Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Bank of America sends internal email about Occupy

Posted 3 years ago on Dec. 6, 2011, 3:02 p.m. EST by rbe (687)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/bank-america-sends-internal-email-exposing-where-occupy-movement-hurting-it-most

While the general media may be ignoring the latest peculiar twist on the "Occupy" theme, or in this case the "occupyourhomes.org", Bank of America is taking it quote seriously. As a reminder, "Tuesday, December 6th is the National Day of Action to stop and reverse foreclosures. The Occupy Homes movement is holding actions around the country in support of homeowners and people fighting to have a home. Find an event near you and join in our day of action tomorrow!. There are actions happening in over 20 cities nationwide. Events are taking place in Brooklyn, Buffalo and Rochester New York; Los Angeles, Oakland, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, Petaluma, Sacramento, Paradise and Contra Costa California; Lake Worth, Florida; Atlanta, Fayetteville, and DeKalb Georgia; Chicago, Illinois; Bloomington, Indiana; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Cleveland, Ohio; Denver, Colorado; Detroit and Southgate Michigan; St. Louis, Missouri; Portland, Oregon; and Seattle, Washington." And if you have not heard about today's protest on the conventional media that is understandable: as BAC says internally, this event "could impact our industry." Here are the specific warnings to BAC "field services" agents: i) Your safety is our primary concern, so do not engage with the protesters; ii) While in neighborhoods, please take notice of vacant BAC Field Services managed homes and ensure they are secured; iii) Remind all parties of the bank’s media policy and report any media incidents.

Aside from the superficial implications, what is more important is that the big banks are showing precisely what the weakest links in the system are, and what makes them the most nervous: it is not protesters living in tents in a major metropolitan city: it is protesters disrupting the lifeblood of the broken banking system - the home selling/repossession pathway. Expect many more such protests now that Bank of America has tipped its hand.

204 Comments

204 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by alexrai (851) 3 years ago

haha pretty hard to put a positive PR spin on booting people out of their homes...

"BofA your best friend in foreclosures. Take a bath, get a job, and not necessarily in that order... and you may be eligible for a loan on one of our newly vacated, previously enjoyed luxury suites... Fine Print: but probably not with that credit score."

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 3 years ago

no it's not... you cast the non-payers as slackers, deadbeats, jobless and worthless crooks who took your money and didn't pay you back.

that's not a view that i share, but that's how they'll spin it.

[-] 1 points by theaveng (602) 3 years ago

And even smarter mover is to cast the homeowners as Typical clean-cut middle class people who should have known better than to sign a $500,000 mortgage.

And they would be right.

[-] 2 points by ineptcongress (648) 3 years ago

you are smart, well said.

have you noticed how the blame for this catastrophe of common sense and second Great Depression has fallen squarely on the poor????? the blame lies with "subprime" borrowers who crashed everything. it's called "SLIGHT OF HAND." my buddy who walked on an $800k house (now worth $450k) makes 200$k, drives a Mercedes AMG and is/was a PRIME BORROWER... that's one of many I know. the smart ones are walking the F away... he'll be dead before that house is worth 800 again--and he's young.

[-] 0 points by vets74 (344) from New York, NY 3 years ago

Getting hammered with a faked-calculation, false text in MERS scam is more like it.

The ARM mortgages were mis-entered in MERS more than not, from what has been dug out from that cesspool.

[-] 0 points by vets74 (344) from New York, NY 3 years ago

It's not like they (meaning Countrywide Financial, first off, an organized crime operation if there ever was one) falsified the references to "balloon clause" text in MERS.

Then these "balloon clause" false-references were invoked fraudulently to up the banksters' demands for monthly mortgage payments. Doubling mortgage payment demands was not uncommon.

That despite the general fall in interest rates, these felony schemes were used to generate much of the 12,570,000 mortgage defaults and subsequent evictions. Instead of the normal 4,500,000 foreclosures with most related to health care bankruptcies, the MERS frauds piled on millions of extra foreclosures.

That's an extra 8,070,000 foreclosures.

Of course the righties in politics conspired with the RICO banksters and made it damn near impossible for home buyers to figure out how they were getting screwed with these frauds.

We just had our president on "60 Minutes" saying that what the banksters did was not criminal. At the least he has been lied to. And he knows nothing about the prosecutions 1991-1995 in the S&L Crisis.

That's pitiful.

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 3 years ago

obama or his GC ought to go back to law school--he must have missed the part about unfair trade practices act... although perhaps the banksters changed that in the nick of time via an express exemption for themselves and anything they do. the sad reality is that finance, investments and economics should be a regular part of the high school curriculum... that knowledge base would serve as a self-defense against the many predators in those waters.

[-] 0 points by vets74 (344) from New York, NY 3 years ago

Damn hard to miss common law fraud.

The Martha Coakley filed complaint.pdf is a strong double-entendre with the Federal RICO statute.

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 3 years ago

i think the fraud is fairly limited, but with unfair trade practices, they can't hide behind their complex paperwork... it's a vague and broader catch-all statute... plus fraud requires intent to be proven, which is always a huge challenge. i think the banks would successfully defend fraud by saying: look all the terms are in that mountain of papers right there, if they didn't understand that's their fault.

[-] 0 points by vets74 (344) from New York, NY 3 years ago

The frauds totaled $7.3-trillion that we can see for 2003-2011.

For the $2.1-trillion in mortgage frauds, a good intro is the Coakley filing.

Massachusetts Attorney General page has the link with a "Five Banks" search, if not directly. Amazing document.

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by randart (498) 3 years ago

I quit using BofA a long, long time ago. They always found ways to rip me off through fees of some sort. I vowed to never use them again around 1979 and have not entered their door since.

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 3 years ago

the memo basically says "let them be." that's good news and a strong positive for OWS!!

[-] 1 points by Argentina (178) from Puerto Madryn, Chubut 3 years ago

Cool , send this to wikileaks!!

[-] 1 points by SGSling (104) 3 years ago

Standard Operating Procedure for any company if there is a major event. Its just warning their field agents to be careful, not get involved, and do their jobs safely. If the press talks to you, contact the PR department.

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

National Public Radio thinks this particular protest is significant also

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

Article about Occupy Foreclosed Homes... in Southgate MI.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/southgate-michigan

[-] 1 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

The banks cannot own private property!! Banks cannot take possession, people can on it's behalf, but their right to REPRESENT unlawful legal fictions like banks & Government should be bought into question... Legal entities are NOT the higher authority as man created by a superior creator, call it what you will. Legal entities are the product of the people. THEY give voice to them,& power to them, so they are the higher authority. WE THE PEOPLE created government. It must be with consent, else we can Lawfully rebel as LAWFUL beings. For the Bank to be able to 'repossess' property, it must be public property as the Bank is a 'public' entity..

[-] 1 points by pinker (586) 3 years ago

We the people are sometimes the ones out there working for the banks. The people who would be in those properties doing maintenance or appraisals are who you are going to fuck with?

[-] 0 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

Why do the people work for the Bank? People should work for their families. If people didn't do their 'jobs', then there would be nothing that could ACT as the Banks representatives, So there could BE no crimes like foreclosures committed against the people Who have the RIGHT to live somewhere. It is the work of the people that has created everything.. Even their own FEMA camps to be incarcerated into.!. Savage Irony... The people have worked to create a giant prison country, & haven't noticed... They have been UNLAWFULLY enslaved because they don't realize they have a CHOICE over government. People created it, how did it get more powerful than the creator? By nefarious means, & fraud. Law is only LAW if you consent, & we unwittingly do because we think we are creations of the state, when we can in fact, ONLY BE AGENTS for other agents to communicate with us.. Legal fiction VS man is impossible. There can be no 'Meeting of the Minds'...

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

You've never seen a sign or read a house sale ad that says "bank owned"? A house is the COLLATERAL in an agreement between the bank that loans people money to purchase that house and the people who want to buy the house. If the people buying the house default on their loan, the BANK "repossess" the collateral and gets to attempt to re-sell it to someone else to recoup their losses.

