Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Pause Switch to Standard View MayDay Protests Turn Violent
Show More
Loading...
Flag Ironhold May 1, 2012 5:42 PM EDT

Note that this is MSN who is reporting this.

Seattle - vandalism is rampant, as numerous buildings and vehicles have had their windows smashed out by individual Occupy protestors; tires have also reportedly been slashed. one of the people who had his car vandalized was a Canadian citizen, meaning that Occupy Seattle is now about to incur an International brow-beating

Oakland - protestors have been pounding on bank windows and going face-first with local police officials. This appears to be part of a larger effort to shut the entire city down.

So yeah - at least two chapters of the Occupy movement are now in the process of embarassing the larger organization.

Flag Druac May 1, 2012 7:32 PM EDT

They need to stand for something other than anarchy. Protesting is one thing, vandalism and obstruction is another all together, in my honest opinion. Two wrongs don’t make a right, and all that jazz.


Occupy This!


We need to get serious about changing our government and wrenching the control from the corporations and filthy rich, but in my honest opinion, this is not the way to do it…and Occupy has done nothing but embarrass itself over and over again.

Flag catboxer May 1, 2012 8:03 PM EDT

Seattle Times reporters on the scene today say "May Day protests turned violent early Tuesday afternoon as a cluster of about 50 demonstrators dressed in black and carrying poles smashed windows and clashed with police in the downtown Seattle retail core."


seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews...


Flag Bodean May 1, 2012 9:03 PM EDT

Waiting for Ted ... and the waving of hands.

Flag rangerken May 2, 2012 12:36 AM EDT

I'm sorry anyone got hurt and also I'm sorry about trashed businesses. BUT, I am very happy that the OWS types have once again shown that...


1. they are immature, amateur, anachists.


2. they are far, far differen from the law abiding tea party folks.


3. they obviously WANT to give the Repubicans a great campaign issue to use in the fall...well, I'm sure they don't, but that's the net effect.


4. and since in my state, Massachusetts, the Democratic candidate for senator running against Scott Brown, Liz Warren, has been a vocakl supporter of the OWS people, this will hurt her and make it even less likely that she will win in the fall. YEA!  (Brown supporter here obviously).


Ken

Flag davelaw40 May 2, 2012 1:49 AM EDT

why would the OWS even want to identify themselves with the far left and the International workers movement? Don't they know that middle America identifies May Day with streams of Russian Tanks parading through the Soviet Bloc?



en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Work...

Flag catboxer May 2, 2012 8:45 AM EDT

The Seattle Times reports this morning that there were "spasms of violence" punctuating the "mostly peaceful" protests downtown yesterday. Still, it was a bad show in Seattle yesterday, especially early on.


seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews...


Most of the violence was vandalism of the broken-windows type, directed mostly against financial institutions. Now, there's no question in my mind that NikeTown deserved to have its windows busted and its store trashed, but at the same time doing that is a very bad idea, because it causes the protesters to lose the one battle they have to win -- the battle of the mass media.


If a movement like #OWS is to overcome the tyranny of the corporate bottom line and dictatorship of money, it will have to use force, just as Gandhi's followers did, and just as the civil rights people did 20 and 30 years later in the US. Repressive regimes will only yield ground under the pressure of force, since they can't be persuaded and they have no concscience people can appeal to.


But the force must be applied with great restraint and self-control. If the insurgents resort to violence, then they lose the battle of the media, and then it's checkmate and lights out.


My advice to the 50 or so people who split off from the main demonstration yesterday to break stuff is to control your vessel. It may feel good to resort to violence, and of course Bank of America has it coming.


I'd be in favor of it too, if I thought it would do any good.

Flag Nepenthe May 2, 2012 8:54 AM EDT

The Mayday protests turned violent before they even began:


NYPD Celebrates May Day


Think about what just happened, here. On a day strongly associated with the old Soviet bloc, armed government agents staged early morning raids on the homes of suspected political dissidents, detained them, then interrogated them about their plans and political affiliations. And of course this isn’t the first time this has happened. There were similar preemptive raids ahead of the 2008 RNC convention in Minneapolis. Almost none of the charges resulting from those raids stuck, and the city has since been handing out settlement checks like parade candy.


