#OCCUPYWALLSTREET campaign - September 17

[seemslikeadream]

[wordspeak2]

The media coverage has been mixed. There's been a lot of the usual way the press write these things off, saying- "There are so many messages; it's not clear what they're protesting again. Seems they're just angry kids protesting to protest."

I'm proposing a mass letter-to-the-editor campaign. I think it couldn't possibly be more appropriate than the current situation. Here's mine, to the Washington Post:
**
Ezra Klein suggests that the "Occupy Wall Street" protest has fuzzy demands and an unclear message, but what's really unclear is the media's lack of getting it, when the protestors' message is clear as day. The wealth gap in this country is absolutely outrageous, and the largest corporations continues to grow in wealth and in power over our political process. How about closing corporate tax loopholes, raising taxes on the rich, and starting to create public sector jobs, for a start?

It's hardly rocket science to see what the protests are all about: 99% of us are being left out of the party, and it's high time to turn the boat around.

NAME, ADDRESS, PHONE
**
You're more likely to get printed if you reference a specific article that a given newspaper prints. You can just search through google (or write to your local paper)

[2012 Countdown]

==

Rolling Stone-

What Occupy Wall Street Is Really About
POSTED: October 3, 7:10 PM ET | By Tim Dickinson

So what's Occupy Wall Street really about?

The answer can be found at We Are the 99 Percent.

Americans young and old are posting pictures of themselves on this Tumblr, along with their stories written on a simple piece of paper.

These are middle class folks who worked hard, played by the rules — and got steamrolled by the Great Recession, even as the Wall Street bonus machine roared on.

I've never seen anything like this as a form of political protest. It's wrenching and honest and true.

Personally, I can't stop thinking about this guy, whose face is straight out of a Dorothea Lange photo:



http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/bl ... t-20111003

===
Occupy Wall Street Protest Spreads
POSTED: October 3, 5:25 PM ET | By Lauren Lipsay

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/bl ... s-20111003

[2012 Countdown]

Rush Limbaugh’s Occupy Wall St. Rant Proves The Protesters Are Winning
October 3, 2011By Jason Easle

On his radio show today, Rush Limbaugh proved that the Occupy Wall Street protesters are winning by going on the attack and calling the protesters, “stupid, idiots, and tools.”

Here is the audio from Media Matters
---
Here is the transcript:

CALLER: Hello, Rush, it’s always such an honor to speak with you.

RUSH: Thank you very much.

CALLER: I’m a very involved conservative, and so I was somehow mistakenly put on SEIU’s robo-calls and conference calls, and this last call was very enlightening. SEIU is changing subjects from Obama administration scandals and his economic policies to active class warfare. They are supporting — they’re part of the group of activists that supports Occupy Los Angeles, an offshoot of Occupy Wall Street, and –

RUSH: You know what’s crazy about these people?

CALLER: What?

RUSH: These are the people that marched on the Brooklyn Bridge over the weekend and so forth.

CALLER: Right.

RUSH: You know how stupid these people are?

CALLER: Incredibly

RUSH: These people are out marching for big government. They’re advocating for Obama’s reelection. They are marching against Wall Street. Who’s in bed with Obama? Wall Street.

CALLER: Right.

RUSH: These people are tools. They are abject tools. They are an embarrassment. I mean the Vietnam War crowd is embarrassed at this bunch, how stupid they are, and then to be steered onto the Brooklyn Bridge where they can then be charged with a crime for obstructing a roadway? This is a bunch of idiots. How did the SEIU end up with your phone number?

CALLER: Well, I was working for Meg Whitman, her campaign for governor.

RUSH: Oh, yeah, she’s the CEO at Hewlett Packard.

CALLER: Right. And Meg Whitman was our only chance at getting the governorship back –

RUSH: Yeah, McCain loves her, that’s right, I remember.

CALLER: And after what Brown or his people called her, nothing was done about that, –

RUSH: Yeah.

CALLER: — nothing was done about that, but somehow I mistakenly got on their robo-call and I have been getting calls since last November, and it’s really amusing ’cause you can find out what the other side’s doing.

Limbaugh’s little insult fest combined with Fox News’ attempts to spin and smear the protests and protesters today are the strongest evidence yet that the right wing corporate power brokers are scared. They are afraid that the message of the protest will get out and reach the American people. They are terrified that the people just may rise up and take back their government. The right wants to make Occupy Wall Street a partisan protest.

Their worst nightmare is that conservatives will join with liberals to form a mass movement that cuts across partisan lines in an effort to fix the broken political system and give the government back to the people. In order to prevent the message from spreading to the hard right, Limbaugh and Fox News are trying to frame the protests as strictly a left wing affair.

The truth is that there are people on the left, right, and middle involved in Occupy Wall Street. The idea that conservatives might catch on that unless they are the super-rich, they are also part of the 99% terrifies the political right. Rush Limbaugh thinks the protesters are idiots because he is a part of the 1%. The right wing is scared.

They are afraid that the message of Occupy Wall Street is spreading. They are terrified Occupy Wall Street will become a truly revolutionary movement that will topple the power structure that has allowed them to own and manipulate the American political system for decades.

Deep in his heart, Rush Limbaugh is most worried that Occupy Wall Street is coming for him.
--
Ingarose on October 3, 2011 at 9:35 pm
Yes, they are scared. I left already two posts on the previous article. But now it becomes dangerous. They feel finally a little wounded and we know that a wounded animal is very dangerous. Wounded animals often behave in a total rabid way and that is how some of those on Fox and talk radio are behaving.

----
Reply
majii on October 3, 2011 at 11:28 pm
When Wall St. was bailed out in the Fall of 2008, it was not with money labeled as belonging to the right or the left. It was with money that came from all of us. We have all been treated poorly by Wall St. Occupy Wall St is not a movement intended to benefit only those on the left. Hopefully, it will help all of us–left, right, and center because there are individuals in each of these categories who lost homes to foreclosure and/or need jobs while Wall St. refuses to do anything to help.

Reply
Anne on October 3, 2011 at 11:38 pm
Limbaugh is at the bottom 1% when it comes to rationality and sanity. Like other attempts to discredit movements by labeling them as communist-inspired, he and his ilk are trying to label it as leftwing, when it is obviously encompassing people from all points across the political spectrum. That means that some conservatives have already caught on that they are in the 99% non-wealthy group that has been hurt by the malfeasance of Wall Street. I wonder how Limbaugh and those other fools feel about the fact that the arrests have only galvanized people participating in the movement.

Reply
SinghX on October 3, 2011 at 11:39 pm
“…I mean the Vietnam War crowd is embarrassed at this bunch, how stupid they are, and then to be steered onto the Brooklyn Bridge where they can then be charged with a crime for obstructing a roadway? This is a bunch of idiots…”

Really? Really, Rush, those protesting against the Viet Nam war were an embarrassment to who Rush; to you and your fleas? Mr. High School letter jack never serve a day in his life and everybody knows why. He’s the embarrassment!

Does he honestly believe protesters were steered so they could be “tricked” when the joke is on people like him? Bottom-feeders like Rush-ball are not thinkers, cons and connivers, yeah, but he could never see that those supposed ‘enforcers’ were enforcing to call more attention. It would never occur to such a smart man like Rush…no, he’s such an honest broker! He and only he has the real insight to all things ‘Mera’kan, so everybody else should shut up and go home before he sticks his cigar in your eye…oh hell, he’ll do it anyway just for grins ‘cuz that’s the kind of guy he really is…ask any of his ex’s.

Reply
Greg on October 4, 2011 at 1:06 am
I’m just amazed that so many so-called independent, non-establishment people such as Alex Jones have eagerly jumped on the bandwagon and proclaimed this a tool of Obama.
Great masses of people have been brought together by a desire to end the parasitic exploitation by the corporate elite– it doesn’t matter who is trying to coopt the movement. Those people are power all on their own, and those who are against the corporate oligarchy are not going to suddenly change their minds and support corporate tool Obama just because Obama desperately hopes they’ll help him. They won’t.

I really am starting to think many of those right wing, so-called anti-establishment figureheads might be in bed with the corporate oligarchy themselves.
--
Reply
Shiva on October 4, 2011 at 9:10 am
“RUSH: These people are out marching for big government. They’re advocating for Obama’s reelection. They are marching against Wall Street. Who’s in bed with Obama? Wall Street.”

I am going to assume that rush has no idea of what he just said in the above paragraph. If Wall Street is in bed with Obama, then wouldn’t the people be marching in favor of Wall Street in order to get Obama reelected?

Just proves that rush can say anything stupid and his people will go right along with it.
---
http://www.politicususa.com/en/rush-lim ... ticus+USA+)

[brainpanhandler]

It's hardly rocket science to see what the protests are all about: 99% of us are being left out of the party, and it's high time to turn the boat around.

Just a bit of friendly, constructive criticism:

I assume you are American from your letter when you say, "The wealth gap in this country is absolutely outrageous...", although of course I might be misreading that. Regardless, let's not forget that as bad as things are in this country, conditions are nonetheless radically better in material terms than most of the rest of the world, although we might argue about what "bad" and "better" really means.

Besides mixing your metaphors a bit too much, unless of course you meant a party boat, I think that I don't really want to join their death party. I am already too much a party to the crimes of the soul grinder. Fuck their party.

I'll settle for plain old justice and common decency, which I understand is not nearly concrete or specific enough to serve as goal clarifying, but, you're right, it's not rocket science and to pretend that you (impersonal you) don't understand what the fuss is all about is to either reveal your let-them-eat-cake-obliviousness to the suffering all around you or more pointedly the knowing, callous hatred of your fellow human beings. In either case, shame.

[Plutonia]

Was the march on BK deliberately lead into a kettle/trap by a few covert operatives? Definitely worth examining what happened from this angle:

Brave Leaders, Provocateurs, or Agents? Brooklyn Bridge Leaders.

by War on Error
permalink 273 Comments

NYPD very carefully chronicled the mass arrest of OCCUPYWALLSTREET protesters on the Brooklyn Bridge. And so did the good citizens that were marching.

So, what really happened. I just had to know. Police say protesters were warned, protesters say they were led by police onto the bridge. Somewhere the truth can be found. However, in spending a few hours looking at vids and pics, I saw what look to be leaders of the Take the Bridge crowd. So

Let's dissect that.

And ask for answers to some important questions so the truth can be uncovered.

"Were there provocateurs that led people ONTO the Brooklyn Bridge?"

Was it the original OccupyWallStreet plan to march ONTO the bridge?

Do any of the OccupyWallStreet General Assembly recognize these people?

Will the March to Brooklyn organizers and/or anyone please answer these questions for us? Thanks.

In the beginning all were marching onto the Walkway, which is legal. The streets from Liberty Park to the bridge were lined with police.




There are several people I want you to notice.

There pictures are below. Can we identify those who led the march ONTO the Brooklyn Bridge?


One woman has a green shirt on with an orange scarf. Notice the tatoo on the right arm. Does anyone recognize this tatoo? What does it mean?



One woman has curly long hair and literally gets in front of crowd at entrance to the bridge and yells "Take the Bridge". She has on denim shorts and a black shirt. By leading the chant, I doubt many heard the Police warning. She yells the chant as the Police Officer is warning the crowd.



And the man with no shirt. I've seen his pics at others rallys. He has a huge red star tatooed to his back. There is also a tatoo on his right arm. Only a number 6 shows. What could that be?




Facing the crowd



In the front row these three hook up with other people that, quite frankly look frightened and confused.





In the following video, you can see that the woman in the green shirt/orange scarf and the woman with the curly hair know each other. They each hook arms with the confused looking people and lead the march onto the bridge.

Does anyone know any of these people?

Did anyone see either of these people, or any of the confused looking people get arrested?Watch closely.

Slow down the vid and watch the three mentioned above, hook up with the confused looking people and seemingly lead the march onto the bridge.

It's a fair question "Are these three provocateurs?"

Why wouldn't those in the front use the Human Mic to relay the Police Warning?



Provocateurs? Or well-known leaders? Anyone?

The Front row group facing the crowd and shouting "Take the Bridge"



While Police Officer issuing warning:




Here we are now, in the middle of the bridge facing the arresting officers.

Do you see the curly haired woman with the denim shorts?



Oh, looks like she might have gotten arrested. See minute 7:23



What do you think? Anyone?

After kettling the protesters from front and back, this officer gives them a warning to leave or be arrested. Kind of hard to leave at this point, you think? Besides, what a huge waste of vans ready to cart away the people.



So, why post this tonight? Kossack middleagedhousewife hit the nail on the head for me:

If they were the ones yelling "take the bridge" (9+ / 0-)

1) drowning out the police's clear warning that they'd face arrest on that bridge, and

2) not passing that warning back with the standard "mic check" followed by the people's mic,

it is a valid question.

I completely understand and agree with not wanting to falsely accuse anyone of causing trouble, but something went wrong here, and 700 people, most of whom did not have records, and some of whom were 13, 14, 15, 16 year old children, had to endure hours in cuffs and jail, and now have records. I don't want to see it happen again. At the very least, if these people were just overly enthusiastic, they need to next time, to be asked to pass back the police warning of arrest.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/0 ... via=search

[Nordic]

Really? We're supposed to be worried about our "records" if we go to a protest?

