Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
We kick the ass of the ruling class

#J3 - Call To Action Against the NDAA

Posted 2 years ago on Jan. 2, 2012, 1:33 p.m. EST by OccupyWallSt

Tuesday, Jan. 3rd 12PM - 5PM (EST)
New York Public Library, 455 5th Ave, Manhattan (5th Ave and 42nd St.)
(B/D/F/M to 42nd/Bryant Pk, 7 to 5th Ave, 4/5/6/S to Grand Central)

via NYCGA:

A call has been put out to let our government know the people will not tolerate any more attacks on our rights!

January 3rd will be a spontaneous show of people power in reaction to Obama’s treasonous signing of the National Defense Authorization Act. Not only does this act violate our first, third, fourth, fifth and sixth amendments, as well as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, but this Act was signed quietly this past New Years Eve violating what little trust remained between the people and their established government. We see what’s happening here, and we will not stand for it.


Tentative Schedule for Day of Action:

7:30AM (All Day) – OWS solidarity with the New York State Nurses Association Strike at St. Lukes (1111 Amsterdam Ave and 112th Street) and Roosevelt Hospital (1000 10th Ave and 59th Street.)
12PM – Press Conference at NYPL (Bryant Park)
2PM – Office Demonstration at Senator Gillibrand’s office (780 3rd Ave.)
3PM – Office Demonstration at Senator Schumer’s office (757 3rd Ave.)
4PM – Rally at Rockefeller Plaza
5PM – Flash check about NDAA in Grand Central for commuters.
After, we plan to march up 5th ave to do a demo tour of 1 percent homes.
(above subject to change at on short notice.)

Please Help Spread the Word and Please Help Fight Back.

295 Comments

295 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 11 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Better be some Tea Party folks showing up in solidarity with OWS on this one. The only way they are really going to take 'the people' seriously is if they see us joining forces on issues that we agree on.

We can fight over other stuff later, but think what kind of statement it would send to have OWS and TEA PARTY in solidarity against NDAA.

[-] 1 points by theophilanthropy (4) 2 years ago

the original occupy platform discovered http://www.RightsOfMan.org

If the Government, or the Constitution, or by whatever name it be called, be that miracle of perfection which the Proclamation and the Addresses have trumpeted it forth to be, it ought to have defied discussion and investigation, instead of dreading it. Whereas, every attempt it makes, either by Proclamation, Prosecution, or Address, to suppress investigation, is a confession that it feels itself unable to bear it. It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from enquiry. All the numerous pamphlets, and all the newspaper falsehood and abuse, that have been published against the Rights ofMan, have fallen before it like pointless arrows; and, in like manner, would any work have fallen before the Constitution, had the Constitution, as it is called, been founded on as good political principles as those on which the Rights ofMan is written.

It is a good Constitution for courtiers, placemen, pensioners, borough-holders, and the leaders of Parties, and these are the men that have been the active leaders of Addresses; but it is a bad Constitution for at least ninety-nine parts of the nation out of an hundred, and this truth is every day making its way.

It is bad, first, because it entails upon the nation the unnecessary expence of supporting three forms and systems of Government at once, namely, the monarchical, the aristocratical, and the democratical.

Secondly, because it is impossible to unite such a discordant composition by any other means than perpetual corruption; and therefore the corruption so loudly and so universally complained of, is no other than the natural consequence of such an unnatural compound of Governments; and in this consists that excellence which the numerous herd of placemen and pensioners so loudly extol, and which at the same time, occasions that enormous load of taxes under which the rest of the nation groans.

Among the mass of national delusions calculated to amuse and impose upon the multitude, the standing one has been that of flattering them into taxes, by calling the Government (or as they please to express it, the English Constitution) “the envy and the admiration of the world.” Scarcely an Address has been voted in which some of the speakers have not uttered this hackneyed nonsensical falsehood.

The Rights of Man Organization

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

?Question:? HOW can any leader sign a NDAA type law - with threat of citizens being imprisoned w//o a trial for long undefined periods of time and not L00k sinister. B.O. may appear to be in touch with the people on the- but --- his actions DO NOT reflect his words and promises & many wall street goldman sach people are inside his administration -- I am looking forward to the election, I will never make that mistake again.

[-] 1 points by Rascus (30) 2 years ago

Simple....hes elected by the powers that be and he does what he is told to do or his career or even worse his life is over!

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

THE NDAA was signed by B.O. on New Years Eve while on vacation in Hawaii.... this is a bad law, this president is not in touch with citizens at all - he made some promises and has FLIPflopped on several. NDAA can toss a citizen in Prison without trial on undefined charges indefinately.... OVERALL that is a very bad thing for any leader to do to his people - it means really BIG trouble for people who want their views to be heard without threat of long term imprisonment. BAD BAD BAD for millions!

[-] 1 points by InvisiblePatriot (12) 2 years ago

Go after the guys who wrote the bill.

First of all, the power was already there via George Bush. It's buried in the Authorization for Use of Military Force

[-] 1 points by JimBeam (152) 2 years ago

Now you want to band with the Tea Party? After all the Tea Party smashing that goes on at this site now you need them to band with you? Good luck on that happening.

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I understand your point of view. There is bashing that goes on from both sides, because there are truly significant differences in ideologies. It may very well be that some people cannot get past their fixations on these areas of disagreement and will continue to fight even when there is common ground. Despite your valid point, I still say it would be in the best interests of both groups to come together on behalf of all people & apply pressure to get this bill undone.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

[-] 1 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

We have to engage and reach out to as many people as possible in our daily lives Many people are either timid or are in despair thinking that change is impossible. We have to make them feel empowered. Approximately half the population agrees with what OWS is doing, and 80% of people in our country think that we (the country) are going in the wrong direction. We have to tap into that discontent, and remind them of that old saying, "Only those that are foolish enough to think that they can change the world, end up changing it!"

Most of the people who put up posts here are better writers than me, and some of them like me live in the suburbs where they could write letters to the editor. The paper that I have written into several times over the years (once in defense of OWS) has a circulation of 100,000 plus. Anyway, it is a bunch of little things like this that we should be doing over the winter, and if we do this thing has a good chance of growing exponentially.

[-] 1 points by titus (13) 2 years ago

"it is a bunch of little things" distils the essence of your post. Starve the beast, clog the system, Like a leak in the dam, one little hole would be quickly plugged, 99 holes would bring it down. The elite has plans long thought in advance. Don't expect instant gratification and NEVER give up.

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

Ding! Ding! Ding! Aside from the letters I have moved most of my money into a credit union and I told the bank I left that their banking practices sucked. I got rid of most of my credit card debt and wrote them nasty grams when I did. Every time I get credit card offers, I put a bunch of junk mail in the prepaid envelope and OWS written on it somewhere and send it back to them. I also have an OWS bumper sticker on the back of my truck, and I talk to some of my timid friends about what we are trying to do. I also have shared the movies Inside Job, and The Warning with them.

Along with several others, I am working on setting up a web site to reach out to mainstream America with issues that they can easily relate to. One of the young ladies that is working on this project with me might give presentations at senior centers and different clubs, as well.

I have also taken part in several direct actions and have almost been arrested twice for non-violent civil disobedience. I don't expect my luck will hold out very much longer though. If you get the chance google up Chris Hedges Brace Yourself. It's a three hour CSpan interview. It's well worth the time. And you're right, NEVER give up!

[-] 1 points by therising (6643) 2 years ago

I agree with your practical approach.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Cool, I practically agree with me too. :-p

[-] 1 points by maeref (1) 2 years ago

I totally agree with you. We have to come together despite our differences we do have a common ground from which to work from. Just disregard the Dogma and Dialogue instead. As you said the enemy of my enemy is my friend

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Cool, I totally agree with me too. :-p

[-] 1 points by JimBeam (152) 2 years ago

You may be right. But I think it will take much more than NDAA. Look up Zendog's thread on the NDAA. It completely debunks the argument about American Citizens. Zen and I are usually on opposite sides of stuff but he posted the truth on NDAA in the forum today. OWS needs to get back to it's two root issues. Corruption and Corporations in government. If that happens, I wouldn't be surprised if the following got bigger because more people could rally around those two things.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I'll check out Zendog's thread. Thanks.

[-] 1 points by JimBeam (152) 2 years ago

:-)

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Just read Zendog's thread. It appears we're barking up the wrong tree.

[-] 1 points by JimBeam (152) 2 years ago

Yup, the Patriot Act does have a provision in it for American Citizens to be detained but only if they are captured on the field of battle. I know of one case in 2005 or 6 where Bush wrote a letter to the Department of Justice to turn over a man who was arressted in NY to the military and they did so it has happened but if you read the specifics of that case, I don't think anyone would have to much of a problem with it.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I'm not at all familiar with the provision in the Patriot Act. Do you know if it allows for indefinite detention?

[-] 0 points by JimBeam (152) 2 years ago

Well it's a play on words but I believe it does but not for American Citizens arrested in the United States. However, if an American Citizen is captured on the field of Battle opposing US forces, they can be held in the same mannor as an enemy combatant which to me means indefinite detention.

[-] 1 points by titus (13) 2 years ago

Who do you think is for? Why is in the books? More to the point, who's going to enforce it? The cop who lives next door, or your brother or sister in the military? Let me answer you the second question. Look at it from the elite perspective. What a return to sanity and constitutional government do for the elite? Trail for genocide for bush & co, long sentence for grand theft and fraud for bernake &co.... We don't have any reason to be afraid. They do.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Thanks for shedding some light on the subject for me. Sometimes it's hard to get a clear handle through all the hype and hysteria.

[-] 0 points by LongDaysnight (354) 2 years ago

Jade you are right IMO people need to stay the common ground especially on important issues. This is the problem with a lot of American politics we get stuck in this protect my party mode, we are kinda forced to large extents. We all need to forget L and R on issues like these.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

It really is difficult to transcend stereotypes and labels when we (I find myself guilty of it more often than I would like) all too often resort to these tactics to defend our positions and beliefs, yet the more we engage in pandering to these fantastical stereotypes and labels, the more they become our realities & keep us stuck in those narrow labels.

In simpler words, when the shit hits the fan, it hits all of us just the same, no?

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

The tea people can be tossed into to military prisons under the NDAA just like the rest of us - they must be concerned - I am concerned and so should all on the street with views -- we must protect our rights and this NDAA must be addressed FIRST and foremost ... without addressing this --- the rest of our concerns will go UNHEARD !!

Do you care about your rights to speak without NDAA inprisonment with no trial -- you should be!

[-] 2 points by JimBeam (152) 2 years ago

You need to read Zendog's post on the NDAA yesterday. It completely debunks your argument. If I had posted it, I wouldn't blame you for discrediting it but Zen is a pretty strong supporter of OWS. It is clear that NDAA states "The ability of the military to detain does NOT extend itself to American Citizens. Your barking up the wrong tree. You need to be focused on the verbage in the Patriot Act, that is far more questionable because it is unclear as to who you can and can't detain indefenatly and for what.

[-] 2 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

I've been saying this kinda shit for years - I'm not in a military prison.

Why don't you get your facts straight, and then we can figure out what to do.

On The National Defense Authorization Act

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

Thank you for you views -- we all value views--- If it is under the discrepancyof a slow gov counsel review board ...

this process will be much longer than we expect - to hold a person behind bars for long lengths it VIOLATES our 6th ammendment rights --- the right to a fair and speedy public trial by jury, including the rights to be notified of the accusations.

Gov is often very slow and while a person sits in a military prison THEY can lose their job, house and belongings --- maybe even their record may be damaged as being a suspect.

THIS is wrong --- 99% wake up --- this is w r o n g !!

THIS is big gov attempt to discourage us and HUSH us!

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

When something like this happens I doubt you can expect many Tea Party people to offer much support.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/occupy-portland-leader-exposes-himself/

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Are you a tea party leader? Do you speak for all tea party members?

Whoever you are, if this is your opinion, so be it. But speak for yourself, not others; not unless you wish to officially identify your name and tea party leadership status.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Please... get off you high horse. Yes it is my opinion. And I can tell you this, while I am not a Tea Party "leader", human nature tells me that when people are treated the way these "Tea Party" people were treated that it isn't likely to make them feel as if they are even welcome let alone give them reason to support OWS in any way.

Did you even watch the video??? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5X3s61ojzk&feature=youtu.be

Tell me you'd be open to working with OWS if this had been directed at you for your beliefs.

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

I strongly agree with JadedCitizen - we all have similar interests - freedom to speak without NDAA -- u n f a i r --- punishment must

be at the top of our to do list

[-] 3 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

I never said I disagreed with JadeCitizen. I was only pointing out that OWS appears to be unwilling to accept differing points of view. And is outwardly disparaging of them. Which is a shame as the 99% isn't all on the same page as OWS but they still have things to offer and should be respected. Otherwise OWS should stop proclaiming they speak for the 99%.

[-] 1 points by InvisiblePatriot (12) 2 years ago

there are 200,000 'Occupiers' at most in this country. Less than that probably attend GA's and have voting rights in this. Some of us cant attend GAs but are TOTALLY behind OWS. We are realistic, mature and have been through these fights since the 60's..yet the young kids do not listen. 200,000 = 1/4 of 1% of the 2008 electorate.

We need to get to work to become 10-14 Million strong. THIS should be the #1 goal. which means means the skills to work with people...listen to different views.

And for God's sake, open this up to internet voting and allow the FULL 99% a voice in this. This MUST be changed !

[-] 2 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

I'm complete agreement with your comments here. I have supported this movement from the beginning. I have donated money and taken supplies to my local occupation. However, OWS has seemed to gone far from it's original purpose for forming. They are trying to be all things to all people and doing that isn't going to grow the movement.

You are right, I have been through these "fights" as a protester of the late 60s and 70s.... without the numbers needed this will slowly die.

[-] 0 points by ModestCapitalist (2342) 2 years ago

Sinead.

Has America's wealth been concentrated over the last 35 years?

Is there a link between a heavy concentration of wealth and economic instability?

Answer.

[-] 1 points by InvisiblePatriot (12) 2 years ago

Sinead's comments have to do with OWS keeping people OUT of the process...this has to opened up to all Americans to vote on The Demands and the direction. Meanwhile, OWS has spent 350,000 per month monkeying around and have $170,000 left out of $700,000 total.

AND STILL DON'T HAVE A DOCUMENT CONTAINING SOME LEGALEZE THAT CAN BE SENT TO CONGRESS! Still playing games in the GA's instead of getting the REAL job accomplished. Frankly, I want my $200 back ! Per the money spending, they/ WE / OWS has half a months income left.

Maybe it's time to LISTEN to experts who know how to build organizations and get things accomplished? You should be concerned too, unless you're a blinded Kool Aid drinker. This WILL fail unless OWS has a strong leadership and makes the changes needed to be an effective delivery source of a message that will benefit 99 out of 100 families, regardless of their political preferences. In fact, if successful, it wont make a Rats AS* WHO IS PRESIDENT. We will have stripped away all the power to do harm...(other than The Supreme Court...those F-ing criminals !)

You better urge them to make an infomercial...PRONTO that can raise money as it's explaining the OWS principles (i.e., the reason they exist and what the 'fight' is all about.

Who gives a SH*T about where the wealth is? The idea is to change the laws to stop the greed from continuing. The 'crying; about it...your argument, is not productive. There's only a few goals ta this juncture: Get SOMETHING done in media form that explains this to the public. finish The list of Demands by National Internet Voting and get the list to Congress.

Bottom line? There are really only 40,000 (a generous max) Occupiers in the US. There are 1.3 million of "The 1%" and take that number by 5, when you include the managerial employees who work for them. I doubt this includes their lobbyists. They all vote.

That's 6.5 million people with power vs. 40,000, most without a pot to piss in. Who do you think is going to win this battle? I'm just being realistic with you

All I read here is 'evil villains' , 'they have too God Damn much' and more whining. Yes, the middle class has been dismantled, Modest C. All these changes take 20+ years to see the effect. I've lived through it. I made like $12,000-$13,000 in 1979. NEVER was I short on money and NEVER was I under pressure..and being a young kid, I had a blast. It would take $60,000 to have the same lifestyle today. 'The game is rigged"....just as Carlin said (Google it if you haven't seen the 10 min skit)

All I'm saying is that WE ALL need to DEMAND from OCCUPY....results and rapid movement forward. Ignore the mistreatment, tell the crybabies to get to work, Quit posting candidate shit on the internet...everyone has their mind made up ! Do only those things that will make Occupy a lean mean fighting machine . PS...if you're like a few Occupiers I spoke with who said, "This doesn't have anything to do with politics" you are dead wrong. It has EVERYTHING to do with politics.

[-] 1 points by ModestCapitalist (2342) 2 years ago

If I thought for one second that the masses, or even the majority here understood just how severe this crisis regarding the concentration of wealth is, I would have no reason to keep typing about it.

The masses don't. Otherwise, they would not gIve so much of their money to the rich. They would not buy IPads. They would not play the lottery.

The majority here don't. Otherwise they would not make excuses for people like Buffet, Moore, Gates, Winfrey, Pitt, ect.

You don't. Otherwise, you would not have told me to shut up about it.

If the majority felt the way I do about greed, we wouldn't be in this mess to begin with.

I'm all for a number of strategies to effect whatever change possible before it's too late. But the people have far more power as individuals within their wallets than they do in the voting booths. There will be no significant process made legally as long as the wealth remains so concentrated or as long as the concept of 'getting rich' defines Western society. Under no circumstances will I shut up about the concentration of wealth or the particular form of evil at the heart of the economic, cultural, and POLITICAL crisis.

That evil is greed. The very concept of extreme personal wealth.

You have your strategy as an individual. I have mine.

