Posts tagged occupy wall street.

What did the Occupy protests accomplish? ›

Perfection. The Poverty of Philosophy by Immortal Technique.

love this quote

love this quote

(via thehackerformerlyknownas4chan)

other-stuff:

marcovhv:

The legalized corruption of the USA, nicely charted out.

This is what we need to put an end to, and the sooner the better.

(via luminousaether)

(via pastaturnsmeon)

LAPD uses excessive force, NPR ignores and apologizes for them ›

jonathan-cunningham:

I unlinked my arms voluntarily and informed the LAPD officers that I would go peacefully and cooperatively. I stood as instructed, and then I had my arms wrenched behind my back, and an officer hyperextended my wrists into my inner arms. It was super violent, it hurt really really bad, and he was doing it on purpose. When I involuntarily recoiled from the pain, the LAPD officer threw me face-first to the pavement. He had my hands behind my back, so I landed right on my face. The officer dropped with his knee on my back and ground my face into the pavement. It really, really hurt and my face started bleeding and I was very scared. I begged for mercy and I promised that I was honestly not resisting and would not resist.

My hands were then zipcuffed very tightly behind my back, where they turned blue. I am now suffering nerve damage in my right thumb and palm.

I was put on a paddywagon with other nonviolent protestors and taken to a parking garage in Parker Center. They forced us to kneel on the hard pavement of that parking garage for seven straight hours with our hands still tightly zipcuffed behind our backs. Some began to pass out. One man rolled to the ground and vomited for a long, long time before falling unconscious. The LAPD officers watched and did nothing.

At 9 a.m. we were finally taken from the pavement into the station to be processed. The charge was sitting in the park after the police said not to. It’s a misdemeanor. Almost always, for a misdemeanor, the police just give you a ticket and let you go. It costs you a couple hundred dollars. Apparently, that’s what happened with most every other misdemeanor arrest in LA that day.

With us Occupy LA protestors, however, they set bail at $5,000 and booked us into jail. Almost none of the protesters could afford to bail themselves out. I’m lucky and I could afford it, except the LAPD spent all day refusing to actually *accept* the bail they set. If you were an accused murderer or a rapist in LAPD custody that day, you could bail yourself right out and be back on the street, no problem. But if you were a nonviolent Occupy LA protestor with bail money in hand, you were held long into the following morning, with absolutely no access to a lawyer.

I spent most of my day and night crammed into an eight-man jail cell, along with sixteen other Occupy LA protesters. My sleeping spot was on the floor next to the toilet.

Finally, at 2:30 the next morning, after twenty-five hours in custody, I was released on bail. But there were at least 200 Occupy LA protestors who couldn’t afford the bail. The LAPD chose to keep those peaceful, non-violent protesters in prison for two full days… the absolute legal maximum that the LAPD is allowed to detain someone on misdemeanor charges.

As a reminder, Antonio Villaraigosa has referred to all of this as “the LAPD’s finest hour.”

Thank God news outlets like NPR are all over what happened there that day. Here’s what NPR has to say about it:

In the end, there was very little force used, in part because this is a new LAPD. It exercises much more restraint than it once did

Thank God for NPR, or we might actually learn about what the LAPD did to Occupy LA!

fuck this fuckin shit, man -___-

(via byallflowers)

thedailywhat:

Infographic of the Day: Brooklyn College associate professor of sociology Alex S. Vitale and illustrator Chi Birmingham chart the evolution of police riot gear from the war protests of the 60s and 70s, through the trade protests of the mid-90s, to the current Occupy Wall Street demonstrations and their various national offshoots.
[nyt.]

thedailywhat:

Infographic of the Day: Brooklyn College associate professor of sociology Alex S. Vitale and illustrator Chi Birmingham chart the evolution of police riot gear from the war protests of the 60s and 70s, through the trade protests of the mid-90s, to the current Occupy Wall Street demonstrations and their various national offshoots.

[nyt.]

(via quinnleesimon-deactivated201408)

cartoonpolitics:

well *somebody* is certainly endangering the public safety ..

cartoonpolitics:

well *somebody* is certainly endangering the public safety ..