Afraid I don't want to trust anyone who's telling me to worry about my "record" in this context.

In otherwords, this seems like classic "divide and conquer" tactics here -- "don't trust your fellow protesters" or you might end up with marks on your "permanent record" and then, by golly, the authorities may not like you down the road.

Bullshit.

While the protesters need to of course look out for provocateurs, this seems like a subtle form of provocateuring itself.

[ninakat]

Click image for scribd page:

[Plutonia]

Really? We're supposed to be worried about our "records" if we go to a protest?

Afraid I don't want to trust anyone who's telling me to worry about my "record" in this context.

In otherwords, this seems like classic "divide and conquer" tactics here -- "don't trust your fellow protesters" or you might end up with marks on your "permanent record" and then, by golly, the authorities may not like you down the road.

Bullshit.

While the protesters need to of course look out for provocateurs, this seems like a subtle form of provocateuring itself.

Yeah, it could be and I agree with you that worrying about getting a record in this context is silly but...

A powerful way to neutralize a movement is to bog everybody down with defending themselves in court - precious time, attention, energy and resources get diverted from the movement.

Was it Bruce who saw the red star tattoo guy being confronted about the Occupy Wall Street Journal? That is the sort of thing that counter-intelligencers would do to subvert the movement. 1) As been pointed out, it's an expensive project - where did the funds come from? 2) It looks cool and so may get a pass without critical scrutiny and 3) It's hard copy and so is prime to be pointed at and quoted from in MSM as "evidence" of an Occupy Wall Street "official" ideology.

I'd be interested to read it for spin in there that might alienate potential supporters.

This is from the comments:

Oh, you can bet there are provocateurs. (41+ / 0-)

We had them in Wisconsin despite Walker's denial. I saw three of them work their way to the front of the crowd one day when Walker restricted access to the capitol and we were gathered outside. They stayed for a few minutes encouraging people to rush the cops, but they were shouted down. Then they whispered to each other and left.

Who sent them I have no idea, but I have no doubt you will see similar occurrences in New York.

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/102222 ... showrate=1#c12

Edit: Thanks ninacat, I'll have a look at that.

[Bruce Dazzling]

Really? We're supposed to be worried about our "records" if we go to a protest?

Afraid I don't want to trust anyone who's telling me to worry about my "record" in this context.

In otherwords, this seems like classic "divide and conquer" tactics here -- "don't trust your fellow protesters" or you might end up with marks on your "permanent record" and then, by golly, the authorities may not like you down the road.

Bullshit.

While the protesters need to of course look out for provocateurs, this seems like a subtle form of provocateuring itself.

Yeah, it could be and I agree with you that worrying about getting a record in this context is silly but...

A powerful way to neutralize a movement is to bog everybody down with defending themselves in court - precious time, attention, energy and resources get diverted from the movement.

Was it Bruce who saw the red star tattoo guy being confronted about the Occupy Wall Street Journal? That is the sort of thing that counter-intelligencers would do to subvert the movement. 1) As been pointed out, it's an expensive project - where did the funds come from? 2) It looks cool and so may get a pass without critical scrutiny and 3) It's hard copy and so is prime to be pointed at and quoted from in MSM as "evidence" of an Occupy Wall Street "official" ideology.

I'd be interested to read it for spin in there that might alienate potential supporters.

This is from the comments:

Oh, you can bet there are provocateurs. (41+ / 0-)

We had them in Wisconsin despite Walker's denial. I saw three of them work their way to the front of the crowd one day when Walker restricted access to the capitol and we were gathered outside. They stayed for a few minutes encouraging people to rush the cops, but they were shouted down. Then they whispered to each other and left.

Who sent them I have no idea, but I have no doubt you will see similar occurrences in New York.

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/102222 ... showrate=1#c12

Edit: Thanks ninacat, I'll have a look at that.

Yes, Plutonia, it was me who saw the argument over the publishing of the Occupy Wall Street Journal.

This is Red Star Tattoo Guy in mid-argument.



He was actually supporting the publishing of the broadsheet, and was angrily decrying one of the self-styled movement leaders as a fascist for trying to prevent others from getting a message out there.

And yes -- absolutely -- provocateuring is something that we need to be aware of at all times, and I'm 100% certain that there are already provocateurs in the mix. Unfortunately, I have a full-time job, so I'm not able to spend enough time amongst the protesters to get a real solid handle on who might be trying to throw a monkey wrench into the works.

On the other hand, however, Red Star Tattoo Guy is also Evolve to Communism Guy, and it certainly could be argued that labeling the protesters as "commies" is helpful to TPTB.

[seemslikeadream]

[Free]

Nordic wrote
:

Really? We're supposed to be worried about our "records" if we go to a protest?

Afraid I don't want to trust anyone who's telling me to worry about my "record" in this context.

In otherwords, this seems like classic "divide and conquer" tactics here -- "don't trust your fellow protesters" or you might end up with marks on your "permanent record" and then, by golly, the authorities may not like you down the road.

Bullshiit. While the protesters need to of course look out for provocateurs, this seems like a subtle form of provocateuring itself.

I think most people who go to a protest would prefer, if possible, not to get arrested, which to me seems fine and normal.

Who the people at the head of the march, that are yelling to "take the bridge" are is a valid question. Usually people who behave this way are either provocateurs or macho show-offs. Peaceful protest is the consensus. A few testosterone fueled hotheads can't fight their police and war machine but they can help ruin things for the non-violent majority. Movements in recent memory were undone with these and other mistakes and tactics. Hopefully now we're too smart for that.

[Free]

Re: occupied Wall St. journal

I didn't read every article but did read most and was very impressed. The lead article, "The Revolution Begins at Home" by Arun Gupta of the Indypendant, was very inspiring and well written. I felt that it was a paper that we could be proud of and could move people to join..... It must be posted somewhere on the Internet? No?

[Bruce Dazzling]

Re: occupied Wall St. journal

I didn't read every article but did read most and was very impressed. The lead article, "The Revolution Begins at Home" by Arun Gupta of the Indypendant, was very inspiring and well written. I felt that it was a paper that we could be proud of and could move people to join..... It must be posted somewhere on the Internet? No?

It's here, but it's not particularly readable...

[Luther Blissett]

Really? We're supposed to be worried about our "records" if we go to a protest?

Afraid I don't want to trust anyone who's telling me to worry about my "record" in this context.

In otherwords, this seems like classic "divide and conquer" tactics here -- "don't trust your fellow protesters" or you might end up with marks on your "permanent record" and then, by golly, the authorities may not like you down the road.

Bullshit.

While the protesters need to of course look out for provocateurs, this seems like a subtle form of provocateuring itself.

Yeah, it could be and I agree with you that worrying about getting a record in this context is silly but...

A powerful way to neutralize a movement is to bog everybody down with defending themselves in court - precious time, attention, energy and resources get diverted from the movement.

Was it Bruce who saw the red star tattoo guy being confronted about the Occupy Wall Street Journal? That is the sort of thing that counter-intelligencers would do to subvert the movement. 1) As been pointed out, it's an expensive project - where did the funds come from? 2) It looks cool and so may get a pass without critical scrutiny and 3) It's hard copy and so is prime to be pointed at and quoted from in MSM as "evidence" of an Occupy Wall Street "official" ideology.

I'd be interested to read it for spin in there that might alienate potential supporters.

This is from the comments:

Oh, you can bet there are provocateurs. (41+ / 0-)

We had them in Wisconsin despite Walker's denial. I saw three of them work their way to the front of the crowd one day when Walker restricted access to the capitol and we were gathered outside. They stayed for a few minutes encouraging people to rush the cops, but they were shouted down. Then they whispered to each other and left.

Who sent them I have no idea, but I have no doubt you will see similar occurrences in New York.

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/102222 ... showrate=1#c12

Edit: Thanks ninacat, I'll have a look at that.

Yes, Plutonia, it was me who saw the argument over the publishing of the Occupy Wall Street Journal.

This is Red Star Tattoo Guy in mid-argument.



He was actually supporting the publishing of the broadsheet, and was angrily decrying one of the self-styled movement leaders as a fascist for trying to prevent others from getting a message out there.

And yes -- absolutely -- provocateuring is something that we need to be aware of at all times, and I'm 100% certain that there are already provocateurs in the mix. Unfortunately, I have a full-time job, so I'm not able to spend enough time amongst the protesters to get a real solid handle on who might be trying to throw a monkey wrench into the works.

On the other hand, however, Red Star Tattoo Guy is also Evolve to Communism Guy, and it certainly could be argued that labeling the protesters as "commies" is helpful to TPTB.

I think the tattoo is real, though, as were his threat that towards his accused "fascist" / censor occupier that he was "a black, dominican, irish, veteran communist," and if he "wants to take this star off of [his] back, you'll have to kill [him] first."

My vote for him being an agents provocateur is a cautious "no," he's probably just an ideologue. A very loud and intimidating one.