The cheap psychological tricks will have no effect on me.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

What does your question have to do with the treatment people who question, or have differing opinions from OWS?

Look, ModestCapitalist, I don't know what gave you the idea that I disagree with OWS and their original reason for forming, corruption on Wall St influencing our government. However I don't see what purpose it serves to vilify all people of wealth. We have some of the worse sitting in our Congress, laws that apply to insider trading does not apply to them..... why is OWS not going after the actual perpetrators instead casting a net that catches all wealthy instead of those that are the criminals.

[-] 1 points by ModestCapitalist (2342) 2 years ago

There will be no recovery for the masses as long as this obsceneconcentration of wealth remains. Its an absolute deal breaker. The richest one percent currently own at least 43% of all financial wealth in America. THATS WAY TOO GOD DAMN MUCH. Therefore, I will persecute and vilify all of the rich without exception. You name one who has shown a willingness to settle for less, and I might make an exception.

Name one.

[-] 1 points by independentmind (227) 2 years ago

Please. Watch this video. I beg you. It might change your opinion and attitude toward those evil villains: all the rich.

http://front.moveon.org/some-millionaires-made-a-video-and-this-is-what-they-said/

[-] 1 points by ModestCapitalist (2342) 2 years ago

I will watch the video later from a high speed connection. Right now, I'm on dial-up.

[-] 0 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

I'm not going to get in to a pissing match with you..... Who has the right to tell anyone they have "too much"? If it obtained legally then there is no reason to begrudge them anything. It's the corruption that is wrong. I must be awful for you to be so jealous of people that have more than you do.

[-] 2 points by InvisiblePatriot (12) 2 years ago

The corruption is actually allowed by law. The laws need to be changed.

I completely agree with dropping the word 'greed' and 'corruption' as they come of as victim terms. Greed was here on earth by about day 4. That won't change....ever. Don't give anyone certain 'wording' they can use (or spin..as they have done repeadedly) to attack or belittle the just causes for which we protest.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

I agree that laws or regulations need to be changed or put in place to end what we all know is an unfair playing field. Such as the insider trading laws that we all must adhere to but do not apply to Congress members.

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

Yes I agree with you. I remember as a kid my Dad telling me that you should never be jealous of someone that has more than you because he probably worked hard for it. I think most people in OWS think that way too. Still though many people on the outside of this movement that have done well, treat their employees good and agree that they should pay their fair share of taxes feel threatened by us. That is something that we have to work on.

[-] 1 points by ModestCapitalist (2342) 2 years ago

I'm waiting. Tick tock tick tock tick tock.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

No, actually I would be offended, and I am, disappointed. When I went to the page you first directed me to and followed that link to 'the gateway pundit', I saw no story - perhaps it was in the older entries - so I did not get what you were talking about. That man should apologize for his actions. And I'm sorry that he thinks he was in anyway helping this movement with crass, teenager-like behavior like that. My sincerest apologies.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Thank you for your honest reply it is appreciated, sincerely. It seems to be a common theme among many OWS members.... if you question, disagree or have differing points of view you are ridiculed.

I have supported this movement since the beginning, donating to the NYC Occupy and taking supplies to my local OWS. But I am beginning to question that support..... as I have been at the receiving end of the insults and accusation and now with this public display of disrespect from the Occupy Oakland.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I know what you mean, I doubt there is one person who has not endured ridicule on this site. A lot of people do it on every side of every issue. On the other hand, I've also encountered more than my share of reasonable and pleasant people, such as yourself.

Still, I completely understand your frustration, and I won't cheapen your frustration by trying to gloss over the imperfections of this movement....I will only wish you the best in deciding on a choice that makes you happiest.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Well, even with my disappointment I will continue to watch and hopefully there will be a change. I just wish the OWS would come out and publicly condemn these type of actions. It really does the movement a disservice and only serves to validate the opinions of people who do not support it.

Best wishes in 2012.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I agree. I think they take the wrong approach in ignoring these type of actions that reflect poorly on the movement, it would reflect so much better if they were upfront in addressing these transgressions.

Thanks, you too.

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

NDAA is like.... GITMO for Americans You can be thrown in to custody for indef amt of time, NO trial date, no clear charges needed --- this is aweful

[-] 1 points by InvisiblePatriot (12) 2 years ago

That is simply not true.

[-] 1 points by shahidbuttar (1) from Washington, DC 2 years ago

There are several local action opportunities that offer sustained chances to build cohesion with the Tea Party, of the sort we need to mobilize concern beyond a single action / news cycle. I just wrapped up a 3-part FAQ about the NDAA that may be useful for your arguments, and concludes with a review of some of the local campaigns already underway around the country: http://www.constitutioncampaign.org/blog/?p=5307. My colleagues at the Bill of Rights Defense Committee will soon roll out materials to support organizers interested in seeking resolutions against military detention from city councils, county boards, and state legislatures. More soon at www.bordc.org.

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 2 years ago

I see your point, but I think it would be best if the wonderful Occupy Movement had as few associations with this corporate sponsored right-wing reactionary TP movement as possible...only my opinion though.

yours s sff

http://struggleforfreedom.blogg.no/

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

We need to stay focused

if they are not the 1% then they must be part of our 99% and we should welcome all that oppose 99%

I noticed several politicans who have extreme incomes (leaning into 1% status -- and walk hand in hand with high executives on WALL ST -- 0bama has several G0LDMAN SACH buddies employed inside and around his admin cabinet and HE DID sign the NDAA to hush us

[-] 1 points by rayl (1007) 2 years ago

i agree, ows should be careful about aligning itself with the tp.

[-] 1 points by bettydonnelly (115) 2 years ago

The TP would have gone nowhere without the Koch brothers money. Think of what it spawned Michelle Bachman, Paul Ryan, and all the freshman Congress People who obstructed Congress. I don't see any hue and cry from them about the NDAA . They seem to be wholly owned by Republican radicals who are wholly owned by wall St. We don't need them.

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

Maybe... but tea people are against NDAA and Bailouts and big government harming people - so are we, just a thought.

We need to stop laws designed to hush us in to submission... with the threat of prison (not jail) long term prison with NO trial. We could wake up in USA GITMO for sharing our views and concerns because we are rattling the cage government wants to keep us in... we want a better life.

[-] 1 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

You saw conservatives and liberals join forces, especially in New England in protesting the Patriot Act years ago. Why not for the NDAA? We could certainly use their energy and their boisterousness. We might even find we have other things in common, although admittedly that is a scarey thought.

[-] 3 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

If truely we are the 99%, we need to embrace different views in tackling the State Corporate Complex and the Military Industrial Complex.

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

Please tell us more about what you mean Military Indust complex - please clarify this statement for us

[-] 4 points by InvisiblePatriot (12) 2 years ago

Go listen to or read Eisenhower's farewell address to the nation in 1961.

In short, its the WAR business and the Pentagon working together,

[-] -1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

ignore that guy - everyone knows what the MIC is

everyone knows what the SIC is

look at the name - Miter99

I can't find anything off hand - I know there is something in Masonic symbolism including the miter - I'm sure - beyond the infamous Miter Square of London.

In any case, this clown is just here to mess with us. I'm positive. He was probably hoping you would start down some dark and mysterious path of conspiracy or something.

[-] 2 points by ronniepaul2012 (214) 2 years ago

Oh, a person can't make sense unless they are in lock step with your view of the world? Zen, you make many posts that are counterproductive to uniting the 99%. Most Americans believe that money has corrupted politics. They visit this site and get flamed by close minded folks like you. OWS is doomed if it is only open to folks who wanna revolution, or whatever it is you want. I wouldn't pretend or presume to have a clue just where you are coming from but DO know your attitude is a MAJOR turnoff to me and would bet many others.

And please, I hope you can do better than troll me off cuz of my screen name :-)

[-] 2 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

yup - I am obnoxious - I make no bones about it. Look at all the trolls running around here, whose specific intent is not to support the movement but to undermine it.

I don't expect people to be in lockstep behind my positions on everything - but certain things are self evident.

Such as:

we know who the enemy is :

Repelicans to undermine the Occupy Movement:


and we know who the TeaParty is:

and:

More on the TeaParty:

[-] 1 points by InvisiblePatriot (12) 2 years ago

NICE work here, Zen. I will read up.

This story below concerns me: Spending $350,000 a month and getting nowhere. These Demands need to be in legaleze form (or far more clear/definitive) and on the desks of everyone in Congress ASAP. Why?

It's an election year...that we can use to advantage of have to wait 2-4 more years...without political pressure the whole thing is meaningless or in a sense, impotent. http://gothamist.com/2012/01/17/occupy_wall_street_coffers_down_to.php

This is a site that makes sense https://www.facebook.com/pages/Occupy-Wall-St-Phase-Two-All-internet-OWS-supporters-meet-here/237495236307425?sk=info

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

I'm on dial-up, and I hate facebook - it takes forever to load - but I'll check it out.

[-] 1 points by falcon1961 (24) 2 years ago

Conspiracy, yeah we have conspiracies. Here's what a corrupted governmental corporate conspiracy looks like if you've never see one. www.classvictim.wordpress.com

[-] 2 points by sufinaga (513) 2 years ago

the defence budget. fake wars to turnover equipment and keep the cash flowing.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

Military–industrial complex (MIC), or Military–industrial-congressional complex[1] (MICC) is a concept commonly used to refer to policy and monetary relationships between legislators, national armed forces, and the defense industrial base that supports them. These relationships include political contributions, political approval for defense spending, lobbying to support bureaucracies, and beneficial legislation and oversight of the industry. It is a type of iron triangle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military%E2%80%93industrial_complex

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

Yes that's it exactly, and those same dynamics are present in our prison industrial complex. The for profit prisons will not accept a loss. They need a constant supply of raw material (people), and if they aren't getting them, politicians will then assist them in passing more and more laws and longer and longer prison sentences for mostly victimless crimes which snare young non-violent drug abusers. All this while states are going bankrupt, cutting aid to education (which causes more kids to go on drugs), and of course while criminal bankers who ruined millions of people's lives get off with impunity. It's really screwed up. There is a great book about this called The Real War On Crime.

Getting back to the military spending, it is very difficult for our representatives to cut military spending since the arms industry and military bases are spread out quite evenly throughout the country, and few politicians want to catch the wrath of the military manufacturers themselves and the people who depend on it. The cuts that are now being proposed aren't nearly as big as they want you to believe either. They just bring down spending to 2007 levels which are still way too high. All this while our parents and grandparents are facing cuts in social security and medicare.

I know that their is evil in the world that we have to stand ready to combat if necessary, but I believe that we should cut military spending a whole lot more. Some of those industries could then get involved in repairing our crumbling infrastructure and pursuing alternative energy innovations, thereby lessening the negative economic impact from reduced military spending, and simultaneously building a 21st century economy.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

i thought soldiers would also be good at health care

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

The End of Dollar Hegemony by Ron Paul (Explains why we have these wars but needs to share the message subversively):

lewrockwell (DOT) com/paul/paul303.html

[-] 0 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

Ill check it out tomorrow. Thanks.

[-] 1 points by Rascus (30) 2 years ago

Yeah and the Patriot Act is still in force is it not!!??

[-] 1 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

Yes it still is in force. Perhaps though if we could wake up enough people this time, some of these laws which violate the Constitution could be repealed. Isn't this whole thing about hope?

[-] 1 points by Rascus (30) 2 years ago

Really need to start by taking out the lawmakers and congress...take away the ability of the powers to write and make the laws the way they want them......and it dont matter how we get the lawmakers out as long as we do...they have grown fat enough at our expense.....time to lean them down at any cost!

[-] 1 points by Rascus (30) 2 years ago

Odin....the thing is that its the people who are now taking away our rights are the same ones who told our forefathers what to put in it when they wrote....they have control now and they had it back then....sad situation we are in ...though I do surely agree with your line of thought!

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

!GETTING BACK ON TRACK - how can we voice our dismay to NDAA?

WE need to stay focused

[-] 1 points by sufinaga (513) 2 years ago

set up two commissions: a community grand jury, a truth and reconciliation commission to expose their crimes against humanity and democracy. we need to educate the 99% to the fact that we have been brutalised by the system for too long. that brutalisation is done through the barbaric crucifixion religion to frighten us as children, the bully police to stop and frisk our youth, the health, education and law all to money shark us with delusional levels of fees. wake up and smell this SHITSTEM it stinks to high heaven.

[-] 0 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

WHY DID 0bama sign this? I am stunned that he signed it while on vacation in Hawaii....

All I did was count change I saved -- and wish things could be better in 2012 that it was this last year

TUFF year for me (financially)

[-] 0 points by anonymoux (70) 2 years ago

Yes, but the tea party is having its own internal problems, see (wild bill calls ron paul a traitor) The Tea Party will not be able to focus enough on the main issue of "Toppling the exsisting power structure". The Tea Party needs OWS, but OWS does not need The Tea Party unless they remain united with one main goal.

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

OWS does need everyone in the 99%. OWS represents the 99%, not the 99% minus Tea Party. OWS is supposed to be an inclusive club and I hope some of the grass root Tea Party folks (not the co-opted sell outs in office) see fit to either show up at this event, or organize their own event, against NDAA.

[-] 1 points by anonymoux (70) 2 years ago

Much better said. Thank you

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

[-] 1 points by anonymoux (70) 2 years ago

"keep your friends close and you enemies closer"

[-] 1 points by Odin (583) 2 years ago

Yeah the Tea Party has lost a lot of its lustre, and we should learn from their mistakes. The one thing I worry about is going poltical too soon. We do not just want to see a couple of band-aid fixes to the systemic corruption problems in our political and economic systems. We should shoot for the stars, and not settle for anything less. I would rather stay out in the streets than to get down in the gutter of our political system at this point.

[-] 1 points by anonymoux (70) 2 years ago

Yes!!!!! We just need a couple million on the ground and ready to move with a tweet. how can this be done? Flash Occs ?

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

This is a good article.. it mentions both Occupy and Tea Party: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/iowa-the-meaningless-sideshow-begins-20120103

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

we 99 and TEA - have similar concerns BIG GOV and WALL STREET

THEY oppose NDAA from what I have read - they oppose it as much as we do

[-] 0 points by LongDaysnight (354) 2 years ago

UNITY issue by issue that is the key to freedom. We will be victorious.

[-] 0 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

I think we need to be careful NDAA can put people in jail without a trial date. I HOPE this law can be CHANGED.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Did you actually check on the teabagge(R) vote on the bill?

Chances are, they backed it too.

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Certainly, the Tea Party got co-opted by the big brothahs from anothah mothah, but I still run across the occasional comment that the real grass movement partiers are alive and kicking. It is this group, if they have any wind left, that I'm appealing to. Fuck the sell out teabaggers in congress.

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

THE News said the Tea party are really against NDAA - we all are concerned and should be!

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

I still want to know what corporations are profiting from the "acts".

Googling, has produced little so far, although the Carlyle Group does show up. The connection seems "purposely" vague.

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

actually the tea party opposes laws that restrict liberty and imprison people - I think they are with us about the problem NDAA and SOPA causes.... infact I think that just about everyone is against the NDAA, why did O sign law in, we need to be able to share views without threat of no trial imprisonment in FEMA_CAMPS

[-] 0 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

I feel like a rat, being punished and now I know ()bama signed and is more like the 1%% than anyone I see

I am sooo disappointed -- lets stay focused people

we need to tell politicans -- that NDAA is not for the people

[-] 0 points by Concerned (455) 2 years ago

Senate Vote - Yea 45 Democrats and 40 Republicans and 1 Independent Senate Vote - Nay 6 Democrats and 6 Republicans and 1 Independent

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2011-230&sort=party

House Vote - Yea 93 Democrats and 195 Republicans House Vote - Nay 93 Democrats and 43 Republicans

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2011-932

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

Why did Democrats vote for NDAA??? -- that seems screwy and goes against the cause. Maybe we should check and see if people like Pelosi and Boxer and Obama make enough $$$$$$ - and are voting for this NDAA -- to be included in the 1%

[-] 1 points by Concerned (455) 2 years ago

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's net worth skyrocketed 62% last year, to a jaw-dropping $35.2 million, according to financial disclosure forms released Wednesday.

Pelosi, the former House speaker, wasn't alone.

The California Democrat's gavel-gripping successor, Republican John Boehner, also saw his wealth get a boost, with the Ohio GOPer's net worth increasing from $1.8 million in 2009 to $2.1 million last year.

Pelosi's drastic growth, from an initial $21.7 million in 2009, is attributed to recent stock gains and smart investments. Her husband reported raking in $1 million to $5 million last year from a sale of Apple stocks.

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-06-16/news/29687626_1_stock-gains-house-speaker-charles-rangel

Barbara Boxer’s net worth was between $1,232,008 and $5,580,000 in 2007, http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=300011

Barack Obama is the former Senator from Illinois and the 44th President of the United States with an estimated net worth of $10.5 million dollars.011 http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-politicians/presidents/barack-obama-net-worth/

Guess that answers your question as to whether or not they are members of the 1% club doesn't it?

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

How about a list of the corporations that are profiting from these "acts"?

That's the MOST important list of all.

OccupyWallStreet!

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

please post the list ASAP

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Most of the profit ties I can find on the Patriot Act so far, are to Bush family businesses and investments.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1112304&mesg_id=1112367

[-] 1 points by Concerned (455) 2 years ago

The controversial part of the bill is the detention of US Citizens and legal residents.

This video shows that Obama asked that amendments protecting US Citizens from detention be removed.

The speaker is Sen. Levin - A Democrat.

From what I understand, any lobbying was done while the bill was in committee - the White House asked for the amendment to be removed AFTER it came out of committee....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5Oo3gzj2oc&feature=player_embedded#!

Perhaps your question would better be "WHY would Obama want to detain US citizens and legal residents indefinitely without trial?"

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

Interesting.

Not one corporation mentioned.

Not a single one.

I agree, this deserves a march, but NEVER lose focus.

OccupyWallStreet!!!!

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

It's a State-Corporate Complex. The Corporation uses the Empire for their purposes. If you kill the Empire, you kill the Corporations. The U.S. should be a federalist nation. Its Empire should not be so big for corporations and Wall Street to rule the world.

Corporations like google, fb, apple, NFL teams, are legit b/c the consumers demand their goods and services. However, every corporation that is not demanded by consumers are propped up as transnational monpoliies b/c of the Empire: --HMO's solidfied by Obama's health care reform --Weapons' industry profit b/c of governmenal contracts --Certain Farmers monopolize b/c of subsidies --Wall Street's too big to fail b/c of bail outs. --Even Big businesses like Walmart got subsides in their favor.

Shrink the Empire to its constitutional size and you shrink the very instrument they use to grow and keep themselves propped up. And you also shrink the lure of lobbyists.

This is where you can find common ground with the Tea Party folks.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

This sounds more like a shill for the libe(R)tarians.

At least I provided a link to some those that did profit.

Shrinking government will only change and cheapen those they will bribe, and further separate the States.

If the teabaggers are libe(R)tarians in disguise, then I want no part of that lie.

OccupyWallStreet!

Changing puppets, doesn't change a thing.

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

It sounds like you're getting paid by the corporations and or being tricked into their lies. It's not about changing puppets but forcing them to represent you and me and finding the honest ones in there like Dennis Kucinich or Ron Paul. Even Ron Paul said you either tax wall street or cut off deals with the government.

Your tone and opinion is one reason why I feel OWS has been already hijacked.

Anyway, here's a good essay to help you at least get an understanding of where they're coming from and no I'm not a libertarian but I understand where they're coming from and find many common things we agree on.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/12/matt-stoller-why-ron-paul-challenges-liberals.html

For instance, how I differ from them is: I'd want gun laws and a 1 tier health care system and education but at the State level like in Canada, and that's one solution for eg. that can incorporate all our ideas.

I just think a centeralized power with enormous influence is a double edged sword. I'm sure for example a united States/Canada/European government can have enough power to wipe out poverty in the Streets of NY, but the question is will they and who will get access to such agglomerated power?

Will it be the rich guy or the homeless guy? How much would it cost to even run and could you afford to so that you'd represent the middle class? Why or why not?

Besides when you say to continue to aim at corporations or banks, you think they're gonna come downstairs and give you money?

The only way to hurt them is to somehow influence their very means of control which is Washington, or what the libertarisn say we should aim at which is the federal reserve bank.. which does serve as Wall Street's personal piggy bank and is run by corporate and Wall street leaders.

Maybe instead of opposing the libertarians, if you listened to them and if you read Bloomberg magazine, you'll see how Wall street received 8 TRILLION DOLLARS from the federal reserve during the recession, where many bankers got paid 1 million each. Wall Street would hate someone like Ron Paul and will do whatever it takes to stop him (for that reason, most likely he won't win b/c you need Wall street's backing if you want to win. Obama for eg is the highest beneficiary of Wall street funds and often hold dinner fundraisers among them.)

The 99% will never truely represent the 99/100 ppl if you isolate a group such as the libertarian minded whether it's the Noam Chomsky or Ron Paul types. If we listen to them, you''d find you would have many common concerns and a different perspective on how to solve issues.

Let's not be stubborn. A part of what OWS to me means is a conversation where we can learn from each other.

It's sad that some OWS like yourself would not want to listen to their voice b/c their unique angle in destroying the reserve would be the biggest threat to Wall Street..a guaranteed threat.

NDAA's 'war on terror' = MIC = endless wars in Middle East = money for corporate elites = strong petro dollar = more power for them = more debt = less funds whether in the form of tax cuts or programs for the poor and middle class = disparities in wealth = poor economy

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

My main problem with libe(R)tarians is the fact they believe the illusion of a "free market".

Also their belief that States can handle everything.

They have a strong misunderstanding, of what coercion is too.

The rest, holds the possibility of understanding, but those three are real sticklers, with me.

Smaller federal government? Yes!

But it also needs be made more effective.

What any of this has to do with what corporations are profiting from legislation like NDAA, is beyond me.

Perhaps you could elucidate who those corporations are.

I did provide a link.

[-] 1 points by independentmind (227) 2 years ago

You focus too much on (R) and (D).

You want change? Stop segregating. Just sayin'.

No matter which side of the fence you look on, there are always common threads. It is by utilizing those threads that the possibility of a united nation exists. I think you understand the reality of that by reading your posts, just don't be so blatant with the (R)'s. It takes away from your point and puts people off. I actually had to force myself to read everything you said and get to the real context of your statements.

Just some food for thought.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

I didn't mention, either one in that post.

In fact, your response had nothing to do with that post.

Misdirection?

It's grown tiresome. Was that your aim?

[-] 0 points by XaiverBuchsIV (508) 2 years ago

The tea party is dead. All the Koch brother's money can't pump life into it.

[-] 2 points by aahpat (1407) 2 years ago

Tea party - Brewing in a cracked pot.

[-] 2 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

The problem is IN WashingtonDC on Penn Ave - we NEED to stay focused 99er's The tea party people are just people speaking out like us- ignore them- stay focused NOW ASK YOURSELF ...who signed this? Was the person on VACATION IN HAWAII when he signed a bill that could put us in jail INDEFINATELY without a trial date - yes in Hawaii

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Certainly, the Tea Party got co-opted by the big brothahs from anothah mothah, but I still run across the occasional comment that the real grass movement partiers are alive and kicking. It is this group, if they have any wind left, that I'm appealing to. Fuck the Kock brothers.

edit: the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

[-] -2 points by Bender (98) from Meriden, CT 2 years ago

i don't know if there will be a direct unification or even anything slightly coordinated between the two groups' but i can think of nothing more unifying for all people than having several important rights taken from everyone in one fell swoop, especially in a time like this. enjoy your whiplash congress.

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

but it was Obama signed NDAA --correct me if I am wrong- Obama signed NDAA

[-] 0 points by Bender (98) from Meriden, CT 2 years ago

correction: enjoy your whiplash all who voted for this bill.

[-] 6 points by SayYes (11) 2 years ago

Why not recall all 86 Senators who voted/wrote the NDAA? It is a legit and peaceful and Powerful message. Recall process would creat a lot of dialogue and interaction while collecting signatures. It would be delightful to see Senators being worried about job security.

[-] 3 points by Jester (30) 2 years ago

Yes!

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

The problem is not the NDAA or the senators who voted for it or the president who signed it.
The problem is the way laws are glued together in our congress. Impeaching 86 senators may FEEL good - but it is impossible. I am saddend by so many of us who put forth feel good ideas that are dead ends.
How about someting concrete - get rid of Citizens United.

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

I am crushed that obama signed it -- I feel so... sad that he did that

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

Do you REMEMBER?

These four men REQUIRE that you vote for Obama

John Roberts
Antonin Scalia
Clarence Thomas
Samuel Alito

If you don’t believe them,
ask Newt about Citizens United

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

Is that a mandate under the NEW NDAA law??? That - we must vote for a person (0bama) who signed in law a NEW law to become supreme leader with absolute power that can be used against common citizens?

==>No leader should be able to toss people in a prison camp without a trial -- that is tearing down several portions of the Bill of RIghts that protects 99%

[-] 2 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

Miter99

Joined Jan. 3, 2012

you must be one of them new trolls hoping to shore up the repelicans chances at election . . . .

miter - what is that? you supposed to be some mason or something?

lemme clue you in -

  • we don't build castles anymore

  • since we don't build castles any more, we don't need secret passages made of stone

  • since we don't need secret methods of egress built of stone, you don't know any secrets, you don't have any power

you're a fucking tee shirt

[-] 1 points by 1SiriusMagus (311) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

Absolutely agree with you. We need to get rid of Citizens United asap and change our campaign finance laws to limit all campaign financing to public financing for every level of government. We also need legislation that will bar any current elected or appointed officials from lobbying our government once they leave office. The corruption is rife in our government because of these unregulated crossovers. The SEC had been neutered by the financial industry whose former employees run the SEC. No wonder Wall Street goes free regardless of the laws they break.

[-] 2 points by ironboltbruce (371) from Miami, FL 2 years ago

Because only a few states allow recall of Senators. Charging them all with Seditious Conspiracy is the way to go:

http://amerikanreich.com/2011/12/10/call-to-action-use-nasi-sars-to-charge-your-representative-senators-with-seditious-conspiracy/

[-] 1 points by SayYes (11) 2 years ago

Sure. whatever works: recall, Seditous Conspiracy, whichever is doable state by state. There are actually... a lot of elected official recalls, we just dont hear about so many at the Senate/House level. Impeachment is doable too. From what I've read many states DO have a recall process. My point IBB is that whatever protocal exists should be used. In OR, both senators voted 'nay' to NDAA, so it's up to state citizens to take it up in their respective locations. - SY

[-] 2 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

░█░░░█░░░█░█░▄▀░█▀▀░░░░▀█▀░█░█░█░▄▀▀░░ ░█░░░█░░░█░█▀░░░█▀░░░░░░█░░█▀█░█░░▀▄░░ ░█░░░█▄▄░█░█░▀▄░█▄▄░░░░░█░░█░█░█░▄▄▀░░

I'm SOO glad OWS's fighting for our civil liberties to be restored!

Keep in mind, not only should one protest for the repeal of the NDAA which is absurdly dangerous, but protest to also repeal the authorization that the President gave to assassinate American citizens’ w/o trial and keep in mind he too pushed for this provision of indefinite detention to be codified into the NDAA with more executive power ( http://bit.ly/u77kSs http://bit.ly/rF8fvK).

Also, don't forget to mention Bush's GTMO and the Patriot Act!

However, these civil liberty concerns are also directly related to the MIC and the endless wars that is costing us 200 billion dollars more than even Bush's average spending cost. It's no coincidence that our deficit each year equals nearly what it costs to engage in war.

MIC = Violations of civil liberties = debt crisis = poor economy = disparities in wealth and poor economy!

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

Do you have a list of numbers or emails - maybe we should text their office to let them know we oppose ndaa and sopa

Each senator has a website with a contact link - I was unable to locate an indiv email address list DO IT ASAP - I have started my letter

Please note that I and my family oppose the new law NDAA. NDAA or similar laws that include unfair treatment is a clear violation the following constiutional rights:

FORTH AMMENDMENT: rights: unlawful detention FIFTH AMMENDMENT: protects the right to due process SIXTH AMMENDMENT: Protects the right to a fair and speedy public trial by jury, including the rights to be notified of the accusations, to confront the accuser, to obtain witnesses and to retain counsel.

Please repeal this or edit it to prevent American any citizen from being unlawfully detained without a trial. Sincerely,

[-] 1 points by SayYes (11) 2 years ago

There is a list of congresional emails and numbers floating @. keep googling and it'll come up ! There is also a twitter list.

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

Good Idea GOOD IDEA... we should call them and speak out. ASAP NDAA is bad for 99er people we are not caged rats

[-] 1 points by PatrickOxOethafulm (35) 2 years ago

That's what Montana folk are trying to do

[-] 5 points by LongDaysnight (354) 2 years ago

I have been fighting tooth and nail on this forum to bring awareness to this. I am glad they are addressing this, now lets add the infamous Patriot Act.

[-] 3 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

government should be transparent

[-] 4 points by LongDaysnight (354) 2 years ago

I agree, if you agree or disagree please thumbs up or down my post as i will yours. This is stupid i know but there is a censoring thumb war here and i am forced to partake to prevent the collapsing of my posts. So as an non-spoken agreement i thumb all posts i encounter but still will not collapse another beyond 3 as i don't want to censor. I actually pride myself on liberty and rights so if i find collapsed posts even if i disagree i thumbs them up just for rights. I will also note that if i later encounter that post and it is doing well on it's own i will thumb as i feel.

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

post it somewhere a collapse won't happen

[-] 1 points by LongDaysnight (354) 2 years ago

What do you want me to post if it is important more then likely it will vanish, well collapse.

[-] 2 points by wintersiroco (10) 2 years ago

How comes nobody is tweeting this.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

twitters kinda young

cute and well backed

don't give up twitter

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7-Qa92Rzbk

[-] 0 points by LongDaysnight (354) 2 years ago

I don't know maybe because it is relatively new or maybe because this has started a power struggle amongst the GA. I am only speculating, i have no idea. Since this has been signed it has started a shift of thinking here and frankly some people don't want to accept what is happening.

[-] 4 points by Jester (30) 2 years ago

Good call, may the force be with you ;-). Please consider thorough strategic and tactical efforts for this action, perhaps by also including misinformation so the entire SWAT isn't waiting for you to arrive. I love the open and transparent nature of the actions, but there are advantages in elements of surprise and in alternate plans. The "peacekeepers" have studied you and must show force for this egomaniacal mayor to save face. A word to the wise OK? Be kool, give 'em hell and resist peacefully but forcefully.

PS... please wear some helmets and eye protection, the army is in full armor. God Bless!

[-] 4 points by joannagw (16) from Denver, CO 2 years ago

How come we waited so long???? I have been working on this since December 1 - and I am sure many much longer than that - why did we not stand up before it was signed?? Occupy Las Vegas tried to with no support - they went so far as to demand the Attny Gen speak up and when he did not they dropped the ball. Occupy Portland protested it too - and had arrests - but no one did anything much before it was signed... you realize of course that they heat wants a place to put OWS - in Dentention Centers...duh

[-] 1 points by independentmind (227) 2 years ago

Agreed. Seems a little late to me. They waited until after the bill passed to even mention this for the 1st time on this forum. Now they wait until it's been signed by Obama before they take any kind of organised "action" against it.

Still no mention of SOPA, other than by concerned citizens who are too often ignored.

[-] 1 points by LongDaysnight (354) 2 years ago

I agree but we are at a starting point with the mass awakening here. So let's, or at least i will be biting my lip and using the gift provided.

[-] 0 points by Jester (30) 2 years ago

Seriously? Do you really think we're such a threat that they need to pass a law to get rid of us. They pretty much do what they want against the law without any consequences already.

[-] 4 points by 1SiriusMagus (311) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

More than 10 years of the Patriot Act and American voters have remained tacit and passive. They obediently cow-tow to offensive strip searches at airports and more than likely to expand to everywhere else. It does appear that they can stomp on our Constitutional Rights with impunity. Like rats they have been chewing up our rights bit by bit and they realize that they better be prepared for when the citizens wake up. Already activists in the environmental movement have been sentenced on charges of domestic terrorism. The day the word Terrorist was uttered by Bush and his neocons I knew activism was on the chopping block in the US.

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

The problem with NDAA is that a person (incl. US CITIZENS) can be held in custody indefinately --- without a trial date for a UNDISCLOSED charge that you MAY never know....

If you do get out - you will have already lost your job, your house and ALL the things you acquired -- even your record may be damaged if they mark you as a threat to homeland security.

PEOPLE should be aware of NDAA and should work to get this terrible law removed, revoked or modified --- PRES Obama should never signed this law and the 99% NEED to do their best to express their concern over this law.

It will harm millions -- of all colors, faith and beliefs

99% focus on this law -- be aware that this is a real danger to our liberty and freedom to express our concerns about government

ARE YOU concerned??????

[-] 4 points by ForwardWeGo (99) 2 years ago

May your numbers reflect the required action!

[-] 2 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

This is the problem supporting a politician who's not a mere agent for Wall street, corporations, and the MIC, but is actual close friends with them:

Unconditional following on the grounds of 'he's better than the other guy,' or 'it's not his fault,' or 'but he tried b/c he said ... ' is the reason why when extreme and dangerous policies pass, they're now considered moderate b/c 'oh but Obama ok'd it so I assume it's ok or that it wasn't him.'

These are all the excuses of Obama's campaigners come up with, but we need to really reflect on whether we may have been duped by Obama 's campaign. It's ok to be duped once, but it's not ok to continue in wilful ignorance.

For instance:

  1. CIVIL HUMAN RIGHTS: Obama's the one who authorized assassinations of American citizens’ w/o trial and pushed for the provision to be codified in NDAA’12 that states indefinite detention of American citizens without a lawyer ( http://bit.ly/u77kSs http://bit.ly/rF8fvK). And we all know he broke promises on GTMO and the Patriot Act.

  2. WALL STREET CORRUPTION: Obama was the top beneficiary of Wall Street funds ( http://bit.ly/58rodJ ), then provides them with more bailouts ( http://bit.ly/1EYhXs ), and then surrounds himself with the very Wall street ppl as his advisors who caused the recession rather than prosecuting them ( http://bit.ly/rA8tVN http://bit.ly/v8NLxa ). 8 trillion also given to banks from the central reserve bank under his watch ( http://bit.ly/tbjxLN ).

  3. ENDLESS WARS: Obama's the top beneficiary of weapons dealers, was lobbied by general Atomic ( http://bit.ly/tWt4yi ) and thus subsequently led to the use of drones with military spending increases in 2009, 10 and still spends 200 billion dollars more per year than Bush's average military spending ( http://bit.ly/tRrGOL ); He also funded children armies in Congo and Yemen ( http://abcn.ws/vnuXYF ) and invaded Libya without congressional approval that ended up helping Al Quada with drone attacks that are known to have severe collateral damage ( http://bit.ly/sb40NX http://bit.ly/uIbA7A )

  4. TIME TO THINK CRITICALLY: So not only has Obama broken his promises on these issues, he has only exacerbated them and what was considered extremely dangerous is now a mere moderate talking point because people suspend their critical thinking to support the charismatic dear leader. For these reasons, I can empathize with people who say: ---he has no backbone (Dr. Cornel West, http://bit.ly/tk6Cne), ---worse than Bush (Noam Chomsky, http://bit.ly/gTI3XQ), ---he can stop terrorism by stop being one (Howard Zinn, http://bit.ly/5Tcvf4), ---prefers a President with some balls (Matt Damon, http://bit.ly/v8rtWk), ---even bashed on the Daily show for the NDAA (Jon Stewart numerous times, http://bit.ly/t2SKcO ) ---Or disappointed b/c he even failed to fulfil his pledges to fight HIV/AIDS in Africa. He should not have pledged if he can't keep it b/c organizers were expecting it (Desmond Tutu, Angelina Jolie, Bono)

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr:

  • “It seems to be a fact of life that human beings cannot continue to do wrong without eventually reaching out for some thin rationalization to cloak an obvious wrong in the beautiful garments of righteousness.”

▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒ ▒▓███▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒ ▒▓█▓▓██▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒ ▒▓█▒▒███▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒ ▒▓███▒▒█▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒ ▒▓███▒▒█▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒ ▒▓██▒░▒█▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒ ▒▓█▓░▒▒█▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒ ▒▓█▓▒▒▒█▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒ ▒▓█▓▒▒▒██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒ ▒▓█▓▒▒▒▒██▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒ ▒▓█▓▒▒▒▒▒██████████████████████▓▒▒▒ ▒▓█▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓█████████████████████▒▒ ▒▓█▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░░░░░░░. ▓█▓▒ ▒▓█▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓███▒▒ ▒▓█▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓█████████████████▒▒ ▒▓█▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░▓█▓▒ ▒▓█▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓█▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓██▒▒ ▒▓█▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒█████████████████▒▒ ▒▓█▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██░░░░░░░░░░░░░░▓█▓▒ ▒▓█▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓█▓▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓██▒▒ ▒▒██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒█████████████████▒▒ ▒▒▓██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██▒░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░▓█▓▒ ▒▒▒▓███▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒██▓▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒██▓▒ ▒▒▒▒▒▓██████████████████████████▒▒▒ ▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒

  • "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."
[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

THE POST ABOVE -- has valid points -- please read it carefully

[-] 1 points by 1SiriusMagus (311) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

I share your rage and despair. From my perspective your assessment is erroneous. First: The President has no authority to dictate policy to the Federal Reserve. Also the secreted trillion dollar loans have only been revealed by forced lawsuits by Bloomberg News. Even the GAO had no access to these records. Fed is a private corporation. It only shows the government what it wants to. It is Congress that has written the rules and granted this authorization to the Fed. Your flying to your conclusions on half truths and on the assumption that a President has the powers of a dictator. You ignore the obvious: A shadow government that holds our governing officials on a leash and dictates the terms and conditions under which they move. Corporate America does not spend billions of dollars on installing their legislators and Judges of choice if they only got favors in return. The US government has been in full corporate takeover mode since Bush and his mob were installed into office in 2000. One President in one term cannot unseat this shadow government in one or even two terms without the cost of his and his family's life. We are talking about a global corporate mafia here that has hijacked our government because most voters prefer shopping and sound-bite thinking.

Yes, I wish Obama had done more, but I do not see what he sees and as an Independent I will not hold back my vote. I believe that our prospects for real change stand a chance under another term of OBAMA if the voters of this country unite and nullify Citizens United and our current campaign finance laws by limiting all campaign financing to public financing on every level of government. Our legislators will only do this in the face of a national uprising. These changes must be brought about by the grass roots like OWS and others.

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

It's so weird.. if the President has power to authorize firing missiles to kill a 16 year old kid or invade a country without congressional approval, you think he has no sway???

Come on.. let's be real. You got to find the right candidate who will challenge the Establishment and expose it, and Obama won't be that candidate.

It's just so hilarious that after all he has done, people still think he's sincere that he's gonna implement change, when in reality when he's getting paid millions by Wall Street. When he's also personally holding his fundraisers among them with 30,000 dollars a plate, he's going to first serve their interests, which will conflict with yours.

Gotta wake up to that fact. Obama Is the Establishment.

[-] 1 points by 1SiriusMagus (311) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

You leapt to another conclusion that I did not make. As Commander in Chief he does carry the authority to authorize the firing of missiles etc., but it does not translate to other arenas of governance with the same authorization. There are limits on each Branch of government. I recognized during his original campaign for President that he was hand picked by the Establishment. I have no illusions that we the people have not selected our own President since I have been alive / six decades. The campaign finance laws and the 1% control of our government leaves no illusion of who is picking our legislators and leaders. With Citizen United in place and running at full speed any candidate for office who would not seek to out fund raise the competition would not be fit to run for president in a country where 80% of the citizenry think in sound bites if they think at all. 152 million americans went shopping on Black Friday and gave the major portion of their earnings to enrich the same corporations that are busy outsourcing their jobs and driving the majority of the working population deeper into poverty. This is not a discriminating electorate. Yet from the choices before us Obama, though brought to us by the establishment still is a better option until the rest of the electorate steps out of their soundbite trance and is willing to run this country with responsibility. You use a lot of words to say all too little. Who would you put on the ticket and how would you do it?

[-] 0 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

TIME TO THINK CRITICALLY

yes it is . . .

Mr. Chomsky is a brilliant individual, no question. But when he says the Obama is worse than Bush I say Bushite.

And that makes me wonder how he can possibly justify such a statement. The only conclusion I can come to is that, at least with bush we knew we were getting Bushite . . .

. . . Incompetence and war mongering, and a constant drum beat of fear . . .

With the current President we have expected more. This is true - and because so much has been left undone, our hopes have gone unmet. We have the hope of something better that has not materialized - but because at least with this President, because we have this hope - and it is not realized - this makes him worse

than a President who is nothing but bushite and whom we know is nothing but bushite

That is the only way I can make sense of such claims regarding the above comparison between Bush and Obama.

The fact is President Obama did try to close Gitmo - and Congress produced new legislation forestalling that possibility, combined with screams that the cost of security for trials in New York City would be prohibitive - his efforts have thus far come to nothing.

Should we blame President Obama for this?

or a do nothing Congress?

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (28267) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Blame the do nothing ( nothing good ) Congress.

Obama is only one man even if he is the President, He still needs the rest of the government to be willing to work for the good of the USA.

I just wish he did more with line item veto's to crush riders on bill's. Or denounce poor decisions that are made that are beyond the power of veto. But not in an anonymous way saying congress failed, but naming names of those who supported the poor decision's.

Yeah it would start a shitstorm in government, but we need the storm if we are going to start clearing the air ( literally ).

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

He doesn't have a line item veto - it's been suggested in the past - Congress won't pass it because it limits their ability to constrain the President and force him to sign bad legislation.

As they did with NDAA.

I blame Levin / McCain - they wrote it.

I think actually it's brilliant - in a really twisted sense. McCain really has gotten even with the President for having been beaten during the last Presidential election.

And he runs International Republican Institute

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (28267) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

One more need to address/change.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

Just as you said, with Bush we knew what we were getting, but with Obama, he keeps things in secret. (But what Chomsky was citing as evidence for why Obama's worse than Bush is b/c he propagated the wars in the Middle East. I bet now given all the other atrocities, Chomsky would agree with historian Howard Zinn who suggested that if Obama wanted to stop terrorism, he must stop being one.)

By any other name than Obama, think to yourself are his policies consistent with a President that is challenging the deep rooted MIC?

Take for example his authorization to kill an American citizen without a trial... are we to blame Congress for that? Or as he even confessed on leno after Gadaffi died, that the invasion in Libya was really led by the U.S. ie him since he didn't get congressional approval.

████████████████████████████████████████████

It's a false dichotomy to suggest one is innocent b/c the other is guilty. Congress is guilty of promoting the MIC, but clearly given Obama's policies and actions done in secrecy as I list below, he is 100% guilty of only advancing the MIC. On every criteria you can list, do the research b/c you can say one thing but actions speak louder than words.

████████████████████████████████████████████

Here's some more taken from an article Glenn Greenwald wrote and if you still think Obama's anti-war and a defender of civil human rights, take a look at the following facts ( LINK: http://bit.ly/txcqQs )

"President Obama — himself holds heinous views on a slew of critical issues and himself has done heinous things with the power he has been vested. He has slaughtered civilians — Muslim children by the dozens — not once or twice, but continuously in numerous nations with drones, cluster bombs and other forms of attack. He has sought to overturn a global ban on cluster bombs. He has institutionalized the power of Presidents — in secret and with no checks — to target American citizens for assassination-by-CIA, far from any battlefield. He has waged an unprecedented war against whistleblowers, the protection of which was once a liberal shibboleth. He rendered permanently irrelevant the War Powers Resolution, a crown jewel in the list of post-Vietnam liberal accomplishments, and thus enshrined the power of Presidents to wage war even in the face of a Congressional vote against it. His obsession with secrecy is so extreme that it has become darkly laughable in its manifestations, and he even worked to amend the Freedom of Information Act (another crown jewel of liberal legislative successes) when compliance became inconvenient.

He has entrenched for a generation the once-reviled, once-radical Bush/Cheney Terrorism powers of indefinite detention, military commissions, and the state secret privilege as a weapon to immunize political leaders from the rule of law. He has shielded Bush era criminals from every last form of accountability. He has vigorously prosecuted the cruel and supremely racist War on Drugs, including those parts he vowed during the campaign to relinquish — a war which devastates minority communities and encages and converts into felons huge numbers of minority youth for no good reason. He has empowered thieving bankers through the Wall Street bailout, Fed secrecy, efforts to shield mortgage defrauders from prosecution, and the appointment of an endless roster of former Goldman, Sachs executives and lobbyists. He’s brought the nation to a full-on Cold War and a covert hot war with Iran, on the brink of far greater hostilities. He has made the U.S. as subservient as ever to the destructive agenda of the right-wing Israeli government. His support for some of the Arab world’s most repressive regimes is as strong as ever.

Most of all, America’s National Security State, its Surveillance State, and its posture of endless war is more robust than ever before. The nation suffers from what National Journal‘s Michael Hirsh just christened “Obama’s Romance with the CIA.” He has created what The Washington Post just dubbed “a vast drone/killing operation,” all behind an impenetrable wall of secrecy and without a shred of oversight. Obama’s steadfast devotion to what Dana Priest and William Arkin called “Top Secret America” has severe domestic repercussions as well, building up vast debt and deficits in the name of militarism that create the pretext for the “austerity” measures which the Washington class (including Obama) is plotting to impose on America’s middle and lower classes."

▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒

"Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me ____ uhhh "
-George W. Bush

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." -Dr. Martin Luther King. Jr.

[-] 2 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

Everything you just posted is nothing more than perception and spin, without substantiation -

and none of it takes into account the Art Of War playing out in Congress, or how that directly affects his policy makiing

In Afghanistan - he changed the military leadership and our policy of indiscriminate bombing, he fired at least two generals over there in the process of changing that policy.

In Libya - I'm not sure if you are referring to groups like

which helped foster social unrest in Bosnia, doing the same thing in Libya, or if you are referring to our participation with NATO to ensure Ghaddafi forces kept their heads down while the Libyan opposition learned how to fight back against overwhelming military odds in the absence of a NATO air campaign.

In either case - once the Libyans rose up, it was inevitable that Ghaddafi forces would have over run cities like Misrata and they would have slaughtered every single human being they found there.

So I don't buy the Libyan example as a negative against the President.

If you want to complain about the destabilization of foreign governments by organizations like

who are in all likelihood acting to create new market opportunities among populations ill equipped to regulate foreign investment and protect their workers and their environment - then we agree. The exploitation of populations by U.S. corporations is and has been unconscionable.

You have a lot of info there - makes it difficult to take it piece by piece -

But as I've said, the President did try to close Gitmo - between the screams of those who claimed the cost of prosecutions in NYC was too much, and Congress passing laws prohibiting transfer of detainees to U.S. soil, his hands became tied.

I blame Congress.

You can blame whoever you want.

[-] 2 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

REGARDING LIBYA: Your justification of the invasion in Libya (the most recent one b/c I don't know of the other one you speak of), sounds just like from Obama himself. Did you know Al Quada's associated forces have now gained a stronger presence within Libya. Even Democrat Dennis Kucinich made it known how Al Quada flags are being raised in Libya now.

If you really think the Libya invasion was justified in order to spread democracy and on humanitarian grounds, why not help out Syrian protesters who are being brutally killed at this minute, or be against the ruthless dictatorship in Saudi Arabia?

███ Easy answer. History shows: MIC, Oil, and Petrodollars.███

Even Chomsky said that the situation in Libya was of a civil war, not some mass murder by a dictator. I would even say it wasn't even a civil war b/c the nation of Libya with only 5 million people with a 90% reading rate and 100% free health care were doing well and this event we speak up only pertained to Tripoli. In fact, the rebel troops were carrying out a genocide themselves, killing and lynching black Libyans and migrants as reported by Doctors without Borders.

▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒

Whether it's Bush's 'war on terror,' or Obama's 'humanitarian wars,' it's wilful ignorance to deny U.S's long history being deeply rooted in the Military Industrial Complex.

████████████████████████████████████████████

Again, you can blame Congress, but it doesn't negate that clearly the President is guilty of his policies done in secrecy and away from the general population. Seriously... even the health care reform bill was him selling out to solidify the HMO's monopoly.

████████████████████████████████████████████

Thus,I BLAME BOTH. To keep on blaming Congress, you're just promoting Obama's rhetoric 'I better blame Congress knowing their approval ratings are lower than mine, so that I can hide what I do in secret.'

To me, this sort of blame them and not one party is just a distraction probably propped up and encouraged by the 1% in order to even distract attention off their horrible policies.

▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒

Go through each item on the list, b/c GTMO and torture against suspected terrorist without due process is bad, but Obama assassinating Americans without due process is even worse (and you can't blame Congress for that).

And if you still are in love with Obama, keep in mind he can only serve 4 more years, so now is the time for you to get on Obama b/c his 'charisma,' is being used to implement more deadly and dangerous policies like with the codification of the broadening the scope of indefinite detention without a trail into the NDAA for future administrations to implement.

▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒

And you don't have to worry about Obama. He will be re-elected b/c the mass general population don't care about these things and the main stream media rather focus on news that will draw viewers and not offend those who buy commercial times off their networks.

▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒

Good discussion though, maybe we can have it again after 2016 once your boyfriend leaves office. The bottom line is even if it is Congress's fault, you need to make aware these underlying issues so that people will vote for the right people in rather than on partisan politics-when in reality, both are in bed with the neoliberal state-corporate complex and the neocon military industrial complex.

[-] 2 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

Even Chomsky said that the situation in Libya was of a civil war, not a genocide like Rwanda

it would most certainly have been genocide if Ghaddafi had been allowed to over run Misrata

it's wilful ignorance to deny U.S's long history being deeply rooted in the Military Industrial Complex.

I do not deny any such thing it's a bit off topic but goes to the issue of denial re: the MIC / SIC

.


.

Now pay attention, because this is how it works:

President Obama signs a bill to fund the Defense Department, though he's upset with one provision that prohibits bringing Guantánamo detainees to the US for trial. He vows to fight the restrictions.

The president registered his opposition in a two-page signing statement issued shortly after he approved the Defense Department funding bill.

President Obama strongly objected on Friday to provisions of the 2011 Defense Authorization Act that prevent the military from transferring Guantánamo detainees to the US for trial.

.

The president had made a pledge that he would close Guantánamo within a year of taking office, and Attorney General Eric Holder sought to lay the groundwork for public trials of high profile Al Qaeda suspects in the US justice system – including alleged 9/11 mastermind Khaled Shaikh Mohammed.

But those efforts are now stalled.

and the date again: January 7, 2011*

and you can read the rest of the CSM article here


On March 7, 2011, President Barack Obama signed an executive order making a number of changes to policies regarding those detained at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. In a reversal of his previous policy, the order resumes military trials for Gitmo detainees. It also establishes a "periodic review" process for for long-held Guantanamo detainees who have not been charged, convicted or designated for transfer, "but must continue to be detained because they 'in effect, remain at war with the United States,'" according to a White House fact-sheet.

The new policy was viewed by many media outlets as an acknowledgment by the administration that it could not keep Obama's campaign promise to close the Guantanamo facility.

Mr. Obama said the restrictions on transfers represent a “dangerous and unprecedented challenge to critical executive branch authority to determine when and where to prosecute Guantánamo detainees.” `

the rest of this politifact.com article here


Point Being

  • this is how they do - attach bullshit to the spending bill. The Congress tied the President's hands early in 2011 with defense authorization that included

    • "prohibits bringing Guantánamo detainees to the US for trial"
  • Now we have a new defense authorization spending bill - NDAA - that includes further revision to the policy of indefinite detention.

Again, his hands have been tied by using the vehicle of defense spending bills to push bad policy on the public

He could have chosen not to sign it - and the repelicans would have a field day.

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

Point Being:

███ You blame Congress, I say both are guilty. ███

All your speaking points, I've heard it from the White House as well. However, you should also hear the other side of the story (I'm not talking about the GOP or Democrats in Congress, but from independent sources like Democracy Now).

It's an assumption (and quite frankly naive) if you think Obama does not lie. You're just re-hashing Obama's speaking points but they conflict with his policies, actions, and the events leading up to them. Even historians like Howard Zinn and scholars like Noam Chomsky can see it.