(via omnivorousstegosaurus)

sunrisenightfall:

EU QUERO…

ver mais conversas politicas sérias sendo iniciadas;
corporações fora da governamentação e o povo de volta ao poder;
paz ao invés de militarização;
poder falar o que eu penso sem comprometer meu emprego;
uma melhor regulação de bancos e mercados;
que meus filhos tenham um emprego e saúde;
a democracia verdadeira que 99% de nós não temos mais;

hello sunrisenightfall. Thank you for reblogging this and for translating it into Portuguese (at least that’s what Google translate tells me it is, correct me if I’m wrong). I appreciate it and I’m glad that the message of the 99% can reach those outside of the English language. Thank you for the translation, friend. :)

Olá sunrisenightfall. Obrigado por reblogging isso e traduzi-la emPortuguês (pelo menos é o que o Google traduzir me diz que é, me corrija se eu estiver errado). Eu aprecio isso e eu estou contente que a mensagem do 99% pode alcançar aqueles que estão fora do idioma Inglês. Obrigado pela tradução, amigo. :) 

(via theangelshavegone-deactivated20)

loverwife:

[image description: eight .gifs with text captions of several people speaking to a camera while at occupytogether protest; caption reads “I want…/to see more serious political conversations starting/corporations out of the government and people back in/peace rather than militarization/to be able to speak my voice without jeopardizing my job/a greater regulation of the banks and markets/my kids to have a job and healthcare/true democracy for the 99% of us who don’t have it anymore”]

inothernews:

“These are irrational demands,” said Wall Street.

“I know, right?” said conservatives.

(via sanityscraps)

owsposters:

“1944 or Today? Henry Wallace on American Fascism”

owsposters:

“1944 or Today? Henry Wallace on American Fascism”

(via oni-personal)

shipwrecktrain:

Here’s a relevant one from 1935.

I hate when people call the unemployed “lazy.” Seriously?? Most salary workers work 34253452x harder than these fuckin’ rich people who sit up in their fancy offices all day. they ain’t fuckin’ lazy; fuck you.

shipwrecktrain:

Here’s a relevant one from 1935.

I hate when people call the unemployed “lazy.” Seriously?? Most salary workers work 34253452x harder than these fuckin’ rich people who sit up in their fancy offices all day. they ain’t fuckin’ lazy; fuck you.

(via iggyjack-deactivated20120215)

goodreasonnews:

six7six7:

GOP before and after OWS

But right!?

goodreasonnews:

six7six7:

GOP before and after OWS

But right!?

(via sidfromabove1975)

The Word of the Day, today, on Dictionary.com is Procrustean.

Definition: “Tending to produce conformity by violent or arbitrary means.”

Synonyms: America. United States of America. Corporate America. Capitalism. Capitalist America. Some of the police force in the United States of America. USA.

the (un)shocking truth about the occupy crackdown

iggyjack:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/nov/25/shocking-truth-about-crackdown-occupy

US citizens of all political persuasions are still reeling from images of unparallelled police brutality in a coordinated crackdown against peaceful OWS protesters in cities across the nation this past week. An elderly woman was pepper-sprayed in the face; the scene of unresisting, supine students at UC Davis being pepper-sprayed by phalanxes of riot police went viral online; images proliferated of young women – targeted seemingly for their gender – screaming, dragged by the hair by police in riot gear; and the pictures of a young man, stunned and bleeding profusely from the head, emerged in the record of the middle-of-the-night clearing of Zuccotti Park.

But just when Americans thought we had the picture – was this crazy police and mayoral overkill, on a municipal level, in many different cities? – the picture darkened. The National Union of Journalists and the Committee to Protect Journalists issued a Freedom of Information Act request to investigate possible federal involvement with law enforcement practices that appeared to target journalists. The New York Times reported that “New York cops have arrested, punched, whacked, shoved to the ground and tossed a barrier at reporters and photographers” covering protests. Reporters were asked by NYPD to raise their hands to prove they had credentials: when many dutifully did so, they were taken, upon threat of arrest, away from the story they were covering, and penned far from the site in which the news was unfolding. Other reporters wearing press passes were arrested and roughed up by cops, after being – falsely – informed by police that “It is illegal to take pictures on the sidewalk.”

In New York, a state supreme court justice and a New York City council member were beaten up; in Berkeley, California, one of our greatest national poets, Robert Hass, was beaten with batons. The picture darkened still further when Wonkette and Washingtonsblog.com reported that the Mayor of Oakland acknowledged that the Department of Homeland Security had participated in an 18-city mayor conference call advising mayors on “how to suppress” Occupy protests.

To Europeans, the enormity of this breach may not be obvious at first. Our system of government prohibits the creation of a federalised police force, and forbids federal or militarised involvement in municipal peacekeeping.

