reversal of the loss of rights.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. Yup, one of the many aspects of OWS

[Obamanaut]

14. These "kids" that are being talked about - are they 'kids as in under 18', or are

they adults, grown-ups, and are simply being referred to as "kids", and if so, isn't that rather demeaning?

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. Nitpicking

do your own reporting

[pintobean]

17. No, it is demeaning

and you do it quite often. You have even referred to DU as 'boys and girls'.

[sabrina 1]

20. Why is it demeaning?

Is there something wrong with being a young person? I would disagree with the implication that it is only young people however. But would never find it demeaning to be called 'young' as there is nothing wrong with being young.

As Shakespeare said 'what's in a name, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet'.

How about addressing the substance of the OP, rather than these kinds of diversions, which serve no purpose.

Eg, do you support the movement as now 60% of Americans do? It's not clear from your comments.

[Obamanaut]

22. There is nothing wrong with being a young person, or an old person, or even a person

who is middle aged.

If a 28 year old is in the news for some real or imagined wrong, referring to that person as a 'kid' is less than accurate. If a male, he is an adult. 18 year olds can go to war, vote, sign legal contracts. They are not kids, except maybe to their parents. They are adults, grown men and women.

If those young adults are doing adult things, engaging in adult behavior, they should be given the respect they deserve rather than having their actions diminished by calling them 'kids.'

Another DUer has a good thread "A 28 year old is not a kid" that you might enjoy http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2287256&mesg_id=2287256

[sabrina 1]

26. Well, 28 IS an adult. The subject here was teenagers.

Big difference imo.

[Obamanaut]

33. Where does "teenager" appear in the OP? I could not find it. But, in many other

threads (and I've excerpted just a *few* from the same OP 'writer', one can see reference to 'kids', even to the age of 27. Dismissive and demeaning.



but there is nothing about the cops going down. Kids are readying both first and fourth ammendment to the stream. Ok they are not kids, they just look like it. And things are starting to go dobwn, in the distance.


Also you are talking of Watts where the media has always been seen as a problem. These are middle class kids mostly. I am sure we can agree there is a slight difference.


Oh my... these kids are making me cry (This one is in a thread about college students)

Now these kids, average age for this group... oh I'd say 27, got a tad pissed (Note that this one even includes an estimate as to average age - really close to the 28 in another post, isn’t it)

And while many middle class kids go there, it is also (in another thread where college age students are discussed)

and a meeting has been had, where they intend to start an occupy city college group, idealistic kids (this is a good one, city college with ‘kids’ attending)

[Obamanaut]

35. Response 33 has just a few samples. There are many more. All dismissive, demeaning. nt

[pintobean]

23. Are you aware of the ignore feature?

If you don't like what I have to say, you don't have to see it. It's just a suggestion, you are free to use DU as you see fit. So am I.

[sabrina 1]

25. I never use the ignore feature, this is a discussion board, if I didn't

want to discuss people's opinions, I would go somewhere where there are no comments and just read.

edited to add, why do you not take your own advice btw? You don't like what Nadin has to say, why do you bother with her threads, why not use the ignore feature?

[Fire Walk With Me]

27. However, take a look at the bottom half of this thread, and note how much of it branches off from

and is apparently a tangent and waste of time.

:shrug:

[sabrina 1]

28. Yes, I did notice that and tried to bring the conversation back

on topic, but my question was not answered. I wondered if people who go off topic in threads like this, support this movement or not, not that they have to, but I wondered if that was the reason for diverting attention away from the topic.

[Fire Walk With Me]

29. It does make you wonder. I have no time for distractions and tangents

because I want to put all of my energy into the positive work at hand.

Do what you will :)

[sabrina 1]

30. I like your sig line. And it's astounding that those same

'fascists' have yet to reveal the name of the criminal who nearly killed Scott Olsen, or those who mugged and nearly killed Sabeghi. But they are claiming they want to be able to 'deal with crime'! What do you call mugging a US citizen on his way home who is unarmed, doing nothing wrong, and merely wants to get to his home? I call that crime and it's right in their own backyard, yet they have refused to release the names of those criminals and don't appear to understand that a crime is a crime no matter what costume the criminal is wearing.

[Fire Walk With Me]

31. It is also criminal to release the Mercedes driver who hit two protesters...

...and to then say the camp is too dangerous to continue...

[sabrina 1]

32. Yes, and the DC driver who sent three people to the hospital

but was not arrested. A lot of of people have been harmed by the OPD, most names were not released, maybe they did not want the publicity. But on the night that Scott Olsen was shot, I was writing an OP and knew only that 'one victim was taken to the hospital in critical condition' that turned out to be Olsen. But I posted a photo of another victim who was also bleeding from the head, and a link to photos of several others who were hit by rubber bullets.

None of those names have been released, but the OPD are dangerous and should be kept away from those protesters. I said back then, and I feel even more strongly now, that the Occupiers of Oakland should have asked for protection from the police that night. Even if they didn't get it, it would have made a statement that needed to be made.

Now these thugs are talking like nothing ever happened and they are the good guys. I still think the Occupiers should make an emergency request for protection before they come in to try to move them out. Also as many people as possible should descend on Oakland to stand with them, as happened in NY.

[pintobean]

34. Did you miss this?

"you are free to use DU as you see fit. So am I."

I'm not here to conform to sabrina 1's idea of the perfect message board. The OP makes several references to previous threads and deleted messages. She does this quite often. She's the one who has caused the diversions that you're complaining about. Why don't you take the issue up with her?

[sabrina 1]

18. They are all ages, actually, from the very, very young, meaning

children, to the very old, the oldest I have seen is a WW11 Vet worried about his grand-children. And it's wonderful to see someone in their 'nineties, still out there trying to make this a better country.

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. Absolutely but the guys doing this last night

and gals, were mostly in their late teens... and to me they are lovely.

[sabrina 1]

21. I agree, it is really wonderful to see so many young people

including teenagers, so interested in making this a better world. For a long time people were putting them down, I don't think they can do that anymore, they are beautiful.