Flag ZafodB May 2, 2012 9:14 AM EDT

and this says it all

Flag catboxer May 2, 2012 9:36 AM EDT

Don't be silly. Who worries about rape at the Menopause Manor retirement village?

Flag catboxer May 2, 2012 11:42 AM EDT

Rule #2: The guy who knows where to get the dynamite is always undercover FBI.

Flag amcolph May 2, 2012 1:24 PM EDT

May 2, 2012 -- 8:45AM, catboxer wrote:


 


My advice to the 50 or so people who split off from the main demonstration yesterday to break stuff is to control your vessel. It may feel good to resort to violence, and of course Bank of America has it coming.


I'd be in favor of it too, if I thought it would do any good.




Still, protests like that must have a certain amount of 'ominousness' to them.  The threat, at least, of violence must always be there.  Splitting off a small, distinct (and ultimately deniable--in case the violence gets out of hand) group seems like a good tactic--as was the Cincinatti OWS decision to cancel their protest because of the link to the bridge bombing team.


In the end, discipline is of utmost importance--whether there is violence or not--not just to avoid bad press, but because a disciplined protest is the most fearsome.

Flag catboxer May 2, 2012 1:51 PM EDT

Sorry, Amcolph, but I see no percentage whatever in hooliganism, or even the threat of it.


Force, yes, but not hooliganism. And you can mount force just with the weight of sheer numbers, as we've seen in Egypt and throughout the Middle East, as well as in the battles on Wall Street and the Brooklyn Bridge this past fall, which forced changes in the national conversation.



Flag Girlchristian May 2, 2012 2:08 PM EDT

May 2, 2012 -- 1:24PM, amcolph wrote:


May 2, 2012 -- 8:45AM, catboxer wrote:


 


My advice to the 50 or so people who split off from the main demonstration yesterday to break stuff is to control your vessel. It may feel good to resort to violence, and of course Bank of America has it coming.


I'd be in favor of it too, if I thought it would do any good.




Still, protests like that must have a certain amount of 'ominousness' to them.  The threat, at least, of violence must always be there.  Splitting off a small, distinct (and ultimately deniable--in case the violence gets out of hand) group seems like a good tactic--as was the Cincinatti OWS decision to cancel their protest because of the link to the bridge bombing team.


In the end, discipline is of utmost importance--whether there is violence or not--not just to avoid bad press, but because a disciplined protest is the most fearsome.





I disagree. MLK Jr's movement got much more done than the Black Panthers and part of that was because MLK used force in the sense that he had a large number of supporters, but he didn't use violence and he condemned violence as a tactic. Black Panthers used violence and it cost them their credibility.

Flag amcolph May 2, 2012 2:43 PM EDT

No doubt you two are entirely correct that nonviolence is by far the best way, but you don't want  your adversaries to be too certain of what might happen down the road if they continue to ignore you. 


In the present circumstances sending the message that "a lot of people don't like what you are doing, maybe you'd better stop" isn't going to be nearly enough.

Flag Bodean May 2, 2012 7:02 PM EDT

May 2, 2012 -- 2:43PM, amcolph wrote:


No doubt you two are entirely correct that nonviolence is by far the best way, but you don't want  your adversaries to be too certain of what might happen down the road if they continue to ignore you. 


In the present circumstances sending the message that "a lot of people don't like what you are doing, maybe you'd better stop" isn't going to be nearly enough.





The only problem I see with your view AM .. is one has to ask: Who is the Demonstration really for??


Do you think the Demonstration is for Wall Streeters??  Do you think the Demonstrations are for Government Officials?? ..... OR .... is the Demonstration for the PUBLIC as an effort to garner mainstream support for ideas??.. thus pressure politicians to make changes?