[-] 0 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

banks loan people DEBT, not anything of value. fiat currency is just your share of the governments debt. It is not backed up by anything of substance, like gold. It is just paper that allows the people to take what is rightfully theirs. They don't HAVE losses if the buyer defaults, because the bank never gave them anything of value to pay for the house. That is why if you don't pay your property taxes, they can take the house... Because it remains the property of the State due to YOU only being the occupier, NEVER the holder of full title. check your deeds, they won't say ANYWHERE that YOU are the owner. Is a scam

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

honestyblaze...Fiat money is back by the US Government.

[-] 1 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

With What? Their promise to pay your debts, in exchange for using your birth cert on the commodities market? (&they do, google the number on your cert. you can find out which country owns you at the moment) They are not your debts that you pay, you are paying the slaves wages for the master, that is all. Why should the slaves pay the slaves wages? Without the slaves, there would be no electricity, for example.. So why are we creating it AND paying fiat currency back to the govt? To created the illusion that WE are provided for by them, when we are provided for by each other... fiat currency represents the government debt, not the peoples.. & unless you can sell the US govt to get something of value, ie, gold, back, money is not backed by US govt. Fractional reserve banking allowed for the bank to give money, without having enough gold to back it up if ALL customers tried to collect their gold at the same time. It was a massive fraud that FDR committed in demanding the peoples gold, that was mined by their own sweat equity... It was massive theft of natural resources that do not belong to anybody, but have been CLAIMED by govt.. govt cannot OWN or Possess anything. It is an entity that does not exist in the same sense as a human, so WHERE does it's authority come from if It certainly doesn't work for the people...?

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

@honestyblaze...Your in serious need of professional help.

[-] 1 points by zootsuit (34) 3 years ago

iii) Remind all parties of the bank’s media policy and report any media incidents.

what is their policy?

[-] 0 points by pinker (586) 3 years ago

Probably that only certain reps of the bank can speak on behalf of the bank.

[-] 1 points by me2 (534) 3 years ago

Of course they issued a memo to their employees who may be out in the field and encounter a potentially hostile situation. What would you expect them to do? What's so damning about this memo? It's pretty standard fare.

[-] -1 points by pinker (586) 3 years ago

Agree. Also, my brother is an independent appraiser who is sometimes hired by banks. He is also a liberal Democrat who sympathizes with OWS. I hope they don't fuck with the very people they are representing.

[-] 1 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

If that is your brother's position, then they are not representing him anyway.. They are representing those who are being acted against by persons REPRESENTING a LEGAL FICTION as the writer & enforcer of the law. If your brother acted for a bank, & say, foreclosed on some old lady that he doesn't know, Then your brother has no lawful business with the lady as HE personally has no claim on the woman, as HE is not party to the contract. He should be held accountable, but the 'hive mind' allows for no culpability, because the PEOPLE have been duped into believing it is lawful, when it is in fact LEGAL. They are not the same, & they are not interchangeable. Lawful is ONLY law with CONSENT of the governed, all law is Contract law, & contract must be, to be valid, enforced by the 2 signatories to the contract.. & ALL THINGS disclosed. It is a massive deception. Obama could not request anything from me lawfully, because I have no contract with him.. No American does either.. Unfortunately, The Constitution is a contract(a great 1, I might add, & I am English), but the people are not party to it. That is HOW they are able to repeal it.. like Posse comitatus. The protection has gone because of this deception. LAW is only LAW if you agree to be bound by it.Laws are now just 'company policy', but they apply them to the people who don't work for the "STATE" company under 'color of law' You wouldn't follow a dress code to visit a place of work if YOU didn't work there, but it's the same thing.Companies apply their policies, & state that they are law. They are not... There is nothing else except to lawfully rebel now that the FEMA camps jobs are being advertised. American's are in great danger from its own government (that was actually created with consent. It no longer serves the people, they serve it, & it is wrong) People can decide they don't like the terms & withdraw from the contract as all things were not disclosed. This is not to piss any of you off. This is the reality. The rest of us are watching what your gov is doing, because we are next. This enslavement & camps stuff will happen everywhere. If the US people can't win, none of us can. Peace to you all. Oh, your signature for the contract was your birth certificate, but you cannot have been party to that due to immaturity, so it is no lawful contract because you were not told all things.. Please look it up before you want to have a go at me for saying all this. It is the truth. People CAN dictate terms & conditions, & state representatives CANNOT deny them as they are not party to any contract either... They can REPRESENT, but they cannot lawfully ACT. (Under penalty of having commercial liens placed on their STATE OWNED properties for interfering in contracts they are not privvy to)..

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

Honestyblaze.....Government's duty is a social contract with the sovereign people is to serve them by protecting their rights.

[-] 1 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

It absolutely is, yes. but that is not what is happening. The people are serving them, not the other way around. That's slavery, & AGAINST contitutional Law

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

honestyblaze....Please educate me on this subject.

[-] 1 points by AllOverIt (100) 3 years ago

Jeeze, do a web search yourself willya?

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

@AllOverIt...Just how is this any of your concern, when someone makes an assertion they are obligated to back it up. So butt out you moron.

[-] 1 points by AllOverIt (100) 3 years ago

Oh, boy. You really know how to make friends and influence people! Calling people names is just a low class activity. And you seemed so polite with that "Please".

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

@AllOverIt....I noticed you didn't respond to my post......You may well be a moron, they seldom know they are one.

[-] 1 points by AllOverIt (100) 3 years ago

Once a hater always a hater - bye chuck

[-] 0 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

pinker.."He's just follow orders" won't hold up, hes the enemy,that defense was dismissed at the Nuremberg Trails.

[-] -1 points by pinker (586) 3 years ago

That's a rather trite response. Appraisers have nothing to do with foreclosures. They also make sure you or I don't get ripped off when buying a house.

[-] 1 points by ineptcongress (648) 3 years ago

this struck me,,, where were they 2000-2007?,,, merely blessing any ridiculous price a sucker buyer was willing to pay, for fear of not getting future deals. appraisers didn't know that the "comp. sales" method is completely ridiculous, and they should be looking to area income and supply and demand and other factors instead?? stupid idiots. they are a primary cause of the tremendous economic and financial problems of about a billion people or more.

[-] -1 points by pinker (586) 3 years ago

OMG, thanks for all the input here. Next time I buy a house, I'm just gonna pay whatever the seller puts it on the market for. Who cares that the house next door with the exact same floor plan sold for 150k less? It's all so clear now. My brother is a fucking asshole.

Inspections are a rip off too. If the seller says the rusted compressor is only a year old, he must be telling the truth. I don't need no stinking help.

[-] 0 points by ineptcongress (648) 3 years ago

no i am serious, the housing problem was caused in large part because people trusted the appraisers...and that includes banks. but the appraisers just grabbed the deed down the street and added 10% to whatever the last one sold for. i am very skeptical too when i buy anything. i want to know median and avg. incomes, income distribution curves, supply demand trends, the financial condition from SEC filings of companies that are big employers (eg, Detroit), everything. that's why i sold my home in 2005 and rented... i saw this coming a mile away.

[-] -1 points by pinker (586) 3 years ago

occupy appraisers! rent from the suckers whose money is not being thrown away. wish my parents had done that so they could be 80 and paying 1500 in rent right now. hell, my dad is as dumb as my brother.

[-] 0 points by ineptcongress (648) 3 years ago

funny, my bet is i could go buy it back for what i paid 12 years ago. but then my capital's at risk, and the housing market is highly likely to lose alot more ground, alot. you choose: home taxes $1,500 per month; rent $1,500 per month or nice facility $4,000 per month--those are your choices at 80,,, right now...

[-] -1 points by pinker (586) 3 years ago

Taxes 1500 per month? Where do you live that property taxes are that high? My dad sure as heck doesn't pay that where we live! And neither do I. One way or another you're paying all that when you rent. Someone has to pay the prop taxes. Might as well be paying for a property you own rather than subsidizing someone else.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

pinker...Everyone may not see it that way.

[-] 1 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

We all get ripped off because we 'think' we are buying a house when we get a mortgage to the death, but all we get is the right to occupy it. If they can repossess it, it never belonged to us at all. & sorry, but an appraiser sets the standard for the amount we get screwed over when BUYING the right to shelter.. My point was not criticism of a person's job, it was about the legality of people working for Govt being unlawful. They have no LAWFUL claim..

[-] 1 points by AllOverIt (100) 3 years ago

So, the solution really is to make the ownership of land and the basic resources we need to be self sustaining the commonwealth of the people. In this system the banks manipulate the money system and squeeze the life out of the people through usurious interest and bailouts. They wind up owning all the money and all the land and the people that worked to create the ACTUAL wealth end up destitute and homeless. The government provides the guns that prevent the people from having the land and the resources they need to survive.

We will be slaves as long as we depend on banks for our money supply and corporate wages and government jobs and handouts for our survival. A truly free people would own the right to use land and resources for their survival just as fish own the seas and birds freely build homes in the trees and mammals burrow in the earth.

[-] -1 points by pinker (586) 3 years ago

Speak for yourself. My parents own their home, not the bank. I will own my home too, as I bought only that I know I can afford, even if we both have to go back to minimum wage. Appraisers don't set prices! The market does. There certainly is a right to shelter - that is why section 8 in my town gives 1200 dollars a month to families in low income jobs.

And what government job are you talking about?

[-] 2 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

try not paying taxes, & you will see who owns your home. You are the occupier, NOT the owner in full title. The house is part of a trust, & you unwittingly give them ownership by not being the beneficiary. The State takes that position & you are trustee, making you liable for any & all charges against the property. Look up fee simple & fee absolute. The Law is all about contracts. The State dictates ALL terms & conditions to the contract because the people don't realize THEY can dictate their own... The State cannot actually do it, people representing the state do, & they are NOT actually, under contract law, ALLOWED to dictate terms to contracts they are not party to. Appraisers AGREE prices.. Look up strawman. I am telling the truth, but you can see for yourself while we still have the internet.. ALL government jobs cause the people doing them to break contract law. There MUST be consent, both sides bring something to the table, but they don't. The Bank do not use their own money to pay your mortgage, they just use a share of their debt to create fiat currency. Fractional reserve banking makes that possible. You get nothing OF VALUE from the bank..

[-] -1 points by pinker (586) 3 years ago

Let's see. In the 1960s my parents borrowed approximately 35,000 to buy their house. Said house is paid for and now worth 425,000. I'd say they got something of value from that bank loan.

I'd not try not paying my taxes. I'm responsible for my community.

[-] 1 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

You parents did not 'borrow' anything. they signed a piece of paper, which caused the fiat currency to be created, thereby PAYING the Bank for their share of their debt. The signature PAID the bank, then your parents agreed to REPAY the Bank. That is fact. & they STILL do not get full title of the property. it does not belong to them, they just have the right to occupy. That is how banking works. THEY don't give MONEY, it is an illusion. They type in some numbers, & voila.. Who made you responsible for your community? You may have a responsibility towards the people in it by way of social contract, but YOU are not responsible for it..

[-] -1 points by pinker (586) 3 years ago

My parents own their home. Should they decide to sell the home and live out their days hopping trains, they can demand the bank give them their CASH from the buyer, sew it into the lining of their coats and never visit a bank again. Of course, they will have to pay sales tax on the sell of the home, which brings us back to my community:

We are all responsible for our communities, not just this social contract. I want the idiots who drive 50 down streets where kids play to get pulled over and ticketed. Therefore, I help pay the police via my taxes. I also want those same kids to have schools and teachers. And the thing is that my taxes help to pay and protect/educate all citizens, even those who pay no property tax or may have no job. And that is fine with me.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

iii) Remind all parties of the bank’s media policy and report any media incidents.

And just what is the banks media policy? Can we get some intel on this? It may prove useful.

[-] 1 points by me2 (534) 3 years ago

No doubt it is the same as every other company's policy which is to direct media people to the company's media relations department. Big whoop.

[-] 2 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

There may be a way to use this predictable behavior -

by forcing them outside their comfort zone, in violation of company policy, we might create fissures within the individual banking establishments if we can force on camera comments of the right kind.

Permit me a poem, that it may help the thought process along these lines:

Every Corner

. . . .

Every

chance

encounter

every corner

every staircase

each and every curb

becomes a forcing function

it's an engineering term.

Did you just step in dog shit?

How was your measured pace,

dictated by some function

forcing footsteps to their place?

. . . . .

© D. Winter 1999 - 2008

[-] 1 points by me2 (534) 3 years ago

Force?

You think it is a good idea to force people to say things, do things?

I'm not down with that.

Who exactly are you proposing to force to do this and how to go about it?

It sounds like more ill advised, misguided ideas to me.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

Apparently you didn't read the poem very carefully.

A curb forces you to lift your foot, or you trip.

I was referring to the ways in which people respond in predictable ways to given situations - predictable behavior can be very useful.

Review what I said once again. Free your mind of any preconceived ideas or emotions.

[-] 1 points by me2 (534) 3 years ago

I think you are grasping at straws. This BofA memo is insignificant and the media relations dept can be easily found on the internet. They even have a pdf with contacts you can download. It's not some big mystery.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

They are under pressure - their nervousness is apparent with the facts presented in the OP.

With a bit of creativity and some careful planning this can be useful.

[-] 1 points by me2 (534) 3 years ago

A lot of people are reading an awful lot into this memo.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

It stands as clear evidence that the empires that exist in this nation do tremble before the weight of public opinion.

[-] 1 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

Only to you.

To every other rational person who has ever worked for a company, it stands as an indication that BOA conducts business and trains it's employees in pretty much the same ways. I PROMISE you that those employees signed a statement when they accepted employment that acknowledged that they are NOT to represent the company in any way, shape or form, and that they will NOT make media statements of ANY kind without prior Media Relations permission or they will lose their jobs. That statement usually says something along the lines of "Company A is absolved of any responsibility for or any indemnity related to any statements I make that aren't in line with company policy."

Your opposition isn't afraid of you. And you don't control their response.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

. . . . you must be a banker . . . .

; D

[-] 1 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

You must be an idiot. Only an idiot would assume to be so omnipotent that no one else could possibly disagree with them and be right!

Not a banker. That you think only bankers would oppose a group of people set on destroying the nations economy, bringing down companies in which innocent people work, or shoving what they SAY are their "public rights" down the throats of all the other innocent people who SHARE those public spaces with them makes you naive and detached from reality.

[-] 0 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

or shoving what they SAY are their "public rights" down the throats of all the other innocent people who SHARE those public spaces with them

So you are not with us.

Then you are against us.

If you are against us then you are for the bankers.

Bankers who have engaged in Fraud. You can see 60 Minutes.

If you are with the bankers then you are against yourself.

You are against yourself because their fraud has cost you and your neighbors money.

It has decimated whole neighborhoods, creating social instability and joblessness nationwide - Countrywide.

All of this as a result of corruption.

Political alliance and negotiation has held in check the hand of justice.

Chaos looms.

It is a natural course of events.

This is where kingdoms fall.

[-] 1 points by me2 (534) 3 years ago

This kind of crap doesn't help the movement. Nor does acting all wild eyed and paranoid over a very standard issue memo.

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

Your logic is flawed. There are more options than just being "for" or "against" you. I can be completely indifferent to you. I can be "for" fighting against corporate corruption WITHOUT being "for" anarchy and ego-driven revolution.

I want OWS to succeed, but within adult, responsible, accountable parameters. Myself, and millions of people like me, would rather die fighting the chaos you instigate than live by lowering ourselves to the point where we have to sell our souls to the same devil that the truly evil bankers did. The incredibly rich, and incredibly powerful men FUNDING this little movement destroy the economies of countries FOR FUN. And you're too stupid to realize that they've sent you to the front lines because they view you as disposable.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

. . . . and it's clickable . . .

One person can make a difference

I believe that.

And if that is true, just think what all of us can do, together.

I am well aware of how disposable I am.

I have lived with that peculiar reality for over a decade.

The Congress is and has been in gridlock for too long. Nothing now can relieve this logjam but the weight of public opinion.

Is it pretty?

No.

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

One person can make a difference. One person could have blown another hole in the Titanic, causing it to sink faster and killing even more of it's passengers. One person could have demanded persistently and obnoxiously and vocally that the damn life boats were being left OFF the boat because of pride and arrogance.

But I will not help that one person sink the boat faster. I will not help you pull the "rich" people off the lifeboats so myself and my "poor" friends can take their place either. This economy has drowned enough people. If your actions, or OWS actions ends up threatening to put more people in the water, in particular my own family and friends who have managed to hang on so far, just so that can feel better about yourselves or be heroes in your own eyes-I will defend them to the extent that I feel compelled to.

And you'll find that the weight of public opinion agrees with me and WILL crush you if you bring it down upon yourselves.

[-] 1 points by Xxskillzz (18) 3 years ago

Predicting or otherwise anticipating moves is a key to any chess game. Making sure your opponent is unable to do the same is another.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

This is not a chess game.

There may be certain advantages in stating explicitly what our objectives and methods of achieving them may be.

It will increase fear in our opposition. Let them be afraid. It will inhibit response. It will also spread.

[-] 1 points by Xxskillzz (18) 3 years ago

I was not intending to imply the movement was a chess game, only demonstrate the validity of your statement.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

well then thanks

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

Fabulous. Get more people to lose their jobs. You people are amazing. The banks have BIG GUN lawyers who will make it clear that employees do not speak for the company and pretty soon NO ONE will want to talk to you on camera.

If you have to TRAP people and FORCE them to do something wrong-you're no better than the mafia and your message can't stand on it's own.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

I am neither for nor against an individual bank employee losing their job.

I embrace the notion of embarrassing the entire alliance of banking empire that has so wrought havoc on American property value with fraud and corruption and steadfastly refuses to make restitution.

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

I will embrace the notion of punishing, in a court of law, ONLY those members of the banking alliance that are PROVEN to have acted with malice and full knowledge FOR THE PURPOSE of wreaking havoc on this country.

I will NOT condemn any innocent (no proof or evidence of guilt) person simply because he is rich or successful than I will condemn any innocent poor person who happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. You are not really interested in defending TRUTH and RIGHT if the facts and evidence don't matter at all to you or your agenda.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

WHERE,

in anything I have written,

will you find me in opposition

to truth

or Justice?

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

When you embraced the notion of "embarrassing the ENTIRE BANKING ALLIANCE" for crimes YOU accuse them of and declared them guilty of without a fair trial. You tried them in the public forum where YOU acted as both judge and jury.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

They could as easily advocate with Congress on behalf of sensible banking regulation.

They have not.

And the evidence is quite clear. A Boston DA is pursuing criminal charges. The CEO of CountryWide has been subjected to something like a $20 million fine - while he walks away with over $80 million remaining in his pocket - the result of fraud, the fruit of corruption.

As I said. You can see 60 Minutes.

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

YOU could just as easily advocate with Congress on behalf of sensible banking regulation. Hell, half the people in congress PROFITED right along with the bankers. But you are choosing not to either.

You'd rather get even. You'd rather destroy them with the vengeance you think they destroyed us with. That makes you just as disgusting as they are. Two wrongs don't make ANYTHING right-they just make things twice as wrong.

If the CEO of countrywide is proven to be a criminal-then he should go to jail. Advocate for that. And everyone else who CAN be proven to have done the same thing. But you have NO RIGHT to bring down hundreds of thousands of innocent people in your quest for the blood of the truly guilty. THOSE PEOPLE HAVE RIGHTS TOO. Those people deserve to be protected from YOU just as much as the innocent people the banks screwed deserved to be protected from them.

You constantly indicate that you only care about ONE category of innocent people instead of both. You see the banks actions as corrupt and evil, but not your own even when they appear so similar to outside observers. It's called hypocrisy. And just because you don't see it, or deny it, doesn't make it go away.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

YOU could just as easily advocate with Congress on behalf of sensible banking regulation

You could check with my representatives to see just how big a pain in the ass I am.

You'd rather get even. You'd rather destroy them with the vengeance you think they destroyed us with.

There has been an investment in social instability. I did not make that investment. I would capitalize on it to ensure correction. I'm not interested in destroying any enterprise that can demonstrate a true commitment to its own interests.

Those who invest in social instability do so to their own harm, and they will reap the rewards.

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

"Those who invest in social instability do so to their own harm, and they will reap the rewards."

Amen and Amen.

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

I posted the only one I could find above.

Almost ALL corporations and companies do not allow their field agents or associates to "speak on behalf of the company". This means they can't go on camera and make statements on anything that is business related without clearing it first. In BOA's case-that would be Media Relations. Associates say and do dumb things and the company is only acting it it's own best interest when it has control over the message or actions of it's employees while they're on the job.

[-] 1 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

Ha! Good thread. Exposure is good and you've interpreted the intent correctly.

[-] 1 points by ubercaput (175) from New York City, NY 3 years ago

Occupy WallSt is on the right track as long as the movements targets the banks of WallSt, not politics as usual.

[-] 2 points by alouis (1511) from New York, NY 3 years ago

Yes, electoral politics would be a distraction.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

I think we must do both.

Politics as usual is a serious bone of contention with the public. One we cannot afford to ignore.

I would not allow that to distract us from our focus on the banking issue - not at all.

I believe there are more than enough of us so that our efforts can become a two pronged pincer action against the entire process of corruption.

[-] 1 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

the banks & the government both work for the State. They are not really divisible in that they are both revenue collectors for the state.. (As are Judges, policy enforcers(police), actually, any government agencies). They are to protect the State from the people, not to protect the people. when the people need protecting from the protectors, it is tyranny & an abomination against man.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

honestyblaze...The Government is the State, the People are the Government.

[-] 0 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

redefine

we are the 99

everything is divisible

from the smallest atom

to the largest galaxy

even your mind is divisible

Occupy Your Mind

[-] 1 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

I'll say that for America... It seems to have better drugs than we can get here..! WTF? Is that meant to be profound or what? Really Hope that helps you all to find the way out & survive this situation... Well Done Man, I am impressed you can type in a straightjacket.... There can be too much monarch programming, tell Obama....

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

I've actually never worn a straight jacket

Today it often arrives in the form of chemical restraint.

While I have never worn either,

The plain fact is,

it has been recommended.

To that I have said,

and I continue to say,

Free the Butterflies

And Kiss My ASS

. . . . and it's clickable . . .

One person can make a difference

I believe that.

And if that is true, just think what all of us can do, together.

. . . Oh how I abhor

The Hordes of Lying Whores

Who Prowl the People's Halls of Power

Bearing Gifts in the name of Profit

. . .

And so I plant my flag

right in your turf

I raise it high

and why?

because . . . .

... ... ...

we all have hills to fly them on

[-] 0 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

Man, Just How much shit did you smoke??? Didn't click on the face, but it you put your butt to your screen, I will kiss it for this... .

Oh how I abhor

The Hordes of Lying Whores

Who Prowl the People's Halls of Power

Bearing Gifts in the name of Profit..... & the butterflies....( There are levels of insanity we are prepared to accept..)! Apologies for insensitive 'straight jacket' comment as it has actually been suggested via the chemical route... I should have taken it as a given, & found another way to be flippant.. Myself, I volunteer... 'FREE DRUGS', why wouldn't ya? Peace Mr Zendog Sir. I thought I was being funny, but I'm English..

[-] 2 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

no worries. I found you useful.

And I don't really mind that the behavioral community in the United States has determined that I am incorrigibly mad

for it is true

I am mad

The whole world has gone mad,

driven into madness

by the madness

that is M.A.D.

YES I am mad.


One of my favorite poets was British.

Wilfred Owen. Decorated military officer. Preeminent anti-war poet.

Slain in France in fighting so fierce we cannot be certain of the date of his death - sometime between the second and fourth of November, 1918, one week before armistice.

Friends and allies are always welcome.

[-] 1 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

Madness is a bit extreme.. i err on the side of nuts myself. insanity is really under-rated though. I am a big fan because crazy people think for themselves.(:

[-] 2 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

LoL!

I'm so crazy I aim to think for everyone else!

hahaa!

[-] 0 points by alouis (1511) from New York, NY 3 years ago

I wouldn't discourage anyone who is so inclined anyhow to go work for some liberal congressional candidate, as opposed to doing nothing, but the real action the real moves that are going to change things are being led right now, today, by Occupy.

[-] 1 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 3 years ago

I would not discourage anyone - if they are not on our side yet, in time there is no doubt they will be, and their station in life may prove useful.

We are all Americans.

We all have a stake in the outcome.

[-] 1 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

The economic issues are a symptom. Occupy Wall Stree might temporarily relieve the symptom a little, but that is it. There is not a wide enough base of support for a great deal more.

The support is mostly for action. The simple fact of action. Occupy is taking action, people like that, but there is no strategy which has a long term effect and the numbers are not there to draw a majority of the public into the action.

It is however a very good manuever and will gain a great deal of support given time.

[-] 1 points by aeturnus (231) from Robbinsville, NC 3 years ago

I don't think that is necessarily true. The fact that 600,000 people recently opted to join credit unions is quite a blow. It's not a major blow, but it is a blow that should not be ignored. I suspect we may be seeing more.

OWS is the protest front against corporate hegemony. It is not about relieving all the symptoms. There are institutions in place, albeit mostly that are outside of the public eye, that are currently offering efforts for change. Our presence ought to be about simply abolishing the chains that the 1% have over our lives, so that we can start creating alternatives.

There is a much larger base of support for economic change other than the people out there protesting. They may not be part of OWS per se, but are part of the solution. But our presence is a fraction of that, maybe a small one, but a growing one, I assume, but one that uses direct action as a form of preservation of our support and a means for change.

[-] 1 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

aeturnus wrote: I don't think that is necessarily true. The fact that 600,000 people recently opted to join credit unions is quite a blow. It's not a major blow, but it is a blow that should not be ignored. I suspect we may be seeing more.END------

Certainly not to be ignored, but still atacking the symptom.

aeturnus wrote: OWS is the protest front against corporate hegemony. It is not about relieving all the symptoms. There are institutions in place, albeit mostly that are outside of the public eye, that are currently offering efforts for change. Our presence ought to be about simply abolishing the chains that the 1% have over our lives, so that we can start creating alternatives.END-----

Protest against corporations yes, but not effecting the cause of the hedgemony at all. Not even related to the nature of it. The symptoms of the hedgemony are many, and all different. Only a few are indirectly related to the nature of the hedgemony. Corporate status is unchanged.

aeturnus wrote: There is a much larger base of support for economic change other than the people out there protesting. They may not be part of OWS per se, but are part of the solution. But our presence is a fraction of that, maybe a small one, but a growing one, I assume, but one that uses direct action as a form of preservation of our support and a means for change.END-----

I would say the fact that action is being taken, is very appreciated, so receives support. Unity of any kind is applicable to solution.

The most direct action is the one that restores a constitutional government that will not tolerate, let alone create these kinds of symptoms. This path removes resistance to change on the maximum level and changes the conditions at the root fully under law and peacefully enables revolution. If not under the constitution overtly, people may consider to be against it and not only withold support, but oppose the movement.

Article 5 convention to propose amendments.

Article V conference, Mark Meckler Lawrence Lessig at harvard 9/25/11-video comments http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-7ikbvu0Y8

Lessig power point on article V http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gpbfY-atMk

Lots of facts here about Article V. http://algoxy.com/poly/article_v_convention.html

Article V conference, Lawrence Lessig at harvard 9/25/11-other attendee video comments http://vimeo.com/31464745 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-7ikbvu0Y8

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

ChristopherAbrownart5....Your missing the entire point...a doctor would not ignore a patients symptoms to concentrate on a cure for cancer, no more that OWS is going to ignore symptoms for a global revolution that may or may not happen. Your not living in the here and now. Your intellectualism is getting in your way.

[-] 1 points by AllOverIt (100) 3 years ago

Your grammar is getting in your way.

[-] 1 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

I've not said that "a doctor would not ignore a patients symptoms to concentrate on a cure for cancer," or any thing analogous to that. If such is not true, you will copy and past the passage to prove that I've done such.

I assume the doctor would logically observe all symptoms, consider them, prescribe a cure, then procede with the cure having USED the symptoms to design the cure. Making such an assumption is not "intellectualism" it is common sense.

Indeed, not using that obvious fact and doing something else which distorts by analogy "intellectualism", is "intellectualism".

Wall street is a social tool or mechanism used by the elite and the use creates symptoms. The methods by which the elite conduct the uses, secretly empower your confusion.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

ChristopherABrownART5..Your quotes: " The fact that 600,000 people recently opted to join credit union
Certainly not to be ignored, but still atacking the symptom".

" OWS is the protest front against corporate hegemony. It is not about relieving all the symptoms."

" Not even related to the nature of it. The symptoms of the hedgemony are many, and all different".

"I assume the doctor would logically observe all symptoms, consider them, prescribe a cure, then procede with the cure having USED the symptoms to design the cure".

Doctors treat the patients symptoms to relive the pain and discomfort. Just as OWS is attacking the symptoms to relieve the pain of the people.

[-] 1 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

How does OWS protest front working only against the hegemony, only releiving symptoms, relate that to what you said, I said,

""a doctor would not ignore a patients symptoms to concentrate on a cure for cancer,""

I am stating OWS is ignoring the cure and source to concentrate on symptoms.


chuck1al wrote: Doctors treat the patients symptoms to relive the pain and discomfort. Just as OWS is attacking the symptoms to relieve the pain of the people.END-

It is a generalization to say that relieving pain and discomfort is always treating something. It might not be, the patient may act on their own simply on information. Addressing the source and curing it is always treating everything.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

ChristopherABrownART5...And they may not. Addressing the cure is important. but while that will take time and resources should OWS go home and wait?

[-] 1 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

No, OWS should go to congress and demand an Article 5 convention so the American people can create a constitutional federal government.

As soon as OWS does that, their status changes and much more of America approves and is willing to be involved. Protestors see more constitutional protection because they are then working to defend the constitution.

Currently their actions are being construed as possibly against the constitution. We need an article 5 convention NOW!

http://algoxy.com/poly/emergency_powers_statutes.htmll

Article V conference, Mark Meckler Lawrence Lessig at harvard 9/25/11-video comments http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-7ikbvu0Y8

Lessig power point on article V http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gpbfY-atMk

Lots of facts here about Article V. http://algoxy.com/poly/article_v_convention.html

Article V conference, Lawrence Lessig at harvard 9/25/11-other attendee video comments http://vimeo.com/31464745

STRATEGY

http://algoxy.com/ows/strategyofamerica.htm

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

ChristopherABrownART5....Your full of yourself, a Constitutional convention could take years, if it succeeds at all.

OWS needs to act now as its doing.

You said.."Currently their actions are being construed as possibly against the constitution".

Just who is promoting this fathom claim. I've seen no reports that freedom of assembly and free speech where considered unconstitutional.

You said if we attempt to get a constitutional convention. "Protestors see more constitutional protection because they are then working to defend the constitution".

OWS has the Constitution on its side now, so that's a red herring.

Are you working for the Republicans?

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 3 years ago

Which Constitution? There are two. Most of the OWS kids couldn't pass a test on either Constitution, if their lives and voting rights depended on such, yet, are real quick to point out how wrong a solution restoring our first one would be.

No, the first Constitution is not on your, or anyone's side. That's merely an illusion. You have NO RIGHTS, only privileges which are subject to be revoked at any given time.

Just open your eyes to carnage of the last few months. NO RIGHTS.

[-] 0 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

@FrogWithWings...WTF are you talking about...Take your meds and leave the thinking to people who are able too.

[-] 0 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 3 years ago

Your mother and father are both boys. Had they both been men, they would have pinched your head off at birth.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

chuck1al wrote: ChristopherABrownART5....Your full of yourself, a Constitutional convention could take years, if it succeeds at all. END------

You have no documentation substantiating that under these conditions such is true. I can show where US soldiers may be ordered to shoot you and in seconds your dead, You probably do not care.

http://www.ssrsi.org/Onsite/BBStext/shootus.htm

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

@ ChristopherABrownART5: Apparently you don't know what is involved to amend the Constitution. Amending the Constitution:

In the first step, the proposed Amendment must find a national super majority of 67% in Congress, both House (people) and Senate (states). The second step requires a super-super 75% majority of the states ratifying, representing a majority of the people in the states ratifying. Congress determines whether the state legislatures or special state conventions ratify the amendment.

On attaining Constitutional ratification of the proposal by three-fourths of the states, at that instant, the "fundamental law" for the United States of America is expressed in that Amendment. It is operative without any additional agency. Although the Founders considered alternatives, no signature is required from the President. Congress does not have to re-enact. The Supreme Court does not have to deliberate. There is no delay from a panel of lawyers to re-draft and re-balance the entire Constitution incorporating the new wording. The Amendment, with the last required state ratifying, is the "supreme law of the land.

What is your time estimate and likelihood of passing an amendment?

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

And if congress wasn't counting, would that be a violation of the constitution and their oat?

The video at the top of this page features Bill Walker who sued all members of congress and learned that about 100 years ago, by strict constitutional interpretation, congress should have called a convention. He learned more.

http://algoxy.com/poly/article_v_convention.html

Time doesn't matter, what matters is the constitution and you have no plan.

Time estimates? As soon as Americans get over their misinformation. Are you helping or hindering?

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

@ChristopherABrownART5....Time does matter, while your twittering away valuable time the war good be lost. Why do you say I have no plan?, I'm not OWS. I'm trying actually accomplished something, while you on the other hand are full of hot air,big ideas and conspiracy theory's.

[-] 1 points by ubercaput (175) from New York City, NY 3 years ago

Focus on the banks. You don't need many persons, just a common target.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

Hmmm, in a house fire, the occupants decide that the turkey in the oven has caught on fire because the kitchen is full of smoke, but in reality the wood burner heater has caught the inner wall on fire at the exhaust jack. They suffer burns leaving and the house goes to the ground.

The battlefield detachment find themselves under fire from what appears to be bombed vehcles used for cover, they advance to find that the fire is coming from concealment much closer and are flanked, all are killed.

In both cases the groups would do better without a common target because the common target was erroneously assumed. Yes, unified action is more effective but unity alone does not assure success. Power must be used wisely, especially our own.

[-] 1 points by ubercaput (175) from New York City, NY 3 years ago

Partisan politics is a detraction. When you target Obama and the hypocrite democrats you would support the hypocrite republicans. Target the banks, target wallst, point at the source of the corruption.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

ubercaput...Partisan Politics can not be ignored, if everyone is a hypocrite and there are no honest men, what would that be. It would be a criminal organization like the mafia.

[-] 1 points by ubercaput (175) from New York City, NY 3 years ago

You invest your precious time and you want change. You don't want your time get wasted, you don't want to get neutralized by partisans mechanisms designed to neutralize and moderate.

Focus on a target. OWS became succesful because the meme OWS blames WallSt.

Tea Party was made into a hate movement which presents you with many targets (President, Health Care 4 99%, taxes for the rich etc.) except WallSt, except 1%. When people recommend you to support Ron Lawl, end the FED, target Obama etc. they want to distract you. We call that a RED HERRING. Fishermen throw red herrings in the waters to distract the sharks.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

ubercaput...You didn't answer my post, why not.

[-] 1 points by ubercaput (175) from New York City, NY 3 years ago

Because your concept of honesty is flawed.

Think of a rubic cube: you have to chose for the next move.

In partisan politics they expect you, divide et impera.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

ubercaput....You have no concepts, just disjointed words and statements that don't make sense.

[-] 1 points by ubercaput (175) from New York City, NY 3 years ago

Take a lethal conflict: You have a gun and only three bullets left, which enemy would you eliminate?

Your time is precious, on which item do you spent it. Would you appear where they expect you? Bipartisan politics is a process aimed at neutralization of your input. You get two options. They are two sides of the same medal. Your impact is marginal.

A Rubic Cube has limited options for the next move. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubik%27s_Cube You can't turn two axis at once.

Honesty: a moral concept. I don't want to "reform" a person but an institution.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

@ubercaput....Your starting to babble.

[-] 1 points by ubercaput (175) from New York City, NY 3 years ago

fish

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

ubercaput..............Exactly what are you saying, it's a distraction to prevent Tea party Republicans from gaining power? If they gain power they will absolutely crush all opposition. Your fighting the wrong fight for 2011-2012.

[-] 1 points by demcapitalist (977) 3 years ago

You can target Greenspan ----------he's the architect of this mess and the bills passed that destroyed the economy were pushed thru by Phil Grahm and Bill Clinton. That's a bi partisan group for sure. It's hard not too make it about politics when it's political decisions about our banking system that got us into the mess. Elisabeth Warren is the only politician out there who I've heard who understands how banking rules affect us and has the guts to stand up to wall street. Dennis Kusinich and Ron Lawl wanting the fed to open the books is a bi-partisan start. The whole bunch of them are afraid of not getting wall street money for their campaigns so they are willing to let our banks keep acting like unregulated casinos.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

demcapilaist...Are you say because Bill Clinton didn't veto the Republican Bill to repeal the Glass-Steagall act of 1933. He was responsible for the Republican agenda?

[-] 2 points by demcapitalist (977) 3 years ago

Look it's an old game. When the markets look good everyone want's to take more risk. The banks were watching wall street make all the money and they wanted in on it. They asked for more leverage and they got it, they asked for less regulation on derivatives and they got it, they ask to do propriety trading and they got it. They took exactly the same over leveraged risks that crashed the markets in 1929. Would I blame Clinton specifically ? no . I'd put more blame on the Anne Rand Ideology of Greenspan. The problem we have now is that we haven't changed any rules in a meaningful way to get the risk out of the system. Casino's have more rules than banks and we don't ever have to go into a casino -----------it's hard to avoid banks

[-] 1 points by ubercaput (175) from New York City, NY 3 years ago

Greenspan is old, a man of the past.

[-] 1 points by demcapitalist (977) 3 years ago

He might be old but his rules (or I should say lack of rules)are still in our banks

[-] 1 points by ubercaput (175) from New York City, NY 3 years ago

I don't think banksters are prepared for a movement against them.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

ubercaput...Isn't OWS already targeting the Banks, with the withdrawals and occupations?

[-] 1 points by ubercaput (175) from New York City, NY 3 years ago

Withdrawals have no commercial significance. Brand value matters. Exposing their crimes matters.

You need a movement where banksters feel: - The hooker we hired may be one of them and photograph the documents. - I don't want to go to the restaurant because those people despise me. - I don't want to work as a bank lobbyist because it's the new tobacco, kills your career. - Average citizens do not approve my activities. - I will not dare to cheat the tax payers because people are really getting angry.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

ubercaput...So your saying getting customers to with draw their monies is not significant. Deposits are the bread and butter of deposit banks. the other actions can be advanced also.

[-] 1 points by demcapitalist (977) 3 years ago

Most people don't understand the math enough to put up an effective fight. With any luck OWS can help change that.

[-] 1 points by ubercaput (175) from New York City, NY 3 years ago

It's a mistake to rally against the government or focus on police (brutality) when the target is the banks.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

ubercaput...Police Brutality should be in the forefront, so the people can see their unconstitutional behavior and law breaking.

[-] 1 points by ubercaput (175) from New York City, NY 3 years ago

I call it the anarchist trap: expose the violence of police.

In reality you articifcially create/escalate/construct a struggle against mere tools: working class police men.

Makes you appear like a loser and distracts you. What cause was it all about?

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

ubercaput...You have a distorted view of the Police. They don't consider themselves working class, they are the people in charge of your life.

They violate the Constitution on a routine basis and commit perjury in open court to put working class people in jail.

They take out their frustrations by beating the shit out of anyone who gives them the least provocation, and sometimes with out provocation because they like to.

"Makes me appear as a loser" Your a no-nothing who sits in is house and talks the talk but can't walk.

"Anarchist trap" I have no idea what your delusional thoughts where there.

Exposing Police brutality and prosecuting the guilty is a citizens responsibility. Unless your afraid of them and would rather stay home.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

@ubercaput...You said.."Police men serve an authority. It makes no sense to confront them because they are just instruments".

That's the most idiotic statement I've heard today.

[-] 1 points by ubercaput (175) from New York City, NY 3 years ago

What would be your "win-scenario"?

Police men serve an authority. It makes no sense to confront them because they are just instruments.

The anarchist trap means that you lose focus, detached from your original cause you just antagonize the police, entirely focus on their misconduct, and indicate them that you are their enemy.

[-] 1 points by demcapitalist (977) 3 years ago

How can you tell the difference between the government and banks when Goldman has a revolving door deal with the highest level policy makers. Hank Paulson ? come on he gave billions in taxpayer dollars to his pals at Goldman when AIG's bets went bad.

[-] 1 points by ubercaput (175) from New York City, NY 3 years ago

Then it is sufficient to target Goldman.

[-] 1 points by demcapitalist (977) 3 years ago

No it's not. It's the whole gov/bank/fed system that has the banks on welfare using fed and FDIC backed loans to gamble with. When I say FDIC backed loans what I mean is we as taxpayers are now obliged to pay off wall street's gambling debts or risk our taxpayer insured bank deposits. It's not a good system and it's government policies that allow it. Wall street is going to gamble ----------it's what they do best. I just want them to gamble with their money not my money.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

Again, hmmmm. I'm not discussing obama or the party system. The source of the corruption is buried in secrecy, and all symptoms spring from that.

That, by the church, has been made a secret few want to know, and made such that even fewer realize that secrecy is the source.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

ChristopherABrownART5...Correct me if I'm wrong, but the last 15 posts have been conspiracy theory's. Is everyone taking their medications?

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

ChristopherABrownART5....Almost all of the sites where anti-conspiracy theory operations aim at the government. the fact that you used them do disprove my observation of conspiracy theory on this site is telling.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

Your observation of conspiracy on this site and calling it theory fits the MO of infiltrators working in cointelpro to disrupt Americans trying to figure out what has happened to their government.

There are conspiracy facts as well.

We need an article 5 convention NOW!

Lessig power point on article V http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gpbfY-atMk

Lots of facts here about Article V. http://algoxy.com/poly/article_v_convention.html

Article V conference, Lawrence Lessig at harvard 9/25/11-other attendee video comments http://vimeo.com/31464745

And here is why.

http://algoxy.com/poly/emergency_powers_statutes.html

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

ChristopherABrownART5.....You know a constitutional convention would take years, and you know it...With little chance of succeeding.

You said..."Your observation of conspiracy on this site and calling it theory fits the MO of infiltrators working in cointelpro to disrupt Americans trying to figure out what has happened to their government".

This sounds more like your MO, your not fooling anyone.

I think you want to side track the OWS movement, I'm sure of it actually. Your a troll.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

We now know you have no desire or capacity to defend the constitution with the tools the framers imbued it with for that purpose. Thanks for being so obvious in your service to the nwo:) -

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

@ChristopherABrownART5....You said "We now know you have no desire or capacity to defend the constitution with the tools the framers imbued it with for that purpose". Just how do you know such a thing?

Your making accusations based on what information?

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

Your posted misinformation.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/bank-of-america-sends-internal-email-about-occupy/#comment-489792

You have no tools for constitutional defense and reject the only one that exists. The people through the states can do this in a timely fashion IF Americans care for the constitution enough to recognize its violation.

Congress has been in violation of US code for Federal law regulating oath of office by government officials is divided into four parts along with an executive order which further defines the law for purposes of enforcement. 5 U.S.C. 3331, provides the text of the actual oath of office congressional members were required to take before assuming office.

5 U.S.C. 3333 required you to sign an affidavit that you took the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and have not nor will violate that oath during your tenure of office as defined by the third part of the law,

5 U.S.C. 7311, which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense for anyone employed in the United States Government to “advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government.”,

18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of oath office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: removal from office, imprisonment, and a fine.

Executive Order 10450 specifies a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 for any person taking the oath of office to advocate “the alteration…of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means"

The definition of “advocate” is further specified in Executive Order 10450 which for purposes of enforcement supplements 5 U.S.C. 7311.

According to Executive Order 10450 (and therefore 5 U.S. 7311) any act taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331 which alters the form of government other than by amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311. Such alteration without amendment is criminal violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 and 18 U.S.C. 1918.


In 1939 the supreme court violated Executive Order 10450 specifiing a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311

http://www.foa5c.org/file.php/1/Articles/Coleman.htm

Acts relating to campaign finance are also unconstitutional and comprise “the alteration…of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means"years.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

@ChristopherABrownART5...Tell me exactly what misinformation I posted, and back up your assertions with more than your mouth.

[-] 1 points by rbe (687) 3 years ago

I agree. Here's a good article I read earlier: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/super-rich-vs-99-class-war-will-explode-2011-12-06

"Warning: Will somebody please tell Luntz Occupy Wall Street is not about politics? This is class warfare, a revolution about economic inequality, not about political parties, political policies and political solutions … and it’s not going away any time soon."

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

rbe...everything is about politics, live in the real world.

[-] 1 points by rbe (687) 3 years ago

No. Everything is about money and power.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

rbe...Which is politics!

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

rbe...Its always about politics..

[-] 1 points by rbe (687) 3 years ago

I think somewhat that politics is a vehicle used by the elite to go to war with the other classes.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

rbe...Would you please explain your logic on that one.

[-] 1 points by rbe (687) 3 years ago

Those with large amounts of money are able to basically 'buy' politicians as well as buy lobbyists to tilt the scares in their favor.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

rbe...I don't disagree with that, however politics is one tool in fighting back. You never coincide a battle until you have at least try to win, that's appeasement.

[-] 1 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

the political policy of being able to treat every American as a terrorist without due process, & for indefinite detention is kinda worrying though, No? We need an 'Occupy freedom', I think..

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

Obama said he would veto it, just because a bill is passing it can't become law until Obama signs it.

[-] 1 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

& he will. He can't REALLY stand up to Government because He is having his strings pulled! He will just make it LOOK like he is going to try to stop it, but it will go through. & when it does, you may realize that if he couldn't stop that, he didn't WANT to. the Senate, or Congress are showing muscle by 'going over his head', but they cannot be more powerful than the elected president, surely? but that is the game plan. & it is just a game, called 'Dog & pony show'.. If the President of America cannot say 'no', Why is he president of such a once powerful country.. They may have military might, which is great if you want war, but what about the people at home who cannot pay their rent, or feed their families? Obama does not care about the people of 'his' country! & He had the GALL to kill bin-Laden, who by Govt's own admission, did not commit a terrorist attack on US, or Gadhaffi for mistreating his people? govt said he did, so we just swallowedit. & it is EXACTLY what he is doing to American people today. Taking ALL of their rights to freedom, & treating them as cattle, to be tagged, penned & vaccinated with all manner of nasty toxic junk.. It will go through because he needs all the dissenters who WANT their rights, out of the way... & the same will happen in Europe soon, probably after he has finished decimating the middle East for their resources.. That is what the wars have been for. America was not threatened. It had no excuse for war, so it created one itself.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

honestyblaze....I think you need mental help.

[-] 0 points by honestyblaze (151) 3 years ago

Are you qualified to say that? You really believe govt wouldn't do that to the people? It is no longer debatable. Govt officers have admitted it. Evidence is conclusive if you look around you. 9/11 was an inside job. did it make Americans terrified enough to give up all of their rights & freedoms? Is there an up-rising right now to try to claw back those rights? By mental help, do you means govt chemicals to bring me round to your way of thinking & subdue original thought? I used to think like that. It is fucked up. You trust your govt if you wish. It might even keep you out the FEMA camps they are staffing right now... Look up everything I have said, & you will see the evidence yourself, but your mind won't accept it if you still think Govt has the best interests of the people at heart. Hey, I would like to be crazy, or wrong, but i am neither.

[-] 2 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

@honestyblaze...I think anyone who is reasonable can see your disturbed......."9/11 was an inside job" that statement alone is enough to stop replying to your ramblings.

[-] 1 points by alouis (1511) from New York, NY 3 years ago

Thanks for the link. It's actually a very encouraging message to those of us 99ers who can't imagine how close we might really be to overturning the one percenter oligarchs.

[-] 1 points by rbe (687) 3 years ago

No problem! The message is getting out there, so it's just a matter of time.

