'Occupy' types

Sorry sick of this characterization - Sure some police are but the vast majority that I have dealt with (and I have dealt with many) are conscientious men and women who would take a bullet to protect me or mine.

As to the woman, I simply was not aware of her circumstances. If you know the context, fine. I am pretty sure, however, I don't want police trying to use brute strength to force an elderly woman to do what she doesn't want to - the next headline is "Police assault elderly woman break her arms".



Or a 2011, London - also a protest that started out peaceably. So tell me, how would you "just move" the Occupiers without force when they refused to move? - - Lawdy Lawdy back at you.

The London riots got out of hand thanks to blackberry messaging and a few bad eggs bringing their bad egg comrades. I could easily see this turning into a London Riot type situation if the police end up killing someone.

I'd think the ultimate message of the Occupiers is to remain peaceful and to weed out the bad eggs as soon as possible because if this get violent, they've let the government win and politicians will start waving their finger saying, "I told you so" and God knows, they can't let THAT happen.

This isn't anything like the Civil Rights Movement in terms of scale or importance (to me personally) but they did peacefully do a lot of civil disobedience and though it took forever. They made progress. I'm gonna wager a guess that the Occupiers feel like this will do the same thing.

Will it? Probably not.

The London riots got out of hand thanks to blackberry messaging and a few bad eggs bringing their bad egg comrades. I could easily see this turning into a London Riot type situation if the police end up killing someone.

I'd think the ultimate message of the Occupiers is to remain peaceful and to weed out the bad eggs as soon as possible because if this get violent, they've let the government win and politicians will start waving their finger saying, "I told you so" and God knows, they can't let THAT happen.

This isn't anything like the Civil Rights Movement in terms of scale or importance (to me personally) but they did peacefully do a lot of civil disobedience and though it took forever. They made progress. I'm gonna wager a guess that the Occupiers feel like this will do the same thing.

Will it? Probably not.

Generally, I agree. I think you discount the fact that the police would be just as disappointed if someone gets killed. The police have a tough, tough job and the vast majority are conscientious professionals who take their duty to "protect and serve" seriously. When crowds and confrontations are involved, a few bad eggs - on either side - can make an otherwise tense but peaceful situation into a bad/dangerous situation quickly.

I hope the Occupiers get busy with the real work of acheiving change through the political process - I don't agree with all of their agenda, but neither do I disagree with it entirely.

I agree with NC Skins. Also, it does not matter if someone has an agenda or not, it is their right to have an agenda. I had a friend of mine say it is not the time for OCCUPY we are at war. Funny we were at war when the tea party was calling our president a socialist and comparing him to Hitler. Imagine what Limbaugh would have said if the Tea Party protesters got maced? Blind ideological allegiance is dangerous to the ideologues more than anyone. Ask yourself how many RHINOS exist. Who is really with you in this ideology game or who is just saying they are with you?

U.S. banks should "undermine" Occupy protesters: memo - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/u-banks-undermine-occupy-protestors-memo-213618820.html)


The Occupy Wall Street movement is a big enough problem for U.S. banks that they should pay for opposition research into the political motives of protesters, said a firm that lobbies for the industry.

Clark Lytle Geduldig & Cranford, a Washington-based firm, proposed the idea in a memo to the American Banking Association, an industry group which said on Saturday that it did not act on the idea.

The four-page memo outlined how the firm could analyze the source of protesters' money, as well as their rhetoric and the backgrounds of protest leaders.

"If we can show they have the same cynical motivation as a political opponent, it will undermine their credibility in a profound way," said the memo, according to a copy of it on the website of TV news channel MSNBC, which first reported on it.

UC Davis pepper spray video: Chancellor Linda Katehi refuses to quit after police attack | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2063706/UC-Davis-pepper-spray-video-Chancellor-Linda-Katehi-refuses-quit-police-attack.html)


http://p.twimg.com/AepbXd_CMAEMGFy.jpg


LOL@ their motto. "A community that embraces civility".

LOL@ their motto. "A community that embraces civility".

Ms Spicuzza told the Sacramento Bee that police used the pepper spray after they were surrounded. Protesters were warned repeatedly beforehand that force would be used if they didn't move, she said.

'There was no way out of that circle,' Ms Spicuzza said. 'They were cutting the officers off from their support. It's a very volatile situation.'

The tents went up on Thursday, and protesters were apparently warned on Friday morning that they had until 3 pm to take them down or they would be removed.

On Friday, Katehi released a statement saying the police had no option.
'Following our requests, several of the group chose to dismantle their tents this afternoon and we are grateful for their actions. However a number of protesters refused our warning, offering us no option but to ask the police to assist in their removal.

'We are saddened to report that during this activity, 10 protestors were arrested and pepper spray was used. We will be reviewing the details of the incident,' she told the New York Daily News.

The university lacked the resources to keep the protest site from becoming a public health hazard. she said


Read more: UC Davis pepper spray video: Chancellor Linda Katehi refuses to quit after police attack | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2063706/UC-Davis-pepper-spray-video-Chancellor-Linda-Katehi-refuses-quit-police-attack.html#ixzz1eHCqbfoX)

They were asked, they were warned and some complied others left the authorities no choice but to use force. Not like they surprised them with the pepper spray. It's a no win for the police. If they don't use the spray then they risk a melee trying to break up an illegal protest. Sorry, don't demonize the police when ample warnings were given and ample opportunity to disburse peacefully.

UC Davis pepper spray video: Chancellor Linda Katehi refuses to quit after police attack | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2063706/UC-Davis-pepper-spray-video-Chancellor-Linda-Katehi-refuses-quit-police-attack.html)


http://p.twimg.com/AepbXd_CMAEMGFy.jpg


LOL@ their motto. "A community that embraces civility".

You're quoting the Mail On Line?
You really expect any credibility after that?

For those against "Occupy" I would like to know:

Is it fair that 90% of elections at all levels are won by the person who spends more money (or gets more money from private interests)?

Do you support the right of corporations to spend millions of dollars lobbying congress, undermining the relationship between politicians and their constituents?

Does it seem moral that politicians can use insider information based on policy decisions to trade stocks and line their own pockets?

Is it okay that politicians who help corporations often end up getting high-paying jobs from those same corporations when they leave office?

Does it seem logical that in our capitalist system, a massive financial institution could become "too big to fail," forcing taxpayers to pickup a multi-trillion dollar bill brought about by destructive and reckless decision making by those institutions' leadership?

Do you see a problem with the fact that 20 years ago, you could raise a family on a single income, while today 2-income families sometimes barely scrape by - and that trend looks to continue?

Maybe you do not agree with the delivery of the unorganized movement. But how can you not support the message?

http://i.imgur.com/t1onp.jpg

UC Davis pepper spray video: Chancellor Linda Katehi refuses to quit after police attack | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2063706/UC-Davis-pepper-spray-video-Chancellor-Linda-Katehi-refuses-quit-police-attack.html)


http://p.twimg.com/AepbXd_CMAEMGFy.jpg


LOL@ their motto. "A community that embraces civility".


I think they want to get pepper sprayed. Look at all the cameras there to capture this even though the cops warned them over and over again. Now they can scream about the cops. They are trying to take the blame off themself and get it directed toward the cops. Its also funny how they seem to always leave out the cops warning them in these clips posted.

For those against "Occupy" I would like to know:

Is it fair that 90% of elections at all levels are won by the person who spends more money (or gets more money from private interests)?

Do you support the right of corporations to spend millions of dollars lobbying congress, undermining the relationship between politicians and their constituents?

Does it seem moral that politicians can use insider information based on policy decisions to trade stocks and line their own pockets?

Is it okay that politicians who help corporations often end up getting high-paying jobs from those same corporations when they leave office?

Does it seem logical that in our capitalist system, a massive financial institution could become "too big to fail," forcing taxpayers to pickup a multi-trillion dollar bill brought about by destructive and reckless decision making by those institutions' leadership?

Do you see a problem with the fact that 20 years ago, you could raise a family on a single income, while today 2-income families sometimes barely scrape by - and that trend looks to continue?

Maybe you do not agree with the delivery of the unorganized movement. But how can you not support the message?

http://i.imgur.com/t1onp.jpg

Have you ever thought that the reason they have more money to spend is because they have more support and with that support come donations? I think the two go hand in hand. I'm not saying that I support it just making the point.