Even look into how the provision was included into the bill and you'll realize Obama never objected to it but thought the President should have more power to detain citizens without a trial. This is the very reason why he agreed NOT to veto. In other words, he didn't get conned by Congress to do it, but agreed to the re-drafting of the bill when they included the provision to detain citizens with him having authority to do it.

▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒

If Obama was really against the provision, he'd push for the amendment proposal by Jeff Landry, a freshman Republican Congressman from Louisiana who introduced H.R. 3676 which intends, “To amend the detainee provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 to specifically state that United States citizens may not be detained against their will without all the rights of due process afforded to citizens in a court ordained or established by or under Article II of the Constitution of the United States.”

▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒

His signing statment only serves to clarify that INDEED the military CAN detain citizens without a lawyer, (even if he said his administration won't). I'm sure there's also a clause hidden in the Act that says they don't have to disclose information to the public if they indeed did detain citizens, so we would never know anyway.

This progressive author does a good job in breaking down the myths and truths of what's in the NDAA.

███ http://www.salon.com/2011/12/16/three_myths_about_the_detention_bill/ ███

I think b/c of your obsession to what you thought Obama tried to do regarding GTMO is blinding you to see everything else.

Drop GTMO and look at all the other things he has done and then look at the GTMO efforts.

That may help you to take off the Obama goggles.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

I think we are looking at the Art of War conducted within the halls of government.

You point to this:

His signing statment only clarified that indeed it does mean the military can detain citizens without a trial, (though he said his administration won't).

I ask:

  • why clarify that this provision pertains to U.S. citizens if it is a policy his admin will not implement?

Does that make any sense? Any sense at all?

Only if you want the opportunity to hold Congress accountable.

I'm a radical sumbiyatch.

I'm all for using the NSA to hold Levin/McCain accountable.

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

Because no one in the right mind could implement that right now. It allows for future administrations to do so.

Though there are the Occupy protests going on, our streets are currently still pretty stable and though there are the twitter fiasco between Taliban and Al Quada and the U.S. government, it would be quite weird to think any U.S. government would detain you now and make a scene.

HOWEVER, keep in mind that signing statements are only used to help clarify meaning and intent. Obama has clarified that INDEED the provision he pushed for does mean U.S. citizens can be detained.

THe kicker is though, a Signing Statement is not part of the BILL. In other words, it is not legally binding for Obama to not do it.. it is only his intent that he won't (or that he won't see the need to), but can.

It is just like Obama having 'reservations.' To blind Obama supporters, you take him on his word but if you see how it got done, Obama's the one who pushed for the provision to be included in so that Congress had to re-draft in order for Obama to drop his veto threat.

███ THINK ABOUT THIS: If indeed Obama was against it and was issuing a VETO threat which even prompted Congress to change the bill, why did he drop it? If he was really against it, he would have continued to issue the veto threat and even advise for H.R. 3676 to be included in as an amendment.███

This just points to the clear fact, that Obama never was against it really in the first place and even if he was, he caved to what he always blames it on: Congress or as you put it, Congress' 'art of war.'

Face it dude. As what Dr. Cornel West even said, Obama's got no backbone: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQnC0k4i4xo

Again, I blame most of Congress and the President as guilty for spitting on the Constitution.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

I could give you the benefit of the doubt I guess. See - I have this problem. You seem to have just enough hard left spin that I expect I really don't need to even know what the President said regarding the threat of veto over the NDAA.

so why don't you get The President's own words on that. His own words, demonstrating he wanted the authority to hold Americans indefinitely.

I'd like to see that.

What did he say about that veto when he threatened to use it.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

he caved to what he always blames it on: Congress's 'art of war.'

I've never heard him say that. I have never heard anyone refer to what is going on in Congress as The Art of War. You are reaching.

  • I said that.

And I keep saying it.

Face it dude

you can't quite see what it is you are looking at

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

Check this essay out for the history it gives. I'm not asking you to agree with the thesis or points he's arguing for but just for some of the history that makes the U.S. it is today: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/12/matt-stoller-why-ron-paul-challenges-liberals.html

Again, Obama's another president in line with U.S. history implementing the same old and not the 'persona,' he campaigned on.

[-] 1 points by 1SiriusMagus (311) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

So what do you recommend? As long as our government will remain in a corporate takeover mode no President or legislator of any Political Party will be able to implement the "persona agenda" that they campaign on. There are a handful of Legislators in our current Congress who are individuals of integrity and Conscience and they are unable to enact anything of significance. The Office of the President is more demanding than that of a Legislator: A legislator represents the constituents of their district; the President has to serve the entire country and represent and protect it's interests in the global community. The war on Terror is a defense of US corporate global hegemony. As a citizen I object to my tax dollars being allocated to this war. With my government being selected, bought and installed into power by corporate America what is the power of my one vote?

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

So keep doing what Occupy and even the early Tea Party did and continue to do.

Also, yeah find the honest guys who have a record of stopping the endless wars and the U.S. fix on the MIC, otherwise you're vote will be wasted. Yet, most likely the eventual President that wins will be the one they fund the most. In 2008, it was Obama.. this year... it'll be Obama vs. ___ hard to say.

No, I'm saying it doesn't really matter. It's two parties -- two sides to the same coin.

Here's a good Rolling Stone Magazine breaking it down: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/iowa-the-meaningless-sideshow-begins-20120103

[-] 1 points by 1SiriusMagus (311) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

Read the article and have held this perception of the American political system since I began to vote many decades ago. It is and always has been very self evident.

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

Sorry, I modified it by saying Congress or what you believe to be Congress' "art of war," before you replied back.

Anyway, I guess for you.. time will only tell if he really is the Nobel Peace Prize winner as you claim him to be, or just yet another politician that falls in line with generations of a nation deeply rooted in the Neoliberal Keynesian state-corporate complex and Military Industrial complex.

Read U.S. history and you'll see for better or for worse (which I think is worse), U.S.'s whole economy has been rooted in the military. There's a reason why 35-50% of the US budget is allocated to the Military. My argument is that Obama's not going to be the one to challenge that, though in 2008 he campaigned on 'change.'

Thus, he's guilty like the rest of them. His strongest skill: to make you think he's one of us and his strong connection with his Corporate and Wall street buddies funding his 1 billion dollar campaign like in 2008 ( http://bit.ly/58rodJ http://bit.ly/v8NLxa ) . I'm sure you'll be the ideal type whom they can pay to defend him at all costs.

[-] 1 points by 1SiriusMagus (311) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

Are you suggesting that we let the Republicans take the White House?

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

No, I'm saying it doesn't really matter. It's two parties -- two sides to the same coin.

Here's a good Rolling Stone Magazine breaking it down, covering the GOP Iowa caucus, and also where the fight should be. (they mention Occupy): http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/iowa-the-meaningless-sideshow-begins-20120103

[-] 1 points by 1SiriusMagus (311) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

I disagree with you. It does matter. Both sides may be indentured to the 1%, However the progressive Democrats still govern with greater responsiveness to their base constituency. They are much more proactive for the issues of working Americans and the poor, disabled and dispossessed.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

I don't claim him to be a winner of the Nobel -

he either received that award

or he did not.

And that may say much more about the process of awards, or the times we live in, or even our American system of politics, than it does about him.

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

Anyway, look through the links I provided in all my previous posts, and maybe you'll then come away with a different conclusion.

But don't worry, it'll take some time for the general population to catch on and until then you can get to watch Obama for another 4 years on tv and receive his personal updates but nothing significant will have changed for the better esp. in terms of foreign policy.... only when the general population wakes up, then the President may decide to legally enforce the NDAA for the sake of 'national security.'

[-] 2 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

so why don't you get The President's own words on that I said.

but I get it. it's tough, keeping track of what they say, how the other side responds, and what happens over time. I get it - it's a real pain in the ass. Much easier to let someone else, someone who reflects anti war sentiments for example - let them gather the information and synthesize the meaning of all of that dayum nuance - who can understand it anyway? right?

. . . .sure . . .

I get it

let someone else tell you how to think - never mind what someone actually said

And as far as the MIC goes - never mind that every other major nation in the world has their very own MIC - even some of those who are hostile to us. Never mind. We have our own problems . . .

We have our own SIC little MIC

I get it.

really

I do

[-] 0 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

Zendog, many of those links simply cite primary data ... facts. For example, Obama being the highest beneficiary of Wall Street funding in all of U.S. history. That's just raw data. Anyway, I hope Obama's paying you well for getting on your knees and serving him.

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 2 years ago

You make a lot of sense, patrickj, but you will never convince ZenDog... unless HE personally ends up in a Fema camp.

[-] 0 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 2 years ago

I DO get the "Change you can believe in" slogan now.

He meant "CHANGE FOR THE WORSE" and boy did he deliver on that promise!!!

[-] 1 points by 1SiriusMagus (311) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

So your recommendation is?

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

Here's a good article on some suggestions by Rolling Stones Magazine: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/iowa-the-meaningless-sideshow-begins-20120103

[-] 1 points by 1SiriusMagus (311) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

I have held and espoused the assessment in Matt's current article. What a testimonial to the propaganda entranced electorate. Yet even Matt T offered no real alternative because we are operating in a closed system that was designed to be closed when originally crafted and drafted by the "founding fathers" i.e. rich merchants and massive land holders.

[-] 4 points by Joeboy32 (72) 2 years ago

I heard about this yesterday. Doesn't surprise me that the U.S. Government would enforce the NDAA. This tells me that they know the economy is going to fall this year, along with many other things.

If you aren't aware now, you better turn off your television set and do some research.

prepare for the next five years, not just 2012.

[-] 1 points by 1SiriusMagus (311) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

Unfortunately that is a real possibility and probability for that. Unlike in the Great Depression, when Wall Street and the Banksters imploded the economy ( again due to private Federal Reserve self serving policies) we had a well established manufacturing base throughout our country. Today 90% of manufacturing has been outsourced. When Wall Street in 2007 imploded the economy again it revealed the obliteration of our manufacturing safety net necessary for rebuilding our economy. The US today is where most third world countries are that rely on imports because they lack an extensive consumer goods manufacturing base. The current financial crash has exposed that the foundation of our economy has been outsourced by corporate America. Apple, HP. Microsoft and Sony all manufacture overseas and none of them pay a tariff on the goods they market in the US. China charges a 35% tariff on all American manufactured goods sold in their country.

[-] 3 points by jomojo (562) 2 years ago

There are no scapegoats. The law must be protested.

[-] 2 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

So how did the New York State Nurses Association Strike go? Did they cancel? Did I hear that right?

what did you fuking nimrods do? Scare the shit outah the nurses?

I keep hearing how this movement isn't about left or right . . . I tend toward the center myself . . . but hey. I am a supporter. I am active in my local GA.

I share my thoughts on the NDAA and what happens . . . oh oh he's co-opting the movement

well go ahead - vote me down some more - nimrods . . . If you can't reach out to the people who Occupy the Center what will you have left?

What hope of change will we have then?

[-] 2 points by SmithGoesWashington (72) 2 years ago

Act was signed quietly this past New Years Eve

Read it as the "Fear and Misery of the Third Reich"

[-] 2 points by sayNO2demm (1) 2 years ago

That democrat puppet Obama will sign anything that tells him to do. Ask Harry Reid he pulls Obama strings.

[-] 1 points by Jester (30) 2 years ago

Interesting, do you have some info you can share about the details of his influence?

[-] 2 points by PatrickOxOethafulm (35) 2 years ago

I will totally be there!

[-] 2 points by bigbangbilly (594) 2 years ago

Also make sure they do not have any potential excuses after we are successful. I am just going to keep it vague because I do not want to be banned and laugh offed just like Cassandra.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CassandraTruth You can ask for clarification and I am just going to PM you.

[-] 2 points by MrD (7) 2 years ago

"Although the White House and Senate sponsors maintain that the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) already grants presidential authority for indefinite detention, the Act legislatively codifies the President's authority to indefinitely detain terrorism suspects without trial as defined in Title X, Subtitle D, SEC 1021(a-e) of the law."

And since there is no real definition of "terrorism", then they can pick up anyone for anything. Not to mention the fact that they could just erase someone and then claim they are being detained indefinitely.

Got to love the way the government can throw the word terrorism around as a tool to arrest innocent people. Yet they fail to use it to describe the man in charge of the 9/11 attacks.

[-] 1 points by independentmind (227) 2 years ago

Actually, the definition of "terrorism" is very clear:

http://www.fbi.gov/albuquerque/about-us/what-we-investigate/priorities

http://terrorism.about.com/od/whatisterroris1/ss/DefineTerrorism_5.htm

http://westgatehouse.com/art98.html

I'm not saying there isn't cause for alarm. There quite possibly is. However, terrorism is clearly defined. And precedent was set in Hamadan vs. Rumsfeld and several other "indefinite" detention cases over the years.

I just really don't understand what the hold up was regarding bringing attention to this matter. This has been in the works for months. It has been in the forefront of many blogging sites and the like for weeks, the ACLU has been screaming about this at the top of their lungs. But OWS has barely mentioned it and waits to take real action until it's effectually "too late"?

Who's side are they on? Really?

[-] 1 points by MrD (7) 2 years ago

Clear yet oh so vague. Like when 2 teenagers were arrested for tossing water balloons at people. They were charged with terrorism and tried as terrorist. Not mischievous conduct. Not juvenile misconduct. Not a misdemeanor. TERRORISM. These boys were put in the same category as the Oklahoma City bomber, Those responsible for 9/11, Ted Kaczynski, and Eric Rudolph. So no, I can not agree that "terrorism" has a cut and dry definition.

[-] 1 points by independentmind (227) 2 years ago

This kid?

http://lancecrowe.hubpages.com/hub/water-baloon-terrorism

This is a twist on State Law. And by no means relevant to Federal Law. It even explains this within the article.

Terrorism, as defined by federal regulations, must have politically motivated violence, aimed at noncombatant targets (in case you didn't read the article).

You're comparing apples to oranges here.

[-] 1 points by MrD (7) 2 years ago

State law, Federal law, It's still all fruit. These kids were classified as "Terrorist" period. They were just moron kids having fun, they did not blow up anything, or kill anyone. They were NOT terrorist.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (20721) 2 years ago

Excellent.

[-] 2 points by bettydonnelly (115) 2 years ago

Go gang Go !!!

[-] 1 points by MonetizingDiscontent (1257) 2 years ago

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::The New Hampshire General Court will consider a::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

:::::::::::::::::Tenth Amendment Resolution during the 2012 legislative session:::::::::::::::::

http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2012/01/new-hampshire-all-powers-not-delegated-are-retained/

-Jan 17th 2012-

HR25... http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2012/HR0025.html ...affirms state powers as delegated by the U.S. Constitution and the New Hampshire Constitution respectively, and calls for nullification of unconstitutional acts.

Representative Daniel Itse (Fremont) serves as the primary sponsor. The resolution has eight co-sponsors.

The resolution begins with a pronouncement from the New Hampshire Constitution.

The Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 1, Article 7 declares that the people of this State have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent State; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States of America in Congress assembled.

After listing specific powers delegated to the federal government and declaring the exercise of any other power void within the state of New Hampshire, the resolution concludes with words taken almost verbatim from Thomas Jefferson’s Kentucky Resolutions of 1798. http://www.constitution.org/cons/kent1798.htm

That the New Hampshire house of representatives urges its co-States to charge to one if its committees with the duty communicating the preceedings of its Legislature in regard to the government of the United States of America to the corresponding committees of Legislatures of the several States; to assure them that this State continues in the same esteem of their friendship and union which it has manifested from that moment at which a common danger first suggested a common union: that it considers union, for specified national purposes, and particularly to those specified in their federal compact, to be friendly to the peace, happiness, and prosperity of all the States: that faithful to that compact, according to the plain intent and meaning in which it was understood and acceded to by the several parties, it is sincerely anxious for its preservation: that it does also believe, that to take from the States all the powers of self-government and transfer them to a general and consolidated government, without regard to the special delegations and reservations solemnly agreed to in that compact, is not for the peace, happiness, or prosperity of these States; and that therefore this State is determined, as it doubts not its co-States are, to submit to undelegated, and consequently unlimited powers in no man, or body of men on earth: that in cases of an abuse of the delegated powers, the members of the General Government, being chosen by the people, a change by the people would be the constitutional remedy; but, where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, (casus non foederis), to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them.

While a resolution does not carry the force of law, it serves as a gateway to more aggressive state action against unconstitutional federal acts down the road. The general often leads to the specific. Passage of the Tenth Amendment Resolution would send a message to Washington D.C. and if supported by the citizens of New Hampshire, would likely embolden lawmakers in the state to support specific nullification bills in the future.

“Some people argue that these resolutions don’t really matter because they have no teeth. They don’t change anything from a practical standpoint. But we’ve seen a pattern since 2008. States pass these kinds of resolutions and it’s kind of like the proverbial gateway drug. It reminds state lawmakers that they do have not only the responsibility, but also the power, to interpose and stop the federal government from shoving unconstitutional acts down the peoples’ throats. While they certainly aren’t a cure-all, Tenth Amendment Resolutions serve an important function and send an important message. We’re glad to see the New Hampshire General Court take this up and we hope they get it passed,” Tenth Amendment Center communications director Mike Maharrey said.

For this reason, the Tenth Amendment Center strongly encourages New Hampshire citizens to call their representatives and ask that they support this resolution.

(((You can find contact info for your representative & senator HERE))) http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/

(((To track Tenth Amendment Resolution bills across the U.S., click HERE))) http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/10th-amendment-resolution/

(((For model Tenth Amendment Resolution legislation, click HERE))) http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/10th-amendment-resolution/


[-] 1 points by Wolfchen (6) 2 years ago

We must have public financing of elections. Without such a requirement, politicians will always by on the take from corporations and Wall Street. The electorate should demand of everyone running for public office to declare their positions on such public financing.