I noticed that rightwing pundits and politicians on the TV shows on which I was appearing were all on-message against OWS. Journalist Chris Hayes reported on a leaked memo that revealed lobbyists vying for an $850,000 contract to smear Occupy. Message coordination of this kind is impossible without a full-court press at the top. This was clearly not simply a case of a freaked-out mayors’, city-by-city municipal overreaction against mess in the parks and cranky campers. As the puzzle pieces fit together, they began to show coordination against OWS at the highest national levels.

Why this massive mobilisation against these not-yet-fully-articulated, unarmed, inchoate people? After all, protesters against the war in Iraq, Tea Party rallies and others have all proceeded without this coordinated crackdown. Is it really the camping? As I write, two hundred young people, with sleeping bags, suitcases and even folding chairs, are still camping out all night and day outside of NBC on public sidewalks – under the benevolent eye of an NYPD cop – awaiting Saturday Night Live tickets, so surely the camping is not the issue. I was still deeply puzzled as to why OWS, this hapless, hopeful band, would call out a violent federal response.

That is, until I found out what it was that OWS actually wanted.

The mainstream media was declaring continually “OWS has no message”. Frustrated, I simply asked them. I began soliciting online “What is it you want?” answers from Occupy. In the first 15 minutes, I received 100 answers. These were truly eye-opening.

The No 1 agenda item: get the money out of politics. Most often cited was legislation to blunt the effect of the Citizens United ruling, which lets boundless sums enter the campaign process. No 2: reform the banking system to prevent fraud and manipulation, with the most frequent item being to restore the Glass-Steagall Act – the Depression-era law, done away with by President Clinton, that separates investment banks from commercial banks. This law would correct the conditions for the recent crisis, as investment banks could not take risks for profit that create kale derivatives out of thin air, and wipe out the commercial and savings banks.

No 3 was the most clarifying: draft laws against the little-known loophole that currently allows members of Congress to pass legislation affecting Delaware-based corporations in which they themselves are investors.

When I saw this list – and especially the last agenda item – the scales fell from my eyes. Of course, these unarmed people would be having the shit kicked out of them.

For the terrible insight to take away from news that the Department of Homeland Security coordinated a violent crackdown is that the DHS does not freelance. The DHS cannot say, on its own initiative, “we are going after these scruffy hippies”. Rather, DHS is answerable up a chain of command: first, to New York Representative Peter King, head of the House homeland security subcommittee, who naturally is influenced by his fellow congressmen and women’s wishes and interests. And the DHS answers directly, above King, to the president (who was conveniently in Australia at the time).

In other words, for the DHS to be on a call with mayors, the logic of its chain of command and accountability implies that congressional overseers, with the blessing of the White House, told the DHS to authorise mayors to order their police forces – pumped up with millions of dollars of hardware and training from the DHS – to make war on peaceful citizens.

But wait: why on earth would Congress advise violent militarised reactions against its own peaceful constituents? The answer is straightforward: in recent years, members of Congress have started entering the system as members of the middle class (or upper middle class) – but they are leaving DC privy to vast personal wealth, as we see from the “scandal” of presidential contender Newt Gingrich’s having been paid $1.8m for a few hours’ “consulting” to special interests. The inflated fees to lawmakers who turn lobbyists are common knowledge, but the notion that congressmen and women are legislating their own companies’ profitsis less widely known – and if the books were to be opened, they would surely reveal corruption on a Wall Street spectrum. Indeed, we do already know that congresspeople are massively profiting from trading on non-public information they have on companies about which they are legislating – a form of insider trading that sent Martha Stewart to jail.

Since Occupy is heavily surveilled and infiltrated, it is likely that the DHS and police informers are aware, before Occupy itself is, what its emerging agenda is going to look like. If legislating away lobbyists’ privileges to earn boundless fees once they are close to the legislative process, reforming the banks so they can’t suck money out of fake derivatives products, and, most critically, opening the books on a system that allowed members of Congress to profit personally – and immensely – from their own legislation, are two beats away from the grasp of an electorally organised Occupy movement … well, you will call out the troops on stopping that advance.

So, when you connect the dots, properly understood, what happened this week is the first battle in a civil war; a civil war in which, for now, only one side is choosing violence. It is a battle in which members of Congress, with the collusion of the American president, sent violent, organised suppression against the people they are supposed to represent. Occupy has touched the third rail: personal congressional profits streams. Even though they are, as yet, unaware of what the implications of their movement are, those threatened by the stirrings of their dreams of reform are not.

Sadly, Americans this week have come one step closer to being true brothers and sisters of the protesters in Tahrir Square. Like them, our own national leaders, who likely see their own personal wealth under threat from transparency and reform, are now making war upon us.

(Also submitted by droppedtaco)

(via iggyjack-deactivated20120215)