I'd say .. protests are for the latter!  You want the PUBLIC to view your organization as a reputable group with reputable ideas.  I don't recall reading story after story about the Tea Party vandalizing places, starting trouble, raping women, destroying property.  While some still oppose the Tea Party Ideas, they can't do so on the basis that they as a group are not primarily upstanding, peaceful people.


Can't say that about some of the "visual" groups of the OWS crowd.  I know there are plenty of reputable peace loving folk .... the problem, is their platform and ideas are of the kind that attract the schaff of the society, who just hate the rich, and think they are owed their pound of flesh.

Flag Father_Oblivion May 2, 2012 9:06 PM EDT

Friends of mine present at the Seattle protest claim those "dressed in black" who were causing trouble were wearing new clothes, not a sign of the typical 'Black Bloc' who are usually behind the damage. They (Black Bloc) don't buy new clothes just so they can be destroyed by paint or be discarded because of being soaked with pepper spray, that would be expensive. These people don't have money to spend on new clothes to be worn once and discarded. They use old clothes or buy them at thrift stores.


This sounds like agent provocateurs at work.

Flag christzen May 2, 2012 10:36 PM EDT

May 2, 2012 -- 9:06PM, Father_Oblivion wrote:


Friends of mine present at the Seattle protest claim those "dressed in black" who were causing trouble were wearing new clothes, not a sign of the typical 'Black Bloc' who are usually behind the damage. They (Black Bloc) don't buy new clothes just so they can be destroyed by paint or be discarded because of being soaked with pepper spray, that would be expensive. These people don't have money to spend on new clothes to be worn once and discarded. They use old clothes or buy them at thrift stores.


This sounds like agent provocateurs at work.




 


"Friends of mine claim" is proof of agent provocateurs?


 


Or an attempt to shed blame for their own violence?

Flag ted08721 May 2, 2012 11:52 PM EDT

As far as violence is concern if everyone remembers we had this discussion several months ago with black bloc or outside forces were involved if anyone wants they can go back and search.
I know I read many articles and listened to several hours of audio with a good portion of it being debates between black bloc leaders and those oppose to those tatics like Chris Hedges.

Also all those allegations of rapes had been proven false so if people want to go down that whole road do not look for me to give much of a response if any.
The occupy Movement will still have marches, rallies and protests but they are also have moved on since most camps are now a thing of the past, also are gone are the stories both true and false that came out of those camps.
Tonight I watch a segment on Viewpoint With Eliot Spitzer, he interview a young man and woman that worked for those large banks on Wall Street, they files a public brief.

A new day for OWS: Josh Harkinson and Yetta Kurland review May Day and assess the movement's future
I don't know if this link will work if you don't have Comcast

xfinitytv.comcast.net/tv/Viewpoint-With-...

Here is another link that does not go through Comcast it does not have tonight's show but one from yesterday about Occupy

current.com/shows/viewpoint/videos/a-new...

 
Flag ted08721 May 3, 2012 12:05 AM EDT



As far as what Occupy's message is that many claimed they did not knoweven though they could have looked at the protest signs to find out, I think these people did know but just wanted to belly ache that they didn't understand. well here is a real pie chart for you 

Flag CharikIeia May 3, 2012 5:19 AM EDT

What does "Release of all Free ENERGY Technologies" mean?


Sounds like taken straight from "Tesla-was-murdered-by-General-Electric" conspiracy theorists...

Flag amcolph May 3, 2012 9:06 AM EDT

May 2, 2012 -- 7:02PM, Bodean wrote:


The only problem I see with your view AM .. is one has to ask: Who is the Demonstration really for??


Do you think the Demonstration is for Wall Streeters??  Do you think the Demonstrations are for Government Officials??



Yes.


 

..... OR .... is the Demonstration for the PUBLIC as an effort to garner mainstream support for ideas??.. thus pressure politicians to make changes?



You wish.  Then the movement could be made to go away quietly,  the pirates could breath a sigh of relief and go back to business as usual.