Further, as part of any radio and TV media licensing agreements, 2 percent of programming time during national elections must be reserved for free access by the electorate and those running for office. Enactment of these modifications of our electoral process will dynamically bring about change for the protection of our democracy that is threatened by the oligarchic elements among us.

Next time you witness politicians doing their dances of deception, let them know you'll not support them unless they' announce such public financing of elections as being at the top of their priorities.

Help spread this message, and let's make it a part of the Occupy movement. This we can do now and not run the uncertainty of passing a Constitutional Amendment to overcome the damage done by the corrupted Supreme Court decision in Citizens United.

Make no mistake: Our democracy is under threat of being severely damaged by those committing Economic Treason.

[-] 1 points by sicofit (1) 2 years ago

Has anyone suggested doing more than just protesting. What about a pledge that patriotic Americans could make to "not vote for any incumbents until special interest influence is stopped." Or draft a national referendum to stop the system of legalized bribery that we now have. There are probably some lawyers in the group that could get the ball rolling. It would probably have to involve public campaign financing, although it would cost far less than what is spent now. It would also have to make taking bribes a form of treason, with mandatory jail. And maybe the era of career politicians should end.

[-] 1 points by Rudy (4) 2 years ago

I haven't read so many irrational comments before in my life. I just don't get it. You folks are throwing around accusations and conspiracy theories that has nothing to do with facts. Absolutely Nothing.

[-] 1 points by Rudy (4) 2 years ago

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is a federal law which literally funds the budget and expenditures of the Department of Defense (the military) for the fiscal year. That includes paychecks and benefits for our military veterans. That includes paying for equipment and gear for our service members abroad. This is not something new folks. Congress has passed the same bill every year for 49 years.

The NDAA is 1000 pages long and it does a great many things, The main problem, however deals only with Sections 1031 and 1032-"Counterrism".. one odious measure out of many good things in the bill.

Besides, the final bill does not extend the power of indefinite suspension the government already has (as authorized both by the Patriot Act and judicial review by the supreme court). It also expires after 1 year. It actually doesn't even grant as much power as the laws currently on the books do (Patriot Act).

You all are lamenting over some percieved threat that isn't even one. Going out there on Capital Hill protesting about NDAA is just a complete waste of time. You could be doing something else.

[-] 1 points by Rudy (4) 2 years ago

Do any of you know what the NDAA is? The NDAA is a federal law that passes at the end of each year. It has been like that for the past 49 years. It is the bill which literally funds the budget and expenditures of the Department of Defense (the military). That includes paychecks and benefits for our military veterans. That includes paying for equipment and gear for our service members abroad. That includes funding our intelligence agencies and contractors which actually do a lot of important work. And so on and so forth.

It's a MUST PASS bill. In this situation, President Obama was left with two choices: veto the bill and have troop’s pay delayed, the bill passes and becomes law anyway because Congress had enough votes to override the veto. OR, he can sign it and issue a signing statement assuring everyone that the Administration isn’t going to enforce the odious measure that was slipped into the bill. Obama chose the latter.

As Commander-In-Chief, it is Obama's responsibility to ensure that service-members and veterans are well cared for.

[-] 1 points by falcon1961 (24) 2 years ago

Our child and my brother in-law sits in prison after being charged three times for the same dismissed charge as state officials the court, attorneys and politicians hope we die from corporate chemical exposure. After winning hundreds of million in a lawsuit on us and a failed attempt of the court to create a frudulent class action. America's jails are now used to hold political prisoners. As this is going on here in Mississippi, the out going governor releases murders, rapest, and robbers. Please help us gain legal aid for this cause for an investment in OWS. www.classvictim.wordpress.com

[-] 1 points by lnl (1) 2 years ago

i was just wandering who the OWS might be backing, because i liked what Ron Paul, said about the Constitution then i read this. Bush, started a war that we pay for. the constitution seems to be in the past, because if it wasn't Bush and his friends would be in jail and the OWS would have free speech and we would not be giving our money away .

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

The End of Dollar Hegemony by Ron Paul (Explains why we have these wars but needs to share the message subversively):

lewrockwell (DOT) com/paul/paul303.html

[-] 1 points by skagway (1) 2 years ago

I am new here. I am completely in concert with you. Bless you all. Some of you may know that the corporate/government corruption is much larger than you even suspect or protest against. David Wilcock at ( "www.divinecosmos.com " ) has been revealing on his site, astronomical information on the criminality of the Federal Reserve BANK, and much more. ALL FACTUAL, PLS READ IT i WOULD REALLY BE STUNNED IF, around the country, OWS and newbies, walked around all 13 Fed reserve banks and chanted "free- dom" 12 hours a day. Do this formation; 4 abreast, line behind line of four, Arms hooked. No reason to scream. The drone of "FREE-DOM" WILL HAVE HUGE RESONATING EFFECTS. Walk slowly. Make shifts. Drink water. Dont stop. Authorities cannot interfere with this. If this spreads to every city and state, Martin Luther King will smile. This has so much power, the whole country/ world will notice and perhaps join in. Extend to WASH. D.C. and lets all join and walk around all the branches of U.S. GOVERNMENT with this "FREE-DOM" MANTRA . The drone will resonate to everywhere. Please consider. Thank you for listening

[-] 1 points by HCCanada (2) 2 years ago

PROOF THE NDAA 2012 IS NOT LAW: IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL:

Q.: When did the States RATIFY?

Press, media & public figures declare the NDAA and the Patriot Act “REPEALED” parts of the U.S. constituti­on. They call NDAA “the law of the land”.

To repeal a part of a constituti­on, including America’s, an amending formula must be used. An amending formula “ENTRENCHE­S” the constituti­on (legal word) to protect it from alteration by ordinary legislatio­n.

The USA has FORMAL constituti­onal amending procedures­:

“The Amendment Process

There are essentially two ways spelled out in the Constitution for how to propose an amendment. One has never been used.

The first method is for a bill to pass both houses of the legislature, by a two-thirds majority in each. Once the bill has passed both houses, it goes on to the states. This is the route taken by all current amendments. Because of some long outstanding amendments, such as the 27th, Congress will normally put a time limit (typically seven years) for the bill to be approved as an amendment (for example, see the 21st and 22nd).”

Source: http://www­.usconstit­ution.net/­constam.ht­ml#interpr­et

Did the Patriot Act and the NDAA pass both houses of Congress by a 2/3 majority and then go on to the States for ratificati­on?

If not, one would normally be looking at ordinary legislatio­n with the NDAA and the Patriot Act, and other similar “void” laws which infringe constituti­onal rights and liberties.

As Chief Justice Marshall correctly observed, ordinary legislatio­n cannot override the constituti­on. Therefore, if it conflicts with the constituti­on, it is VOID.

Delivering the opinion of the Court in Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 in 1803, Chief Justice MARSHALL said this of unconstitutional laws:

"If, then, the courts are to regard the constitution, and the constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature, the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.

Those, then, who controvert the principle that the constitution is to be considered, in court, as a paramount law, are reduced to the necessity of maintaining that courts must close their eyes on the constitution, and see only the law. This doctrine would subvert the very foundation of all written constitutions. It would declare that an act which, according to the principles and theory of our government, is entirely void, is yet, in practice, completely obligatory. It would declare that if the legislature shall do what is expressly forbidden, such act, notwithstanding the express prohibition, is in reality effectual. It would be giving to the legislature a practical and real omnipotence, with the same breath which professes to restrict their powers within narrow limits. It is prescribing limits, 178*178 and declaring that those limits may be passed at pleasure. That it thus reduces to nothing what we have deemed the greatest improvement on political institutions, a written constitution ..."

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=5&invol=137

America's rights were never REPEALED, it’s a BLUFF.

The NDAA and the PATRIOT ACT are VOID laws which have NO POWER to amend the constitution by "repealing" any part of it.

They are simply hoping the American people won’t wake up in time to SAVE THEMSELVES before martial law is invoked by the putsch (A sudden and decisive change of government illegally or by force) which has taken over the government­.

YOU NEED TO MOVE FAST to have these VOID laws legally declared VOID before they put you into the FEMA CAMPS!

Kathleen Moore HABEAS CORPUS CANADA The Official Legal Challenge To North American Union http://www.habeascorpuscanada.com "TAKING AMERICA DOWN FOR GLOBALISM IN THE NAME OF PATRIOTISM" http://canadian-state-of-the-union.blogspot.com/2011/06/taking-america-down-for-globalism-in.html YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/crazyforcanada

[-] 1 points by HCCanada (2) 2 years ago

PROOF THE NDAA 2012 IS NOT LAW: IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL:

Q.: When did the States RATIFY?

Press, media & public figures declare the NDAA and the Patriot Act “REPEALED” parts of the U.S. constituti­on. They call NDAA “the law of the land”.

To repeal a part of a constituti­on, including America’s, an amending formula must be used. An amending formula “ENTRENCHE­S” the constituti­on (legal word) to protect it from alteration by ordinary legislatio­n.

The USA has FORMAL constituti­onal amending procedures­:

“The Amendment Process

There are essentially two ways spelled out in the Constitution for how to propose an amendment. One has never been used.

The first method is for a bill to pass both houses of the legislature, by a two-thirds majority in each. Once the bill has passed both houses, it goes on to the states. This is the route taken by all current amendments. Because of some long outstanding amendments, such as the 27th, Congress will normally put a time limit (typically seven years) for the bill to be approved as an amendment (for example, see the 21st and 22nd).”

Source: http://www­.usconstit­ution.net/­constam.ht­ml#interpr­et

Did the Patriot Act and the NDAA pass both houses of Congress by a 2/3 majority and then go on to the States for ratificati­on?

If not, one would normally be looking at ordinary legislatio­n with the NDAA and the Patriot Act, and other similar “void” laws which infringe constituti­onal rights and liberties.

As Chief Justice Marshall correctly observed, ordinary legislatio­n cannot override the constituti­on. Therefore, if it conflicts with the constituti­on, it is VOID.

Delivering the opinion of the Court in Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 in 1803, Chief Justice MARSHALL said this of unconstitutional laws:

"If, then, the courts are to regard the constitution, and the constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature, the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.

Those, then, who controvert the principle that the constitution is to be considered, in court, as a paramount law, are reduced to the necessity of maintaining that courts must close their eyes on the constitution, and see only the law. This doctrine would subvert the very foundation of all written constitutions. It would declare that an act which, according to the principles and theory of our government, is entirely void, is yet, in practice, completely obligatory. It would declare that if the legislature shall do what is expressly forbidden, such act, notwithstanding the express prohibition, is in reality effectual. It would be giving to the legislature a practical and real omnipotence, with the same breath which professes to restrict their powers within narrow limits. It is prescribing limits, 178*178 and declaring that those limits may be passed at pleasure. That it thus reduces to nothing what we have deemed the greatest improvement on political institutions, a written constitution ..."

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=5&invol=137

America's rights were never REPEALED, it’s a BLUFF.

The NDAA and the PATRIOT ACT are VOID laws which have NO POWER to amend the constitution by "repealing" any part of it.

They are simply hoping the American people won’t wake up in time to SAVE THEMSELVES before martial law is invoked by the putsch (A sudden and decisive change of government illegally or by force) which has taken over the government­.

YOU NEED TO MOVE FAST to have these VOID laws legally declared VOID before they put you into the FEMA CAMPS!

Kathleen Moore HABEAS CORPUS CANADA The Official Legal Challenge To North American Union http://www.habeascorpuscanada.com "TAKING AMERICA DOWN FOR GLOBALISM IN THE NAME OF PATRIOTISM" http://canadian-state-of-the-union.blogspot.com/2011/06/taking-america-down-for-globalism-in.html YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/crazyforcanada

[-] 1 points by Rascus (30) 2 years ago

One thought for all who comment on here or are involved in the activities that originate here.....United We Stand....Divided We Fall......divjde and conquer is the enemies way of keeping the people always divided!

[-] 1 points by Rascus (30) 2 years ago

You really want to accomplish something.......make the FED dissappear!

[-] 1 points by Rascus (30) 2 years ago

You need to be fighting the people who wrote the Documents giving us our rights....as they are the same people today who are taking them away from us.....thats right people....the New World Order....wake up people those documents right now are not worth the paper they are printed on if we dont have control of them! The NWO has been in existence long before our founding fathers wrote those documents and when they rote them they were told what to put in them by you guessed it...the NWO! WAKE UP SHEEEPLE!!

[-] 1 points by jimevanhoe1 (55) 2 years ago

OBAMA IS ONE OF THEM........OBAMA is an absolute PHONY !!!!!!

             why are Our Right Illegally being taken away

because they are protecting criminals and crimes by public officials Democrats and Republicans, the President and Congress

OBAMA has not convicted anyone from Wall Street for Global Fraud, the deliberate and fraudulent selling of financial securities known to be bad (mortgages). Deliberate Fraud from Greece to the USA by Goldman-Sachs, AIG,Standard & Poors, etc. etc etc etc etc.........millions of cases of out right fraud, creating a GLOBAL melt down totaling $82 Trillion Dollars.... OBAMA is a Criminal! OBAMA is a FRAUD FACTS: OBAMA took a million dollars from Goldman-Sachs and millions more from Goldman Executives & Cronies as has>> ROMNEY<<

OCCUPY = Independent Voters, WE are the major 52% of the Voting Public, we our the FORCE the NEW MAJORITY! elect a new president and a new congress ...no Democrats and no Republicans! STOP PUBLIC CORRUPTION convict: BUSH, OBAMA, CHENEY & PELOSI........etc, etc., etc., etc...............

Financial Fraud, War Crimes, Insider Stock Trading, Kickbacks & Bribes Money Laundering-Racketeering-with-Drug Cartels-through-HSBC BANK- Read John Cruz's book "World Banking World Fraud" John was an insider and became a whistleblower.....they have threatened him and his family The OBAMA Administration & the Bush Family are criminals creating a Society by through Chaos, profiting from Global and U.S. Chaos, deliberately put upon the poor & middle class....PURE CLASS WARFARE! Needless Wars Collapsing Financial Markets...inflating then shorting the market profiting both 1988,89,90,91, 2000, 2001,2002, 2008,09,10,11, destroying our jobs, our savings, our children's futures as they profit. Laundering Drug Cartel money HSBC Bank keeping the cartels in business on a global scale including Afghan Heroin....Obama and Bush know this did nothing... killing our neighborhoods our children our families Building Prisons for Profit convicting those that use their Drugs

Who can work with OCCUPY to convict Bush & Obama...see attorneys: Vincent Bugliosi and Bruce Fein, iraqusa@tc-america.org, ECCHR (Europe) info@ecchr.eu & CCHR NYC, alerts@ccrjustice.org The Ralph Nader Group, info@nader.org, Independent Senator from Vermont Bernie Sanders, CBS 60 mins, Frontline, PBS, your local leaders, your church leaders, use the Occupy sites, use FACEBOOK, TWEETER world wide........KEEP THE PRESS ON THE OBAMA & CONGRESS VOTE THEM OUT in NOVEMBER then convict them in 2013! In 2012 the end of the World isn't coming but the End of Corruption is OCCUPY WALL STREET .......................Keep Occupy Pure! WE ARE THE MAJORITY the 52% IS the USA a Democracy or is it a Society of Chaos by design OBAMA is a PHONY from the very beginning.

ALL OF US MARCH on WASHINGTON DC this SUMMER A 10 MILLION PERSON MARCH....CLOSE IT DOWN!

STOP THE SOCIETY of CHAOS, STOP deliberate CLASS WARFARE

STOP THE REPUBLICANS & THE DEMOCRATS

[-] 1 points by joshmann (1) 2 years ago

Why OWS is considered terrorist? Because its philosophy is based on fighting violence with peace which is against the philosophy of fighting violence with violence the power that be has. The power that be cannot allow that philosophy to grow in the society or else it will lose grip of its power,

[-] 1 points by Rouf (4) 2 years ago

NDAA means that your protest has started to affect the evil that is why the evil resorted to NDAA.

[-] 1 points by InvisiblePatriot (12) 2 years ago

I am ALL for OWS and changing America. Why are you distorting the NDAA issue? Anyone who reads this closely, knows he COULDN'T veto the bill. Veto proof due to the 2/3 majority vote. IMPOSSIBLE.

  1. I'm sure all of you know…(?) The National Defense Authorization Act is a United States federal law that has been enacted for each of the past 49 years to specify the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense.
  2. Congress and the White House have been at odds over detention policy ever since Obama was sworn in. Many lawmakers have resisted the administration's efforts to close the U.S. prison at Guantánamo and have opposed trying terror suspects in federal courts in the United States rather than by military commission.
  3. After a Senate-House compromise text explicitly ruled out any limitation of the President's authorities, and >>removed the requirement of military detention for terrorism suspects arrested in the United States<<<, the White House issued a statement saying that it would not veto the bill 4.MH-Obama has indicated his intent to sign that bill, but Friday's statement signaled that he would raise similar objections. "My administration has repeatedly communicated my objections to these provisions, including my view that they could, under certain circumstances, violate constitutional separation of powers principles," Obama said. He said he would continue to work toward their repeal.~Miami Herald
  4. On December 31 and after signing the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 into law, President Obama issued a statement on it that addressed "certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of terrorism suspects." In the statement Obama maintains that "the legislation does nothing more than confirm authorities that the Federal courts have recognized as lawful under the 2001 AUMF. I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens.

Please read up on these things and for God's sake, read real news vs. that shill news that is posted all over social networking sites.

Just have your facts straight. It's essential for credibility

[-] 1 points by tomykalaka (1) from Jordan, Mt 2 years ago

"Find out just what people will submit to, and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows, or both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.” Frederick Douglas, the abolitionist

[-] 1 points by redwessex (1) 2 years ago

Ive been a militant anti-capitalist for 30 years & have managed to get up to the London camp twice thus far(not great I know,but i do live a long way away).Despite my huge respect for the people involved in this movement,I feel my early misgivings have proved well-founded tho'.Maybe its different in the States,but here in Britain the movement is not only an irrelevance to those working class communities that it desperately needs if it is to make any headway,but it is having no impact whatever on those who hold all the power. The inescapabable conclusion seems to be-sorry people, but if we want our freedom we are gonna have to fight for it,& we are gonna have to accept the fact that we will not be the majority in our countries either,given the extreme submissive nature of the western working & lower middle-classes!Do we really want freedom,justice,equality or are we playing some kind of teenage student's game-time for people to decide,you don't have forever...dictatorship is just around the corner. Dont make the same mistake the Left made in Germany in 1930-33,this is war.

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

I like Dr. Paul's points and I think Occupy at least should hear him out on his views on how tyranny and control is produced:

Ron Paul doesn't say that true liberty comes with just mere 'privatization,' but what is also essential in his message is the need to tackle the underlying instruments used to suppress freedom. He believes they are:

i) the Federal reserve bank via them feeding Wall street and controlling the money supply (eg just altering the money supply and interest rates leads to more people buying things, taking out loans, etc).

Guaranteed Wall Street would be in fear if their piggy bank was further exposed or taken away from them.

ii) an Empire so big regarding its resources and authorities, that rich people will be the ones lured in as to access its power in order to grow and solidify their corporate monopoly power (e.g HMO's and how their oligo-monopoly is now secured, also via contracts to weapons' dealers, bail-outs to banks, subsidies, and other policies that only an Empire can implement to make the rich into trans-national powers).

To those who argue the free market would only make the corporations bigger, but consider that we don't have a total free-market (though there are specs-eg) cell phone industry-apple vs android, and even FB, Google etc.) What we have right now is a State-Corporate Complex where by the rich use the Empire to grow their big businesses into trans-national corporations).

iii) the MIC (Military Industrial Complex) which serves to enforce the previous two in order to maintain their power. In other words, wars and nation building in OPEC nations ensure US petro dollars stay in demand allowing the Fed to create more money w/o subjecting them to steep inflation and war is also used to ensure the Empire's centralized power continues to stay big. (The drug wars do the same but on domestic grounds leading to further racial injustice while propping up the prison industrial complex).

RP's saying thus if you want true liberty and you want to end unjust disparities of sway, you need to demolish the Fed, tackle the MIC, and downsize the Empire and decentralize the power closer to the people.

If these power structures are tackled, then he believes there will be true LIBERTY

This way, people will be truely free and on a level playing field in terms of power. RP though does gives a warning that this system like all Empires will collapse if radical change doesn't occur soon.

Noam Chomsky differs slightly and goes a step further thinking any sort of big business that creates a profit will have authority to manufacture consent via mass marketing, will spiral up in power, and thus we will never be free. Chomsky thus would not be a fan of the internet or fb or google or apple b/c he'll feel the profit they earn will just dish out heavy marketing in order to control and influence people into a state of mass consumerism. Thus he believes in communal ownership and property. But even Chomsky believes right now we don't even have a free-market society but a 'state-corporate complex' or as Ron Paul would say, 'crony capitalism,' or 'corporatism.' The American dictionary in 92 defined this as fascism when coupled with polices to promote national elitism.

Ron Paul on the other hand, thinks communal ownership can only occur if people are given the free choice to opt into it or not. Noam Chomsky agrees as well on the grounds of a truly free market but thinks it's impossible. However, they both agree that the state-corporate complex is no good (ie what RP calls crony capitalism). But when Chomsky thinks of 1 tier health care, he thinks as long as that's what the people voluntarily want.. Ron Paul would say realistically an Empire is more subject to corruption and thus a decentralized government with a federal government abiding with its constitutional boundaries is the better way.

However, both would say that change comes from the people and so why protest just corporations? Lead up to it by protesting to implement change from local and state level and up. RP's attempt to tackle the system heads on gives him perhaps less than 5% chance. Yet, while RP fights the air-war, the 99% can also implement bills at their local or state level to reverse federal laws that currently allow banks and corporations to maintain their power (subsidies, contracts, bail outs, things to oppose the NDAA in their state, etc).

B/C the Empire hasn't reached the power of completely over-riding the states, the people from each state have more power at their local and state levels to fend off the corporate and banking elites tyranny.

[-] 1 points by sufinaga (513) 2 years ago

what will you do with your 25¢ per hour? seems to me we need solidarity with the prisoners! the political roadshow rolls on and we are not even a side issue! WE ARE THE SOLUTION! but let us not be as deluded as our enemy's stooges. we face worse violence to come as we grow in numbers and more desperate for our real human community. we face barbaric repression under the cover of FAKE terrorist alerts. be of good cheer through these dark days. we know we will win because we are CONFIDENT IN THE VICTORY OF GOOD OVER EVIL!

[-] 1 points by TheScreamingHead (239) 2 years ago

Vid on the NDAA and other things.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BYvVDVdIxk

[-] 1 points by SayYes (11) 2 years ago

back to see what was posted: seems that protesting NDAA & Citizens United on many levels is going on already and will continue. ( Yes yes! ) The idea of OCCUPY is to do just that, right? And the 1% should be pressured on many levels of activism that people are able to do by .orgs, demonstrations, et al. including recall. And it is not impossible as someone suggested. Again, there are citizens who would be willing to resist with that venue while others may prefer other actions. All good, don't you think. NDAA action or Citizens united. Keep it coming strong from sincere and balanced actions on many levels. RE: Citzens United: ...Montana Supreme Court enacted that it is unlawful in that state. Thanks for the discussion. I like that people can 'agree to disagree' and not get rude and mean-spirited. It shows a lot of soul.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Does anyone know what the outcome of this Direct Action was? I see they have updated the news page but they have added nothing about the success or lack thereof of this event.

[-] 1 points by sinead (474) 2 years ago

Does anyone know what the outcome of this Direct Action was? I see they have updated the news page but they have added nothing about the success or lack thereof of this event.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

Sorry - I really don't understand the "anti-NDAA" lectures. Cerainly not all of the NDAA is anti-American. Shouldn't we be enhancing our argument with the SPECIFICS.? NDAA contains cost containment measures for health care costs - are we against that? I just think we should attack what we are against. Attacking NDAA weakens our position and hides what we are really against inside its 500 pages. imho


The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012[1] is a law in the United States that was signed by President Barack Obama on December 31, 2011 The President issued a “signing statement” in conjunction with signing the bill into law. The NDAA is a lengthy act, its hundreds of pages covering numerous topics. The act primary "authorizes funding for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad, crucial services for service members and their families, and vital national security programs that must be renewed. In hundreds of separate sections totaling over 500 pages, the Act also contains critical Administration initiatives to control the spiraling health care costs of the Department of Defense (DoD), to develop counterterrorism initiatives abroad, to build the security capacity of key partners, to modernize the force, and to boost the efficiency and effectiveness of military operations worldwide."[5] The provisions which have received the most attention and generated the most controversy are contained in Title X, Subtitle D, entitled "Counter-Terrorism." In particular, sub-sections 1031 and 1032 which deal with detention of persons the government suspects of involvement in terrorism, have generated controversy as to their legal meaning and their potential implications for abuse of Presidential authority. Although the White House[6] and Senate sponsors[7] have maintained that the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) already grants presidential authority for indefinite detention, the Act states that Congress "affirms" this authority and makes specific provisions as to the exercise of that authority. [8] [9] The detention provisions of the Act have received critical attention by, among others, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and media sources which raise concerns about the scope of the President's authority, including contentions that those who may be held indefinitely could include U.S. citizens arrested on American soil, including arrests by members of the Armed Forces

[-] 1 points by bigbangbilly (594) 2 years ago

Add "against patriot act" somewhere just so it does not end up as this :

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NiceJobBreakingItHero

[-] 1 points by Anachronism (225) 2 years ago

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/12/16/1046078/-Obama-has-THROWN-Down-the-Gauntlet:-Occupy-Must-Stand-and-Fight-NOW!-?via=siderecent

I IMPLORE every single Occupier in the this nation to watch and share this video. The legislation that this fascist government and administration is worthy of Nazi Germany. And, that is NOT an exaggeration. It is a fact. I can not do justice to the implications of this bill, please watch the video.

Again and again and again, Obama has betrayed the American citizenry and governed for expansion of corporate & military power and profit. And, again and again and again, many of his supporters have rationalized/justified/or even championed policy and appointments from the Obama administration that would have drawn near universal protest and outrage if implemented by Republicans or the Bush administration.

This must end. It is time for Occupy to not only challenge the corporate power structure, but unflinchingly challenge ANY politician or political party that governs against the people for the expansion of corporate/military profit.

I do not know how a single American, democrat/republican/independent/green or otherwise can support ANY politician that would codify indefinite detention without charges or trial against American citizens. It is insanity. Yet, if we march forward and move along with the circus act that is the two party stage corporate election circus of 2012, we are all enablers of the destruction of our constitution and unraveling the last tattered remnants of our democracy.

There is no lesser of two evils. There is now only evil. And, it is up to us to stand with courage to create a different alternative and dialogue to solve this crisis.

Obama can't be the Occupy movement's nominee. Neither can any of the Republicans. They do not and WILL NOT represent us. This bill proves that fact beyond a shadow of any doubt.

We must move forward with courage.

ABSOLUTE MUST READ: http://www.salon.com/...

[-] 1 points by Miter99 (33) 2 years ago

NDAA and SOPA was designed and signed in after we were promised hope and change.NDAA is bad for us... to have a president sign to have people imprisoned without a trial can really hurt people.

[-] 1 points by jane01 (22) 2 years ago

The GOP what happened. We have for our PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES The cheater/sticky fingers-- N. Gingrich. Rom., Really a hand shake bet on a health care issue with Perry then the next day state, my wife said that I don’t bet really well. These are people lives not puzzle pieces!!!!!! -Rom reminds me of the dirty politician who smiles in Americas face then goes under the table with China and Russia or anyone in that case for greed not the US (I would NOT trust him with my dog). He does not flip flop but is playing a chameleon role on the US. He is so transparent!! Then had Crawford publically endorse him (a has been by the way) as the Liberal face, really !!! The corporate paid suit which is why the media is pushing him imagine him in office who will suffer, not his suits and I will make a bet on that but the US!!! He reminds me of a snake-sickening-(to the highest factor worst offense) M. Romney. Perry no comment lower than Palin. Bach., really you are not neither will you ever be a replacement rep for Cain!! Presidential candidates, really an embarrassment The GOP had respect now all we have is this!!!! GOP what happened… WTH happened! Proud conservative refuse to even touch the GOP/tea.

[-] 1 points by jane01 (22) 2 years ago

Good Job Guys OWS, yet the GOP/tea, indep new Congress is so greedy they won’t even comply or listen! Anything just to protect their money. Don’t blame the wealthy it’s the New Congress voting down any measure that would involve taxing (not even a its worth, minus a maid!) . The Dems have no problem with tax increase nor the Wealthy or the President it’s the new Congress Voting it down time and time again for no increase. JOBS BILL for increasing jobs…Your-Gop/tea, indep is no vote down because of TAX INCREASE on RICH!! ALL and you GOP/tea, indep. ppl do is BLAME OBM, Really-ITS you- GOP/tea, indep!! !! Meanwhile their taxing is equivalent to a maid or secretary! The new Congress is the look of America if we vote or they control the United States government. For them all, with no thought or care for the United States of America.! Truly …a horrific sight OWS we are with you do not listen to the hate filled comments by GOP/tea, indep! DOWN with the GOP/tea, indep.-Corporate Greed!

[-] 1 points by jane01 (22) 2 years ago

GOP what happened… WTH happened! Proud conservative refuse to even touch the GOP/tea. Our country is headed in the wrong direction; Are You Kidding Me!! The GOP is the one who put it there before and after! After electing a good person who is trying to save America you vote every bill every suggestion if it effects your money!! (Greed) and recruit societies senile by misleading! The tea has got to be the worst party in history! At least OWS is doing it for a true cause! You people actually stood up in council meetings over false accusations on Heath care reform!! Thanks to the GOP- Death panel, really..make a copy of the actual page, paragraph and article number of the page- notarized!

[-] 1 points by jane01 (22) 2 years ago

PROUD Conservative, No, none, non- affiliated with the Republican/tea, ashamed. We recruit societies low percentage who talk about minorities ( Asians, Blacks, Gays, Latinos-Italian, Hispanics, Mexicans, Muslims, Jews, Indians), then elect a new congress that block all with no benefit too this great nation and these people blame him? Honestly, blaming the current Chief, really. You people put the current new congress in and what have they done, not one thought on you, when will you learn. The current president has done more in 3 years than the last president has done in 8. First thing when in with new Congress attack Social Security, that was funny!

[-] 1 points by jane01 (22) 2 years ago

Our country is headed in the wrong direction; Are You Kidding Me!! The GOP is the one who put it there! After electing a good person who is trying to save America you vote it down or recruit societies senile by misleading! The tea has got to be the worst party in history! At least OWS is doing it for a true cause! You people actually stood up in council meetings over false accusations on Heath care reform!! Thanks to the GOP- Death panel, really..make a copy of the actual page, paragraph and article number of the page- notarized! I bet you can’t find it, go ahead and try-do it. You can’t because it’s false!! Your lies will catch up to you GOP/tea, indep…. but for now continue to be the puppet feeding lies for a vote! OBM did more in 3 years than the previous administration-GOP did in 8! !! That’s what the GOP/tea, indep., party do is lie and mislead for greed (taxing), power(Chief), self preservation with a vote while the US suffers. PROUD Conservative, ashamed of the party. What Happened!! The GOP what happened!!

[-] 1 points by jane01 (22) 2 years ago

The GOP what happened. We have for our PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES The cheater/sticky fingers-- N. Gingrich. Rom., Really a hand shake bet on a health care issue with Perry then the next day state, my wife said that I don’t bet really well. These are people lives not puzzle pieces!!!!!! -Rom reminds me of the dirty politician who smiles in Americas face then goes under the table with China and Russia or anyone in that case for greed not the US (I would NOT trust him with my dog). He does not flip flop but is playing a chameleon role on the US. He is so transparent!! Then had Crawford publically endorse him (a has been by the way) as the Liberal face, really !!! The corporate paid suit which is why the media is pushing him imagine him in office who will suffer, not his suits and I will make a bet on that but the US!!! He reminds me of a snake-sickening-(to the highest factor worst offense) M. Romney. Perry no comment lower than Palin. Bach., really you are not neither will you ever be a replacement rep for Cain!! Presidential candidates, really an embarrassment The GOP had respect now all we have is this!!!! GOP what happened… WTH happened! Proud conservative refuse to even touch the GOP/tea.

[-] 1 points by jane01 (22) 2 years ago

The tea has got to be the worst party in history! At least OWS is doing it for a true cause! You people actually stood up in council meetings over false accusations on Heath care reform. Death panel, really..make a copy of the actual page, paragraph and article number of the page- notarized! I bet you can’t find it, go ahead and try-do it. You can’t because it’s false!! Your lies will catch up to you GOP/tea, indep…. but for now continue to be the puppet feeding lies for a vote!! That’s what this party does is lie and mislead for greed, power, self preservation and a vote while the US suffers. Your comments to OWS by GOP/tea-indep., get a job take a bath!! Defecation in the park, noise level really, stated by Mayor of NY, “UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS,” in other words no proof of it!! That’s all you do is lie and mislead! Do you think those kids liked to be in the cold, on the ground. They are educated people fighting for a cause but of course you would not know about that.- Your cause is limited government gee I wonder why? Correction I already know! Look at the current Congress you put in!! Any one who follows the tea must be uneducated or have an alternative agenda. The thought of you all of you GOP/tea, indep. running the whole country is the worst, sickest idea in the history of the United States of America! Social Security was put on the table by the new Congress voted in by the Tea!!! We toldyou, GOP puppets!! OWS Great Job!! Awesome…The US believes in you!! To the hate filled comments by GOP/tea, indep., pathetic!!

[-] -1 points by capella (199) 2 years ago

The Taxed Enough Already party is not a political party. ows is a collection of useful idiots.

[-] 1 points by jane01 (22) 2 years ago

OWS good fight, good cause! The useless GOP/tea the misleaded the misguided-funny with your New Congress the first attack was on Social Security, funny.

Like a pack of children to the GOP. You are the Joke! Proud Conservative-No, None, Not ever will be associated with GOP, emb., ashamed. What Happened to the GOP!

[-] 1 points by sampson (34) 2 years ago

whew, glad OWS is taking a stance on this... This is monumental and needs to change

[-] 1 points by DonHawkins (37) 2 years ago

http://knowledge321.wordpress.com/ check out my last post am going to go get gaga the new CD kiss me darling..

[-] 1 points by TheEvilFuckaire (208) 2 years ago

There is no government to complain to. That is why we have no rights. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_28_00003002----000-.html rule 15 A the "United States" is a federal corporation. registered in Delaware https://delecorp.delaware.gov/tin/GINameSearch.jsp search "United States" There is nothing to protest against or overthrow. The government left 150 years ago, we have been slaves since then, maybe before then.

[-] 2 points by TheEvilFuckaire (208) 2 years ago

And check out "Canada" it is also a corporation, it is registered in the US Securities and Exchange Commission.

[-] -1 points by HarryPairatestes2 (380) from Barrow, AK 2 years ago

"There is no government to complain to. That is why we have no rights. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_28_00003002----000-.html rule 15 A the "United States" is a federal corporation."

Why be misleading? You are pulling a specific definition for the U.S. as applied in the debt recovery section of the U.S. Codes. That definition is not the exclusive definition of the United States and you know it.

[-] 1 points by TheEvilFuckaire (208) 2 years ago

So when you pay your taxes is that not debt recovery. When the international banking cartels come for the money they loaned the "United States" through the FED will that be debt recovery?

[-] 0 points by HarryPairatestes2 (380) from Barrow, AK 2 years ago

No and no. Try again. I bet you haven't even read that section of the U.S. Codes that apply that specific definition. you are just copying and pasting what other people claim and none of their claims have EVER been upheld in a court of law.

[-] 1 points by TheEvilFuckaire (208) 2 years ago

It applies to judicial collection of debt and the definition of the parties named. Try again.

[-] -1 points by HarryPairatestes2 (380) from Barrow, AK 2 years ago

So out of that one section you extrapolated that the U.S. is a corporation? Time to lay off the crack.

[-] 1 points by bobmason117 (0) 2 years ago

The Nurses Strike has been called off. Please update this page.

[-] 1 points by 1SiriusMagus (311) from Minneapolis, MN 2 years ago

Do you know why it was called off?

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago
  1. I support the Movement

  2. I support the actions as stated above

  3. I'm not in NY - I'm in Vermont

  4. I would like to point out this was primarily a budget bill

  5. As a budget bill, given the time frame of its passage through Congress, it was inevitable that it would be passed into law

  6. What is really clever is the way that the President was constrained to sign it -

  7. If we want to repeal the provisions in question - sections 1031 and 1032 of the Senate version - then we have to look at the entirety of legislation authorizing indefinite detention - and not just this particular bill or individual sections of it

  8. I would point out that the President made what appears to have been a good faith attempt to follow through on his campaign pledge to close gitmo - the screams over cost with regard to trials in NYC killed the prospect.

  9. Carl Levin / John McCain both wrote the bill. If anyone is guilty of sedition, I would blame them.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Regarding Gitmo, Congress also made it illegal to transfer prisoners to US soil, so the President had to negotiate with foreign governments to take them, sometimes one prisoner at a time. In fact, one of the provisions of this law that Obama is refusing to enforce deals with a new requirement disallowing transfer of prisoners from any nation to another, making sure gitmo stays active indefinitely.

This current legislation also specifically exempts US citizens from military detention and prosecution, as well as legal residents, and in his signing statement, the President declared he would not abide by its enforcement.

It's a terrible law, motivated more by political cynicism than military need, but at least it has been rendered, both by Diane Feinstein's amendment and the president 's signing statement to be mostly toothless against American citizens, at least for the duration of this administration.

Regardless, it is worth protesting.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

Congress also made it illegal to transfer prisoners to US soil,

I don't suppose you have the specific piece of legislation do you?

I should just google . . .

I do recall hearing about it in the news.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

I wish I had it at my fingertips, but I don't. (Also, I'm getting REALLY tired and don't have the energy to research it tonight.)

If you don't mind googling it, I would be much obliged.

One last thing, though. The Senate passed this bill 99 to 1. The assertion that Obama could simply have vetoed this bill is erroneous: given the numbers, his veto would have been overturned in a nanosecond. By promising to sign it under certain conditions, he managed to avoid signing an even more draconian version that was headed to his desk.

[-] 1 points by philosophersstoned (233) from Gypsum, CO 2 years ago

hey I'm a VT expat

and I agree, this NDAA hysteria is a red-herring. Yeah it sucks that Obama took Bush's War on Terror executive power precedents and widened their scope slightly, but it's not a covert NWO initiative to sweep Occupiers off the streets.

[-] 2 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 2 years ago

yes it is wake up they are gonna put us all in fema slave camps.

[-] 2 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

It helps to perpetuate the confusion over whether we will treat terrorists as Prisoners of War or as criminals. Various members of the Presidents admin have come out opposing it.

It is also a clever political maneuver by the President's former opponent in the race for the White House 2008. One that plays to the current of discontent around the country.

The bill was written by Carl Levin and John McCain.

In sum, that makes it much more than a simple red herring.

[-] 1 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

Obama codified the provision of indefinite detention and as alluded is assoicated with the 'war on terror.'

Keep in mind that the U.S. federal government is spending on avererage still 200 billion dollars more than they were under Bush which is a main contributor to the debt. High debt means less funds for other expenditures or less tax cuts to the middle class.

The MIC is directly connected to income disparity and the 1%. In fact, the MIC is part of the 0.01% and the MIC is deeply rooted in the U.S. economy.

If you don't address this root cause, other solutions are mere band-aid ideas.

[-] 2 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

So your solution is to tank a President who would make the proper changes if given a legislature that would go along?

That does not sound like a solution to me. Sounds like a certain recipe for more of bad policy and worse policy.

scroll up

[-] 1 points by Anachronism (225) 2 years ago

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/12/16/1046078/-Obama-has-THROWN-Down-the-Gauntlet:-Occupy-Must-Stand-and-Fight-NOW!-?via=siderecent

I IMPLORE every single Occupier in the this nation to watch and share this video. The legislation that this fascist government and administration is worthy of Nazi Germany. And, that is NOT an exaggeration. It is a fact. I can not do justice to the implications of this bill, please watch the video.

Again and again and again, Obama has betrayed the American citizenry and governed for expansion of corporate & military power and profit. And, again and again and again, many of his supporters have rationalized/justified/or even championed policy and appointments from the Obama administration that would have drawn near universal protest and outrage if implemented by Republicans or the Bush administration.

This must end. It is time for Occupy to not only challenge the corporate power structure, but unflinchingly challenge ANY politician or political party that governs against the people for the expansion of corporate/military profit.

I do not know how a single American, democrat/republican/independent/green or otherwise can support ANY politician that would codify indefinite detention without charges or trial against American citizens. It is insanity. Yet, if we march forward and move along with the circus act that is the two party stage corporate election circus of 2012, we are all enablers of the destruction of our constitution and unraveling the last tattered remnants of our democracy.

There is no lesser of two evils. There is now only evil. And, it is up to us to stand with courage to create a different alternative and dialogue to solve this crisis.

Obama can't be the Occupy movement's nominee. Neither can any of the Republicans. They do not and WILL NOT represent us. This bill proves that fact beyond a shadow of any doubt.

We must move forward with courage.

ABSOLUTE MUST READ: <http://www.salon.com/...>
[-] 0 points by LongDaysnight (354) 2 years ago

OBAMA ordered the most controversial provisions in the bill wake up please. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_ysdsxF3eo

[-] 0 points by LongDaysnight (354) 2 years ago

Good let's have a trial for Bush and Cheney to. As i suggested yesterday when this thread started lets add the Patriot act to the protest.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

Obama codified the provision of indefinite detention

at least get your facts strait - that was done under Bush. He opened Gitmo.

The President's battle with Congress over this issue of indefinite detention predates the rise of the Occupy Movement.

Today when the President signed H.R. 2055, the “Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012″ into law, he issued another signing statement in his battle with congress over the closure of Gitmo. Ever since Obama issued an executive order to close Gitmo, Congress has been running end games around funding the closure and transfer of detainees. This year was no different.

.


.

yeah-ya - I'm co-opting the Movement. all by myself

powerful, aint i.

We agree this needs to change: We need Gitmo closed. We need an end to indefinite detention.

We definitely disagree regarding who, precisely, should be held accountable.

What you suggest is that the President has been engaged in theater specifically designed to deceive the public around his position on this issue.

That doesn't make any sense. Why would he? If he were in favor of indefinite detention, then Congress has covered his ass - so why the theater?

What you suggest doesn't make any sense.

I realize those members in his cabinet who have come from Wall Street are a problem - they create a definite impression of corruption at the very top. As do the campaign contributions.

I see that.

I think I also understand how the system got this fucked up.

There are currently something over 300 economists who support the Occupy Movement.

I bet you would like it if he appointed some of these guys to his cabinet instead.

I know I would.

And what happens to the stock market if he does?

The value of stock is all based on perception. During the budget standoff the market tanked. It tanked on lack of confidence that the government would not default on its debt.

Congress has never acted in a manner that would both predictably and deliberately cause a market decline.

and now we have computers buying and selling in nanoseconds. Profitably.

[-] 1 points by LongDaysnight (354) 2 years ago

Here he is big brother himself, the man i did much fighting with to bring awareness to others. He and hiss troll army literally followed me around flagging my post to collapse them. http://occupywallst.org/forum/rip-america-2011-obama-freaking-signed-ndaa/ ((((((((())))))) http://occupywallst.org/forum/the-zendog-delemia/ they literally collapsed my post's within minutes .

[-] 2 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

oo . . . kay . . .

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by ombp2 (12) 2 years ago

Hey "revolutionaries"--here's an idea for you--don't do bad stuff and you don't have to worry about anything!

[-] 0 points by the99areLazy (14) from Benton, PA 2 years ago

Im glad they passed it. Now they can arrest you and the hard working Americans can use the roads and parks again.

I Love America.

[-] 0 points by xposingfalsehoods (39) 2 years ago

OWS should start backing Ron Paul and OWS will build a stronger movement backing a politician that fights for what we fight for.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by LongDaysnight (354) 2 years ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_ysdsxF3eo Obama is as guilty as anyone else that signed this.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by ironboltbruce (371) from Miami, FL 2 years ago

Obama has filed his NDAA Signing Statement. Here is mine:

Americans must not be distracted by Corporate Fascist Puppet Barack Obama saying "my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens" in his signing statement for the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (H.R.1540). Presidential "signing statements" are political propaganda with no Constitutional basis. A President who breaches a signing statement covenant faces no more consequences than any other corrupt politician who renegs on a promise. By signing NDAA and attempting to give its unconstitutional provisions the force of law, Barack Hussein Obama became complicit with all of the bought-and-paid-for U.S. Senators and Representatives who voted for this bill, and along with them should be charged with Seditious Conspiracy under U.S. Code Title 18 Part I Chapter 115 Section 2384. Unless and until these vermin are arrested, charged and removed from office, I will no longer consider the government they infest to be legitimate. Nor will I respect any ruling to the contrary from a judicial system that grants rights of citizenship to corporate entities that treat settlements and penalties for criminal conduct as costs of doing business with no concerns about incarceration or execution to deter their illegal, immoral or unethical conduct.

No more Left. No more Right. Time to Unite. Stand and Fight!

IronBoltBruce via VVV PR ( http://vvvpr.com )

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by marga (82) 2 years ago

Its a all out war on people who commit crimes against humanity. If you are innocent then you got nothing to worry about. Obama got less freedom then you have so why don't you people take part of the blame for looking the other way while all sorts of crimes where committed against humanity. OWS stay focused and don't get sucked in by shit like that. Keep reaching out to people, stay strong, you have a very important and strenuous job to do. Let all negativity roll off from you like rain drops on a window pane. You are a special group of people and you do not need a leader or a well thought out plan until you decide you have reached your goal. Protest alone accomplish nothing more then a few crumbs they will throw you just so you go away. But you are only a part of a much greater force that no one will be able to fight because its gonna come from every direction when you least expect it. Don't settle for less then you set out to do. The media only thinks they can crush you. Let them think so, it puts you two steps ahead of them. 2012 is gonna be a very exiting year and every-bodies shadow will catch up with them. The internet is better then God, Jesus and money combined. It gives you knowledge and self satisfaction, if you know how to use it to your advantage. To bad some people waste is on negativity and keep spreading their poison they have been fed for to long. For better or worse America will always be the country that has changed the face of the planet. Some people like what we did, some people don't. If we sink the world is going with us. We don't owe the world a thing and the world owes us nothing. However we cannot continue going the way we been going.

[-] 0 points by LloydJHart (190) from Vineyard Haven, MA 2 years ago

The Occupy Wall St. Movement has no leverage to force change and until OWS gets some leverage nothing will change.

If OWS blocks traffic and shuts down business as usual, OWS will have leverage to force change.

The forgotten must block traffic to remind the forgetful of the needs of the forgotten.

Don't follow the leaders. Block traffic with your friends.

Guidelines For Non-Violent Civil Disobedient Traffic Blocking. http://occupywallst.org/forum/guidelines-for-non-violent-civil-disobedient-traff/

[-] 3 points by Jester (30) 2 years ago

Yes, actions must be memorable and forcefully inconvenient. It takes courage and requires risk, commitment. Lock it down. Chain yourselves together and to cars and trees. Lie on the ground arm-in-arm with protective covering of sensitive areas (yes?). Make it memorable.

[-] -2 points by BeatMan (16) 2 years ago

We need 10,000 Points of Lightning: deposit a brick through a bank window, superglue the automated tellers; keep marbles in your pockets for when cops chase you; a couple smoke bombs can come in hand; stink bombs are really handy for banks and financial institutions; mail back all letters seeking new credit cards with something foul inside or at least a note. Paste Occupy wall Street or Arrest the Banksters posters on their window late at night (use carnation milk fr. the can, when it dries, it is a bitch to get off). Go into a bank, fill out the forms with a teller, than change your mind at the very end of the process. Be creative and gum up the corporate workplaces. It is time to begin the Gumfucking of American Plutocracy. SPREAD THE WORD. WE NEED THIS TO GO VIRAL.

[-] 3 points by Jester (30) 2 years ago

This sounds like you're advocating turning demonstrations into riots. Destruction of property does nothing. Hurting peace officers will get you beat. This is something I strongly argue against.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by CatLady2 (248) from New York, NY 2 years ago

NYSNA called off the strike at St Luke's - Roosevelt Hospital. http://www.nysna.org/news/press/122711.htm

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by rebel9999 (24) 2 years ago

Do all of you know why George Bush jr. was elected President? It was because of people not joining together even though they had their differences and entirely supporting someone who would defeat George Bush jr. In the 2000 election many people voted for Ralph Nader and in doing so handed victory to George Bush jr. WE had to pay dearly for that mistake. We will pay dearly again if we don't All support President Obama in the next election. We may not agree with everything that President Obama does as President but we will disagree with EVERYTHING that a Republican President and Republican Congress will do to us! ALL of you in this Wall Street Protest have better be aware that the Republicans are pushing for you to get so disappointed with President Obama that you will not vote for him in the next election or vote for someone else but remember the lesson of the 2000 election. United we win something, devided we lose everything! Every Republican will be voting in the next election. It's up to everybody who disagrees with the Republicans to vote aginst the Republicans and support candidates who have the best chance of winning against the RepubliCONS! If the Republicans win the Presidency and Congress then the Bush tax cuts will become permanete, we will go to war against Iran, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will become worse, abortion will become illegal for decades, laws that protect us and our environment will be gutted and our life will be worsen in many other ways. Read my web page at www.mybetteramericaplan.com to see why the republicans must be defeated in the next election. Also on my web page in the Current Events section are ideas on how to legally shut down Wall Street. Get as many people as you can in any way you can to read my web page so that we can make this Wall Street protest a success instead of just a sit-in protest.

[-] 2 points by patrickj (15) 2 years ago

Why support Obama when he on his own initiative authorized assassinations of Americans without a trial? killing even a 16 yr old?

▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒

Why support a President who invaded a country in Libya without approval? Why support him when he with both approval of Democrats and Republicans increased military spending now 200 billion dollars more than it was under Bush's average??

http://bit.ly/u77kSs http://bit.ly/rF8fvK

▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒

Why support Obama when he himself's the one who pushed for indefinite detention w/o a trail to be codified into the NDAA giving absolute power to the President to decide and not the civilian courts?

▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒

OH CUZ IT'LL BE WORSE UNDER SOMEONE ELSE??

Will it take concentration camps or genocide to hit in the U.S. before it gets worse??? Well, Obama has made it at least legal to do so!

▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒

It sounds to me that the corporate MIC establishment has infiltrated both Democrats and Republicans, and their strategy is to pin it on one to avoid the attention off the facts, when they're all GUILTY! Corporate and Wall Street elites who send their drones into Washington to do their bidding. Don't Believe in any republican or Democratic campaign at face value, but do your homework.

▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." -Dr. Martin Luther King. Jr.

[-] 1 points by LloydJHart (190) from Vineyard Haven, MA 2 years ago

Carl Rove would have stolen the 92,000 votes Ralph deservedly got in Florida in 2000 to insure his down syndrome boss won the election. The supreme court stepped in with the most fascist decision a court could make and stopped the state wide recount which would have won the election for Gore. The only reason there wasn't a violent revolt then was because only 50% of the voting age public participated in election 2000. The other 50% yawned. There is more going on here than some vote for the better of the worst con game. American politics or fascism if you please, is tightening it's grip on our throats deepening poverty to a majority of the population. When there are enough people hurting the blow back will be violent and unstoppable. That is when the generals will have to choose between civil war or give us real democracy. My guess is they will choose civil war for an opportunity to wipe out the left, the people of skin color and the Jews. You know just like the nazis did for America in Europe during WWII and then moved the operation to latin America and did the same there. So go fuck yourself rebel9999. The democrats and republicans are finished along with the generals they tap dance for. Some new is about to happen.

[Removed]

[+] -5 points by riethc (1149) 2 years ago

As a sometime associate of LaRouchePAC, I knew this day would come. We carried signs with the Hitler mustache and we were ridiculed. Now is the time to listen to the real resistance and fight with us to end tyranny once and for all.

Obama is the 21st Century Hitler: http://www.larouchepac.com/node/21046