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

-Article 5 convention NOW!- Gee, it looks like chuck1al is trying to exploit the land of limited argument:) -

chuck1al wrote: @ChristopherABrownART5...Tell me exactly what misinformation I posted, and back up your assertions with more than your mouth. END------

Here you go chuckie. I make a good case for asserting you do not know what you are doing. Or, . . . or whatever you are doing is helping those that would usurp the constitution with your dense confusion and unaccountability.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/bank-of-america-sends-internal-email-about-occupy/#comment-493604

[-] 0 points by ChristopherABrownART5 (46) from Santa Barbara, CA 3 years ago

The land of limited argument ran out of space like chuck1al ran out of explanation for his prescense here other than to impede those that are working with substance in defense of the constitution.

chuck1al wrote: @ChristopherABrownART5....Time does matter, while your twittering away valuable time the war good be lost. Why do you say I have no plan?, I'm not OWS. I'm trying actually accomplished something, while you on the other hand are full of hot air,big ideas and conspiracy theory's. END-----

You are working against the defense of the constitution.

[-] 0 points by Tinhorn (285) 3 years ago

All it said was that there people's safety was important to them, to make sure that the properties were secure and to not interact with the protesters. Is that any different than any other company would do to advise there people that they are potentially in danger?

[-] 0 points by chestRockwell (-4) 3 years ago

Wow one bank sent an email mentiong the OWS group, and you guys consider that a success?

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 3 years ago

It's the little successes that lead to the bigger ones-Bravo! We've got their attention!

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

I read that and see that the banks are worried about their agents and the homes they own/manage being damaged or broken into. Which is totally normal considering the past behavior of OWS.

If OWS starts a campaign of taking over PRIVATE property that they do not own and have no claims to, this movement is finished. All you'd be doing is lowering the property values of the people who are still managing to cling to their homes AND be breaking laws that have been established to protect THEIR property just as much as anyone else's. You keep pushing against the majority of Americans and they will not join you.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 3 years ago

"I read that and see that the banks are worried about their agents and the homes they own/manage being damaged or broken into. Which is totally normal considering the past behavior of OWS."

That would be normal..

But number 3 is not normal.

"3. Remind all parties of the bank’s media policy and report any media incidents."

and lets look back at your message

"You keep pushing against the majority of Americans and they will not join you."

So there would exist no reason for number 3. Because, by your view, media coverage would make the protesters look bad and make Bank of America look like a victim. But they DID include it. Meaning that even Bank of America thinks you're full of it. While I usually disagree with the banks, I'm going to have to agree with them on that one.

[-] 1 points by anonwolf (279) from West Peoria, IL 3 years ago

BofA and other corps are just so lucky to have pro-bono public relations lawyer-types defending them from the evil 99% These people are true heroes, protecting the underdog.

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

Because what matters to me what the TRUTH is, more than whose side get painted in a better light (which I also do in defense of OWS thank you very much) I looked up BOA's media policy-for their employees-

Bank of America Code of Ethics, pg. 7 Responding to Media Inquiries-

"We work to both advance and protect the Bank of America brand through engagement with the news media as a part of our larger marketing, communications, public policy and corporate affairs activities. If you are contacted or approached by a reporter or a member of the media, you should direct them to the Bank of America Media Relations. Associates who anticipate speaking or otherwise communicating with the media must obtain prior approval from the Media Relations staff. You need to be aware of and comply with any other applicable line of business specific polices and procedures regarding media, public relations or communications requirements."

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

I have no idea what BOA's media policy is. Do you?

The sentence doesn't say "STOP any media action/incidents", it doesn't say "make the media go away". Because it tells those who experience a "media incident" to report it-maybe the bank's policy is that field agents don't get to represent the company and so they aren't authorized to make statements to the media. That would make sense. And alerting the company when a media incident happens is normal practice so that they can make sure their legal team sees it and can respond to anything that might damaging to the company. People and banks and corporations HAVE the right to defend themselves. It's not evil. It's a RIGHT.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 3 years ago

"maybe the bank's policy is that field agents don't get to represent the company and so they aren't authorized to make statements to the media. That would make sense. And alerting the company when a media incident happens is normal practice so that they can make sure their legal team sees it and can respond to anything that might damaging to the company."

But it's not a part of their media policy.. Reread the statement..

"3. Remind all parties of the bank’s media policy and report any media incidents."

Had it said,

"3. Remind all parties of the bank’s media policy TO report any media incidents."

I would agree that it must part of their media policy, but it's not. Understandably so, since I doubt their policy is always to "report any media incidents."

Obviously, they intend to watch this very closely because they've already concluded that publicity for this is bad, which is the opposite of what you said.

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

Oh my hell.

Picture it-BOA field agent working+protesters+media. Either OWS or media asking for a statement, or trying to get one from field agent. Agent-remembering the memo he got, REMINDS ALL PARTIES (the OWSers and the media reporter) "that I must refer you all back to the Media Relations of BOA-I have no response" and then reports TO THE COMPANY that he was approached by the media/OWS etc and DID indeed "remind all parties involved that BOA's media policy does not allow me to respond to you".

My lord. You are SO THICK. Go to my comment ABOVE the one you responded to and READ the damn policy yourself. I actually bothered to look it up and POST IT for you 41 minutes ago. It IS part of the freakin policy. The memo you keep referring to with it's 1. 2. 3. points is a MEMO-it's NOT "the policy".

Now, before you respond. If you read the "policy" I quoted, you'll note that at the end it says "any other specific policies....procedures....regarding media". So there's obviously MORE on this somewhere in their employee rules. YOU can dig those up.

I've proven my point in all the depth I care to. You're going to assume whatever you want to even if the facts prove you might be wrong.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 3 years ago

"REMINDS ALL PARTIES (the OWSers and the media reporter) "that I must refer you all back to the Media Relations of BOA-I have no response" and then reports TO THE COMPANY that he was approached by the media/OWS etc and DID indeed "remind all parties involved that BOA's media policy does not allow me to respond to you"."

LOL!!

You're saying that field agents are being advised to REMIND the OWSers of the BANK'S MEDIA POLICY???

Seriously??

Then they are to "report any MEDIA INCIDENTS"..

Nevermind.. I'm not even going to ask you what you think "media incidents" is referring to.

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

Define incident-happening, event, occurrence

It's a generic term that doesn't mean GOOD or BAD. It just means HAPPENED.

You've CLEARLY never been involved in a company or corporation of any significant size or prominence.

Nothing I say will change your mind. You prefer be be "right" rather than correct. Fine by me.

[-] 1 points by TLydon007 (1278) 3 years ago

"And alerting the company when a media incident happens is normal practice so that they can make sure their legal team sees it and can respond to anything that might damaging to the company."

EXACTLY MY POINT!!

Why do you think they're so eager to "defend themselves"(your words) from the media doing something "damaging to the company"??

"People and banks and corporations HAVE the right to defend themselves. It's not evil. It's a RIGHT."

I never said they don't have a right to defend themselves from the media.. Of course they do..

But based on what you said, they shouldn't need to waste time and money on their legal teams because the public loves them and hates OWS, thus any publicity will play into their favor.

But obviously Bank of America disagrees with you.. They are obviously afraid of the media covering this and must "defend themselves" to the public that watches or reads the media.

Thus, you're full of shit and Bank of America knows it.

[-] 0 points by justhefacts (1275) 3 years ago

You. Are. Being. A. Moron.

I didn't say they were "defending themselves" (my words indeed) from the media doing something (those are YOUR words). I said "so they can respond to anything that might be damaging to the company". That sentence followed one talking about "field agents making statements to the media".

They aren't protecting themselves from the media. There's no way they can actually DO that. They CAN however protect themselves from anything their EMPLOYEES might do or say that would damage them.

Your paranoia is naive and damaging to this movement.

[-] -1 points by pinker (586) 3 years ago

Actually, what appears to make them nervous is not protestors disrupting their business, but harm coming to the homes they own and harm coming to employees who may be in those repossessed homes.

[-] 2 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 3 years ago

pinker...Do you have an inside source in the BOA?

[-] 0 points by pinker (586) 3 years ago

And BTW, I responded to both simply because I know that my brother is always alone when appraising homes. He went back to school in his 40s to become an appraiser and is self employed. I would hate for someone to mistake him for a bank employee and harass or harm him. He is a man taking care of his wife and kids.

[-] 0 points by pinker (586) 3 years ago

No, I read the memo in the original post.