I'd say .. protests are for the latter!  You want the PUBLIC to view your organization as a reputable group with reputable ideas. 



The "PUBLIC" already knows all about it.  The Wall Streeters and their government toadies need to be shown that the "PUBLIC" can rise up and pull them down if necessary.


 I don't recall reading story after story about the Tea Party vandalizing places, starting trouble, raping women, destroying property. 



You evidently have different news sources than I do about the demonstation in Seattle on Tuesday.


 While some still oppose the Tea Party Ideas, they can't do so on the basis that they as a group are not primarily upstanding, peaceful people.



LOL! Who are often ostentatiously healed at their events.


.... who just hate the rich...



Yes, they hate the noble and benevolent rich who have only their best interests at heart for no reason except greed and jealousy.  Imagine that.


Oh, right--you do already.  Imagine it, that is.

Flag Fodaoson May 3, 2012 9:59 AM EDT

Few posters seem to have the understanding of the rhetoric of implication that Catboxer has; he seems to both be able to write it and comprehend it.   Some posters engage in writing  it unknowingly.  

Flag ted08721 May 3, 2012 10:11 AM EDT

May 3, 2012 -- 5:19AM, CharikIeia wrote:


What does "Release of all Free ENERGY Technologies" mean?


Sounds like taken straight from "Tesla-was-murdered-by-General-Electric" conspiracy theorists...





I assume it means to put into use all energy sources that are free such as solar and wind.

Flag arielg May 3, 2012 10:55 AM EDT

May 2, 2012 -- 1:51PM, catboxer wrote:


Sorry, Amcolph, but I see no percentage whatever in hooliganism, or even the threat of it.


Force, yes, but not hooliganism. And you can mount force just with the weight of sheer numbers, as we've seen in Egypt and throughout the Middle East, as well as in the battles on Wall Street and the Brooklyn Bridge this past fall, which forced changes in the national conversation.




Are you kidding?  There is no revolution without violence and it's excess, hooliganism.


There is no such thing as a peaceful revolution. Revolution is an attempt to impose certain ideas by force.


 Evolution doesn't need demostrations and screaming.   Just dialog and the power of ideas which do not need to be imposed or forced.


 

Flag Fodaoson May 3, 2012 11:09 AM EDT

May 3, 2012 -- 10:55AM, arielg wrote:


May 2, 2012 -- 1:51PM, catboxer wrote:


Sorry, Amcolph, but I see no percentage whatever in hooliganism, or even the threat of it.


Force, yes, but not hooliganism. And you can mount force just with the weight of sheer numbers, as we've seen in Egypt and throughout the Middle East, as well as in the battles on Wall Street and the Brooklyn Bridge this past fall, which forced changes in the national conversation.




Are you kidding?  There is no revolution without violence and it's excess, hooliganism.


There is no such thing as a peaceful revolution. Revolution is an attempt to impose certain ideas by force.


 Evolution doesn't need demostrations and screaming.   Just dialog and the power of ideas which do not need to be imposed or forced.


 





Surprise, I agree with arielg; A difficulty is that the word  “revolution” is often used  when evolution is more correct.  Instead of an industrial revolution it was evolution of manufacturing and building techniques. The resulting changes are drastic, but they are accepted because they work better for the purposes desired

Flag catboxer May 3, 2012 11:18 AM EDT

Of course there has to be violence -- violent repression.


That doesn't mean we have to respond in kind.


If Gandhi and ML King had not enforced a rule of nonviolence among their followers, they would have lost.


I'm not interested in losing.


The 99 percent movement is already influencing the 2012 election more than any other single factor. As we edge closer to success, the forces of reaction will lash out with intensified violence and repression. That will be the big test.

Flag SecondSonOfDavid May 3, 2012 1:21 PM EDT

May 3, 2012 -- 11:18AM, catboxer wrote:


The 99 percent movement is already influencing the 2012 election more than any other single factor. 





LOL!  Thanks for the laugh.  That statement is not even remotely true.

Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook